Oregon firearms laws

Game Larder - Your reliable choice for Game Larder solutions - www.gamelarder.com
splash

splash

Well-Known Member
Look what’s happening to Oregon Firearms laws !
I know some will think what it’s got to do with us but it’s as sure as a new morning going to come our way.
If things are changing in the US you can bet that Uk will use it to reduce our freedoms and impose more restrictions upon shooting in the Uk
 
splash said:
Look what’s happening to Oregon Firearms laws !
I know some will think what it’s got to do with us but it’s as sure as a new morning going to come our way.
If things are changing in the US you can bet that Uk will use it to reduce our freedoms and impose more restrictions upon shooting in the Uk
Click to expand...
Perhaps a link to the story may help?

- Oregon Measure 114, Changes to Firearm Ownership and Purchase Requirements Initiative (2022)

You could argue they have adopted our scheme partially - you need to get approval from the police to get a permit…(Nat a bad thing surely?)

You need ID, finger prints taken and safety training to get said permit (again, not a bad thing considering the number of incidents)

You can’t have a magazine with more than 10….not sure why this one makes a difference but hey ho…other than Ruger 10/22’s we don’t see many mags with over than 10 round capacity and when I lived in the US I didn’t really see much need for banana mags but I would say this one is a waste of time.
 
Last edited:
Most of that seams ok to me, and we already have a similar process so I'm not worried that it creates a president that we might follow.
M.
 
Compared to relatively complete freedom, its a significant restriction.
That said, apart from the stupid 10 round magazines restriction, there is nothing except fingerprints we don't have here and TBH is a reasonable set of restrictions if applied even handedly and universally - which it isnt here. One could see this as a control measure at the whim of the police so someone should build in the rights of the individual to challenge decisions and have restrictions overturned. Price clearly needs to be fixed first as more than a nominal amount is its own restriction to youth and aged alike. Will it be retrospective and how long would it run for ?
 
I assume that these measures only apply locally and that anyone barred by these restrictions could just drive to a neighbouring county/state and purchase a firearm?
 
splash said:
Look what’s happening to Oregon Firearms laws !
I know some will think what it’s got to do with us but it’s as sure as a new morning going to come our way.
If things are changing in the US you can bet that Uk will use it to reduce our freedoms and impose more restrictions upon shooting in the Uk
Click to expand...
Utter bollocks
The electorate in Oregon were given a chance to vote on the proposition and the majority voted for it
What they voted for would still make getting a permit much easier than getting an FAC or SGC in the UK



Cheers

Bruce
 
mealiejimmy said:
Utter bollocks
The electorate in Oregon were given a chance to vote on the proposition and the majority voted for it
What they voted for would still make getting a permit much easier than getting an FAC or SGC in the UK



Cheers

Bruce
Click to expand...
Interesting to see how long their “FAC” takes too. Last time I was in Pa I accompanied my pal to the local Sheriff’s Office (I kid you not) when he went to renew his concealed carry permit for his .380 pistol. One side of an A4 pageform to complete and from memory $10 and out he walked with it.
🦊🦊
 
caberslash said:
Tyranny of the majority is not freedom.

Germany voted for Hitler.
Click to expand...
Hardly a fair comparison
Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaphorizia and Kherson all "voted" to join Russia by huge majorities, but no-one (not even the MAGA crowd) are suggesting that the decision by the majority of voters in Oregon was somehow not free and fair.
I'd say the majority in Oregon voted for the proposition because it was, in large part, eminently sensible

Cheers

Bruce
 
mealiejimmy said:
Hardly a fair comparison
Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaphorizia and Kherson all "voted" to join Russia by huge majorities, but no-one (not even the MAGA crowd) are suggesting that the decision by the majority of voters in Oregon was somehow not free and fair.
I'd say the majority in Oregon voted for the proposition because it was, in large part, eminently sensible

Cheers

Bruce
Click to expand...

You can't vote for a law which is unconsitutional.

States that have done so, such as California should be ejected from the Union.

Another example is the right to abortion. The overturn should never have been allowed and I hope this can be reversed.

America should be a pillar of liberty, freedom and self determination. Any law made to the contrary is wrong.
 
Thing is in some states you cannot buy a firearm and yet in those states there are lots of illegally held firearms. when i was in Massachusetts you had to show your license before the gun shop opened its doors but yet New Hampshire and Maine where just up the road .
America can never but Firearms back in the bottle and as proven here in the uk with handgun use , neither can we . Look at the amount of cocaine in the UK it doesn't grow here or anyplace close !
 
mealiejimmy said:
Utter bollocks
The electorate in Oregon were given a chance to vote on the proposition and the majority voted for it
What they voted for would still make getting a permit much easier than getting an FAC or SGC in the UK



Cheers

Bruce
Click to expand...
I will say…a very, very small majority! 🤔
 
caberslash said:
You can't vote for a law which is unconsitutional.

States that have done so, such as California should be ejected from the Union.

Another example is the right to abortion. The overturn should never have been allowed and I hope this can be reversed.

America should be a pillar of liberty, freedom and self determination. Any law made to the contrary is wrong.
Click to expand...
Your statement that "you can't vote for a law which is unconstitutional" is clearly illogical since, although a majority have voted in favour of the proposition, no such law has yet been passed and if such a law was passed, it would then be up to the courts to decide whether or not that law was unconstitutional.
I absolutely agree with you on the Dobbs decision which effectively threw out Roe v Wade, however, the problem with Roe V Wade was that it was always at risk from a right wing anti abortion SCOTUS such as exists at the moment
The right to abortion should be enshrined in federal law - something that seems even less likely if the GOP win a majority in the House of Representatives
Finally, I don't think it's our place to tell America what it should be.
For better or worse, that's entirely up to them

Cheers

Bruce
 
mealiejimmy said:
If that very, very small majority had been the other way would this have even been discussed on here?
UK constituency elections have been won by a single vote, but the winner still becomes the MP for that constituency - the runners up win nothing

Cheers

Bruce
Click to expand...
i agree…I was just pointing out it was a very close run thing it seems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Changing address during firearms application
2
Replies
22
Views
903
12gsnapcaps
12gsnapcaps
S1 and S2 merge example letter
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
sh1kar
sh1kar
‘The Firearms Law Handbook’
Replies
9
Views
1K
Tim.243
Tim.243
Sending firearms for repair via Parcel Force/Royal Mail
2 3
Replies
40
Views
3K
enfieldspares
enfieldspares
Central Suffolk/North Ipswich constituency IMPORTANT
Replies
10
Views
790
Sjambok
Sjambok
Leica Geovid Pro - Green
Back
Top