|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
OR: Oregon gun ballot initiatives: what you need to know
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
IP 43 would ban the sale of select semiautomatic guns and high-capacity ammunition magazines.
But it will no longer be on the November ballot since Oregon’s Supreme Court recently ordered a change to the word ‘assault weapons’ in the title.
Now they’ve simply run out of time.
“This has gone back and forth and challenged by the NRA every time,” Reverend Knutson said.
A similar initiative that won’t hit the ballot until 2020 is Initiative 44.
That would require gun owners to use safety devices when storing guns and report lost or stolen firearms within 24 hours. |
| Comment by:
xqqme
(6/30/2018)
|
| Hey, Rev... we thunked you all church-goin types were all about tellin the truth and that there straight-shootin kinda behaviors. And then your word-twistin, sneaky, underhanded way of getting folks to "see it your way" instead of clearly statin what you all wanted to happen with this here proposed ballot measure, and now complainin cause them other folks at the NRA what wants to protect our constitutional rights went an pointed our your obfuscatory shenanigans to the ol Oregon State Supreme Court, an all... Shame on you. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
