this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
403 points (100.0% liked)

News

28053 readers
3659 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A voter-approved Oregon gun control law violates the state constitution, a judge ruled Tuesday, continuing to block it from taking effect and casting fresh doubt over the future of the embattled measure.

The law requires people to undergo a criminal background check and complete a gun safety training course in order to obtain a permit to buy a firearm. It also bans high-capacity magazines.

The plaintiffs in the federal case, which include the Oregon Firearms Federation, have appealed the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case could potentially go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 166 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I mean if a common sense law like that violates the state constitution, it does seems like the problem is in the constitution or how it's interpreted, not the law…

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Fixed the headline - Judge rules that Americans need more mass shootings before anything changes.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fixed the headline - Judge rules that Americans need more mass shootings ~~before anything changes.~~

FTFY

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Man uses a fork to rake leaves, rails against tree for the fork not working"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We can’t have reduced gun crimes in America. It would send the wrong message to the rest of the world that we’re reasonable and give a shit about our own people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This will be overturned. This judge is known for making politically motivated decisions. There is a reason this was filed specifically in Harney County where this yahoo presides.

Guaranteed this is not the last time this will be in the news.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I hope so, will keep an eye on it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

People from around the developed world looking at America...shaking my head...

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Trust me, Americans who understand what's going on are shaking their heads too. And furiously voting and getting ready to vote. But are there enough of them?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Like many other systemic problems, our voting isn't working. Case in point, your article. As for how we can actually effect meaningful change? No idea. It's frustrating.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Democracy is when the majority of people vote for a law but because rich people from 100+ years ago say otherwise it doesn't get enacted.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago

States rights people really confused prolly.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (55 children)

C'mon, this is easy... all you need is a large gathering of BLM people or antifa packing ARs and boom - this law will mysteriously pass before the media frenzy has had a chance to get it's shoes on.

load more comments (55 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago

Breaking: one unelected person with an agenda overrules entire state, imposes his personal interpretation of the law

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (24 children)

You folks should educate yourself before blanket statement saying, “Gun control gud, me vote fast for boom boom pow ban.” If you read Measure 114 it’s not at all gun control.

You simply cannot walk into any legitimate firearm store and legally purchase a firearm without filling out paperwork to undergo a background check. Period. So get that out of your head. It’s not possible. You have to fill out a 4473 from any dealer holding an FFL, any legal gun dealer has been issued an FFL by the ATF and is required by FEDERAL law to maintain records of their firearm sales for x amount of years so they can conduct and audit at the drop of a hat.

Measure 114 was pushing for Oregonians to have to take a class, approved by Law Enforcement, in order to apply for a permit to apply to begin the process to buy a firearm. So for my slow friends out there this would be like going to a car dealership, wanting to buy a sedan, having to present to them your state mandated document saying you have taken a class and passed, received a permit to be at the dealership looking at cars, before you can even test drive or start the conversation of purchasing that sedan. Then once you are ready to purchase said car, you have to begin the FEDERALLY mandated background check and jump through a completely different set of hoops.

Measure 114 was also pushed so quickly onto the ballot, Oregon State Police had no time to create curriculum for the mandated course, local law enforcement agencies (who were already facing budget cuts and staff shortages) had to figure a way to process these classes and additional applications and background checks that they never had to deal with.

As for the magazine ban, your typical handgun magazine holds 17 rounds. Again for my slow friends that’s 7 more than the proposed limit of 10. An AR magazine holds 30 rounds. These are not the kinds of magazines that should be the target of a magazine capacity ban. These were specifically designed for effective personal defense. You should look up from medical journals how many rounds from a handgun (9mm or larger) and an AR (.223 or larger) it takes to stop a full grown adult. The answer will surprise you, it’s close to 2/3’s or 66% of a handgun mag for one home invader. That leaves the average person 1.5 rounds short to protect them and their family should, God forbid, the unthinkable happen. Now you add adrenaline, nerves, and whatever other factor in and you realize that person is probably not going to land every shot perfectly on the invader. Now what. Should they just sit there and watch while the invader take advantage of their family?

You’ve cut funding for law enforcement. I’ve sat on hold for 30 minutes while calling in an active rape in a major city waiting for backup to respond. The police can only do so much, we have tied their hands with minimal funding and increased legislation. Is gun control a must absolutely, but educated control is the answer. Not blind support for any bill labeled, “Gun Control.”

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

You had me up until "fund the police state" as if US police unions aren't already the most powerful groups in the country to be a member of, as if any state or municipality has meaningfully cracked down on policing abuses, as if the US doesn't already have incarceration rates 5x the next NATO member, as if the US doesn't already spend more on policing than all but 2 nations do on their militaries, as if police spending ever dropped even 1%, and as if supposed funding cuts aren't just city council members shuffling the numbers around while the departments themselves see steady budget growth year-over-year.

Your experience is simply finding yourself calling in an incident on the wrong street for the wrong person, a call the officers know won't affect their bottom line. It's always been the case, whether passively delaying responses or actively corralling rioters away from wealthy districts. It's not because they're suffering for funding, it's because they know they can get away with it.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (9 children)

For reference, the bit in the Oregon state constitution is as follows:

Section 27. Right to bear arms; military subordinate to civil power. The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power[.]

Pretty similar to the US constitution's second amendment. If SCOTUS was consistent, I think they'd rule in parallel to what's been established elsewhere for licensing, purchasing restrictions, etc.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

And the 21st amendment to the U.S. constitution violated the 18th amendment U.S. constitution. They should have passed this as a state constitutional amendment. Note that the judge didn't say in violated the U.S. constitution, just the state - and another one said that it didn't violate the 2nd amendment.

load more comments
view more: next ›