Once again, Liberals are showing that their debate on gun control is dishonest (shocking, right?). They tell us that they want to lower shootings, and that they do not want to take guns from law abiding citizens, but then they keep pushing laws, rules, and regulations that go after the law abiding citizens, rather than the criminals. Now Oregon is giving what Vermont just did a whirl
Gun measures could come to Oregon with or without gun owners’ input
While much hand-wringing was going on following the filing of an initiative to ban the sale of assault weapons in Oregon, a second gun measure, Initiative Petition 44, was filed Monday, April 2, just 11 days later.
The newest measure, submitted by the group called Oregonians for Safe Gun Storage, would require gun owners to use safety devices in storing and transferring firearms and report stolen or lost guns within 24 hours. Owners who fail to comply and have their gun used to injure or kill someone within five years could face liability for the harm.
The initiative faces the same high hurdles as the first. More than 88,000 signatures must be collected by July to be certified by the Secretary of State before the general election in November.
Both measures likely face appeals to the Oregon Supreme Court by either in- or out-of-state opponents, which means it could take months for a ruling. And by law, petitioners can’t gather signatures while the court case is being reviewed.
Which means it’s unlikely either measure will be on this November’s ballot.
Whether or not they make it on the ballot, the groups will keep pushing. More importantly, we see what the gun grabbers are attempting to do: turn law abiding citizens into criminals, along with making it harder to defend themselves. What’s the point of having a handgun or rifle for home defense if you must keep a safety device on it by law? Interestingly, I’ve ran across a few articles which make the claim, at least regarding the Vermont law, that carrying the weapon, both open and concealed, could be considered “transferring”, and would require safety devices, such as a trigger lock, when carrying for protection. Which would make them useless.
Now, the above is an editorial from the Statesman Journal, so
These two attempts in Oregon’s two initiative attempts should be a wake-up call for responsible gun owners in Oregon.
The Second Amendment does not guarantee “unregulated” access to guns. So while some are bleating that they would welcome IP 43, because a vote would bring out the redness in the state like never before seen, it might also bring out a deeper shade of blue.
Yes, it should be a wake-up call, but not how the editorial board means, especially as we see the very next paragraph. It’s a wake-up call that Democrats are duplicitous wankers, hell bent on eroding our 2nd Amendment Rights, while caring not a whit about the actual criminals. There’s no honesty in this debate from the gun grabbers: these same people have conniption fits if the police perform a raid that goes after criminals and ends up scooping up lots of guns. They’ll yammer on about law enforcement terrorizing a community. Usually, Democrats are fine with high crime which involves gun play, because that happens in the neighborhoods far from where the Democrats live. And usually Black ones, and the Democrats only care about Blacks as a voting block.
BTW, here’s an idea: gun owners should push for ballot initiatives in these Democrat run areas which would require all the armed security for the elected lawmakers to have trigger locks on their firearms at all times. The resulting hypocritical freakout would be educational.
Read: Oregon Looks To Enact Gun Measures That Primarily Affect Law Abiding Citizens »
(
(
(
(
