Oregon Initiative 43 passes first step; complete ban on all modern guns...

There is no compromise on a ballot initiative (again correct me if I am wrong). Its dichotomous. It is either voted in or not. There may be problems with this one that end up being struck down for other reasons but a ballot initiative is not an opening to compromise.
 
You’re right, I was commenting on the generic demands the anti gun folks are raising this go around.
I suspect if it gets to the ballot, it will pass.
Even if the voters don’t care about guns, they’ll vote against as a partisan issue, the real reason is payback for 2016 pure and simple. Oregon is awash in guns, but I5 corridor makes the rules.
 
Can someone familiar with OR law explain to me:
  • If passed, will the ballot measure be contested at a particular election, or is it too early in the process to know?
  • Can the state legislature override a ballot initiative?
The reason for my first question is that TX constitutional amendments must be voted on by the populace, but are often placed on "off-season" ballots where few or no major statewide or national officeholders are up for election. This is often done deliberately so that groups backing or opposing a single-issue measure will have an easier time motivating their supporters to show up, thus giving them more control over the outcome, without having to mount a massive and expensive PR campaign aimed at the general voting public.
 
The other party does have something to give up. He has the power to take away your constitutional right which he can negotiate away. If you would stop putting him down and respect his power, you could come to a better place for all.
 
Koda94 said:
Excuse me? You want us to compromise our constitutional right? How do you compromise with someone who has nothing to give up in return?

There hasnt been a single year go by in Oregon that hasnt included a gun control initiative that state 2A "hardliners" fight, all without any outside funding or help from the NRA.
Click to expand...
And look where it has gotten you.
 
rpenmanparker said:
IMO what is being described in Oregon is the fault of the 2A hard liners.
Click to expand...

You don't blame the people who wrote the initiative?

koda94 said:
Excuse me? You want us to compromise our constitutional right? How do you compromise with someone who has nothing to give up in return?

There hasnt been a single year go by in Oregon that hasnt included a gun control initiative that state 2A "hardliners" fight, all without any outside funding or help from the NRA.
Click to expand...

rpenmanparker said:
The other party does have something to give up. He has the power to take away your constitutional right which he can negotiate away. If you would stop putting him down and respect his power, you could come to a better place for all.
Click to expand...

How are less liberal gun laws in Oregon a better place for all? What firearm restriction will make your life better?

Capitulating to the gun control impulse so you look friendlier and in the hope that they will leave you something is a weak position. It simultaneously emboldens your opponent and depends on his mercy.
 
Last edited:
Should this proposal become law, and a law-abiding citizen who possesses one of these newly restricted items wishes to remain law-abiding...
Click to expand...

Interesting, and a bit troubling is that they are calling out specifically the people that AREN’T the problem with guns.
 
Only if you believe in win-lose transactions. If you believe in win-win transactions, then both parties are winners and must be regarded as strong.
 
Only if you believe in win-lose transactions. If you believe in win-win transactions, then both parties are winners and must be regarded as strong.
Click to expand...

Believe in win/lose transactions? I've seen them.

Rpenmanparker, how are less liberal gun laws in Oregon better for all? What firearm restriction will make your life better?
 
ATN082268 said:
Are you suggesting that compromising is a better way to preserve the 2nd Amendment and if so, how?
Click to expand...
Hard core gun advocates are in the minority. The NRA has fooled politicians into believing they have inherent power. But their power is not inherent. It is given them by the politicians themselves. You must know that most folks with high NRA voting scores are not really true gun believers. They are opportunists who think they need to comply with the NRA to be re-elected. When they discover that isn’t true, gun advocates will be left with no line of defense. Such politicians would flip on a dime if they thought it would keep them in office. So the NRA fortress is very vulnerable. When you are outnumbered, being besieged, and your fortress is not reliable, does it behoove you to play the hardass? I don’t think so.

If gun advocates adopted the position of protecting RKBA while still promoting the sensible regulation of firearms, they could get crossover appeal and lift their support numbers. Then their position would be much more secure than it is now. Think about it: which is the more reasonable position in the eyes of the majority, reasonable regulation or never, ever the tiniest bit of regulation? The never, ever folks are regarded by the majority as cranks, and that is no foundation on which to build political power.

What is sensible? I swear I don’t know. But the negotiation process yields a result that is as good a definition as any.
 
It is not what you or I think. It is what the gun control advocate thinks will make his life better. Just remember that besieged positions occupied by a minority nearly always fall. It is our job to find a way to make the majority happy with controls that we can live with. Until you start talking there is no hope for a good outcome. There is no other long term future.
 
But we are talking about a certain state. You could have said the same thing about slavery. After the Kansas-Missouri agreement and if you ignored the North, it was working pretty well.
 
rickyrick said:
Do you know what the NRA is?
It’s us
It’s legal, and safe gun owners.
It has flaws, but it is us.
Click to expand...
Uh, no it isn’t. It is a political machine that uses your money and votes to consolidate its power. You are being duped by Big Gun to believe you run the show. That just ain’t so. As Bob Dylan sung so well, we are just pawns in the game.

Let me give you an analogy. If you talk to a used car dealer you can quickly learn that contrary to what seems to be, selling cars is not the object of the business. The object of the business is to lend money. The cars are just the means to do it. The buyer cares about the car because he needs it to get to work. The dealer only cares about lending money.

Okay now back to guns. The NRA is just like used cars. I wouldn’t be surprised if the NRA officers don’t even shoot guns. Guns are just how they stay rich and in power. Simple, huh?
 
rpenmanparker said:
Hard core gun advocates are in the minority.
Click to expand...
Perhaps in terms of the general population, but what counts in this particular instance is who shows up at the polls.
rpenmanparker said:
The NRA has fooled politicians into believing they have inherent power. But their power is not inherent. It is given them by the politicians themselves.
Click to expand...
The NRA has fooled nobody; no non-governmental actor has inherent power. The NRA's power lies with millions of members and sympathetic non-members who contact their elected representatives and VOTE.
rpenmanparker said:
You must know that most folks with high NRA voting scores are not really true gun believers. They are opportunists who think they need to comply with the NRA to be re-elected.
Click to expand...
You recognize that this is how our political system works with respect to MOST controversial issues, right?

If a single-issue advocacy organization gets the politicians to vote in its favor, it has done its job; the politicians' personal views are arguably irrelevant.
rpenmanparker said:
If gun advocates adopted the position of protecting RKBA while still promoting the sensible regulation of firearms, they could get crossover appeal and lift their support numbers.
Click to expand...
...

Serious and informed gun enthusiasts understand that firearms are heavily regulated RIGHT NOW, yet many of the laws are not seriously enforced, and that many measures touted as "sensible" seem designed to poke lawful enthusiasts in the eye while doing little to address real-world problems. This ballot measure is one such "sensible" proposal. :mad:
rpenmanparker said:
Think about it: which is the more reasonable position in the eyes of the majority, reasonable regulation or never, ever the tiniest bit of regulation?
Click to expand...
Who do you think is seriously espousing "never, ever the tiniest bit of regulation," individual cranks on online gun forums notwithstanding? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top