• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Oregon State Democrats Introduce Massive Gun Ban In Oregon House

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
shadow9d9 said:
Democrats aren't liberals.

When you have a society with a ton of mass killings and an obsession with killing machines, it is logical to remove guns.

You should be ashamed of your obsession with killing machines...
Click to expand...

There isnt a ton of mass killings. And if we are going to remove consitutional rights. Lets continue with the 4th amendment. When we have a society of people trying to hide things the logical move is to not allow them to hide it in their homes. We will start at your place with this policy.

You should be ashamed of your obession with protecting the privacy of your home at the detriment of the collective.
 
lol. i find it funny that people think they are just going to look at the lockbox then go. If people really believe that you are insane.
 
Charles Kozierok said:
If it did allow warrantless searches, I would be as strongly opposed to that as most people here.
.
Click to expand...

If you want to keep your ONE 'assault' rifle, the government will come in and search your house. The word warrant never appears.

The effect of the law is a warrentless search if you want to own a certain gun.
 
Roosevelt and Truman (both Democrats, by the way) supported the development and ultimate use of atomic weapons to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians in a matter of minutes.

Clearly we need to prevent civilians from owning firearms.
 
michal1980 said:
If you want to keep your ONE 'assault' rifle, the government will come in and search your house. The word warrant never appears.

The effect of the law is a warrentless search if you want to own a certain gun.
Click to expand...

And what does that tell you about this bill?
 
zinfamous said:
And what does that tell you about this bill?
Click to expand...

Tells me it won't pass but thats not the issue IMO. The issue is that politicians would even try this BS. I can see them in a room "Let's put all the gun restrictions we would like to have in our wet dreams and see how many provisions stick when/if it passes". Maybe they should reference the Constitution first? IDK to me thats just a logical step.
 
PC Surgeon said:
Tells me it won't pass but thats not the issue IMO. The issue is that politicians would even try this BS. I can see them in a room "Let's put all the gun restrictions we would like to have in our wet dreams and see how many provisions stick when/if it passes". Maybe they should reference the Constitution first? IDK to me thats just a logical step.
Click to expand...

also how many times is it going to be introduced? it was done in CO but that was a "mistake". now its in OR?

what state is next? all it takes is ONE state to pass it to start more doing it.
 
PC Surgeon said:
Tells me it won't pass but thats not the issue IMO. The issue is that politicians would even try this BS. I can see them in a room "Let's put all the gun restrictions we would like to have in our wet dreams and see how many provisions stick when/if it passes". Maybe they should reference the Constitution first? IDK to me thats just a logical step.
Click to expand...

introduced means it wasn't even voted on.

just wait for a vote before you guys get your panties in a wad. Hoping that politicians will stop "trying this shit" (oftentimes, "this shit" is determined by one's perspective, no?) or that people will stop discussing issues and solutions simply because they make you or your viewpoint uncomfortable, is a gross failure.

....that's a general statement, by the way.
 
shortylickens said:
Weird. Oregon used to be about personal freedom.
Click to expand...

There are too many hippies in this state that think personal freedom only extends as far as their weed and shrooms are concerned and believe anyone who would even want to own a gun is a future mass murderer. The ideological disconnect between "my rights are good because they don't affect you" and "your rights are bad because they scare me" is absurd. Granted, we had legal marijuana up for vote in 2012 and it got shot down, so I'm guessing this bill isn't going to get far against the strong Republican core of everywhere in the state that isn't Portland, Eugene or Ashland.
 
Atomic Playboy said:
There are too many hippies in this state that think personal freedom only extends as far as their weed and shrooms are concerned and believe anyone who would even want to own a gun is a future mass murderer. The ideological disconnect between "my rights are good because they don't affect you" and "your rights are bad because they scare me" is absurd. Granted, we had legal marijuana up for vote in 2012 and it got shot down, so I'm guessing this bill isn't going to get far against the strong Republican core of everywhere in the state that isn't Portland, Eugene or Ashland.
Click to expand...

I have family that still lives in Salem and Portland (some in Eugene but i don't see them).

i was amazed with the amount of hippies all over. there are like 100 damn coffee shops on every block.
 
waggy said:
I have family that still lives in Salem and Portland (some in Eugene but i don't see them).

i was amazed with the amount of hippies all over. there are like 100 damn coffee shops on every block.
Click to expand...

Portland is the hippie Mecca of the US. It makes Berkeley look like Montgomery, AL.
 
waggy said:
I have family that still lives in Salem and Portland (some in Eugene but i don't see them).

i was amazed with the amount of hippies all over. there are like 100 damn coffee shops on every block.
Click to expand...

Coffee shops aren't necessarily hippie; a lot of them are hipster. And there's a cubic ass-ton of those in Portland as well.
 
This can't be good for the ammo shortage. After sandy hook, I was anti gun (emotion driven) but not anymore. Freedom has never been, nor will it ever be without consequence or price. Sandy hook was a portion of that price. Does that sound sick? Well too bad, because its true. With freedom comes guns, and with guns comes shootings. Lock up the crazies if you want, there will always be that one you missed and he will steal a gun and go on a rampage.
 
BoberFett said:
Roosevelt and Truman (both Democrats, by the way) supported the development and ultimate use of atomic weapons to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians in a matter of minutes.

Clearly we need to prevent civilians from owning firearms.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because those Civilians are fighting against the Axis powers engaged in a World War...🙄
 
zinfamous said:
introduced means it wasn't even voted on.

just wait for a vote before you guys get your panties in a wad. Hoping that politicians will stop "trying this shit" (oftentimes, "this shit" is determined by one's perspective, no?) or that people will stop discussing issues and solutions simply because they make you or your viewpoint uncomfortable, is a gross failure.

....that's a general statement, by the way.
Click to expand...

Yes. Politicians who want to pass laws allowing government agents to enter my house makes me uncomfortable.

I wonder why? :hmm:
 
Ausm said:
Yeah, because those Civilians are fighting against the Axis powers engaged in a World War...🙄
Click to expand...

You are aware of how many civilians were killed by the two a-bombs dropped in Japan right? Or do they not matter to you because they were 'nips'? Racist!!
 
Atomic Playboy said:
Coffee shops aren't necessarily hippie; a lot of them are hipster. And there's a cubic ass-ton of those in Portland as well.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean that the two are related. Just pointing out the two things i seen all over were hippies and coffee shops.

i swear every corner there was a coffee shop. they weren't cheap either!
 
BoberFett said:
Roosevelt and Truman (both Democrats, by the way) supported the development and ultimate use of atomic weapons to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians in a matter of minutes.

Clearly we need to prevent civilians from owning firearms.
Click to expand...

governments have killed a lot more people with firearms throughout the years than have private citizens.

but only governments should have guns.
 
Triumph said:
governments have killed a lot more people with firearms throughout the years than have private citizens.

but only governments should have guns.
Click to expand...

Considering how they tout themselves as the party of science and logic, Democrats certainly are an illogical bunch of fools.
 
nehalem256 said:
I think its more a matter of dishonesty than illogic.

They want to make sure only they have guns. Nothing illogical about that 😀
Click to expand...

Talk about dishonesty. Who's 'they' here, as I have yet to see a law where the subset that can own firearms is exclusively (or even a vast majority of) democrats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top