Fogdog
Well-Known Member
What gun law caused the Uvalde police to run away when they heard gunfire in a room that was filled with children?
Gun control is coming
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
rasterman
Member
None. But I'm not the one who just said it was caused by Texas' screwy gun laws.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Judge Rascio -- a circuit court judge elected to preside over Harney County, home to all of 7,575 people who was hand picked by the gun lobby to misread measure 114 and pronounce that the measure does what is most clearly won't do, has run out of time. His weasel words can no longer delay the judicial process over this measure. More than one year after he ordered a stay in implementation of the measure, he finally signed the general judgement and the measure has finally left the halls of Harney County's courthouse. It can now finally move into an appeals court where it will be reviewed by judges who actually know something. As with in other MAGA legal cases, Rascio could only delay the process. Deliberate or othewise his misreading of the measure aren't the final words and maybe in another year, the loophole that allows criminals to circumvent background checks will be closed and bans on the sale of high capacity magazines will finally become law.
www.kgw.com
January 9, 2024
OREGON, USA — An Oregon judge has entered the final order striking down a gun control law that was narrowly approved by voters in 2022.
Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert Raschio signed the general judgment on Monday. The judgment finalizes the opinion Raschio issued in November finding the law violated the right to bear arms under the Oregon Constitution...
"Voters were clear that these life-saving policies should be the law in Oregon," Rev. Mark Knutson said. "We know these policies have been upheld by courts in other states, and though we anticipated Judge Raschio would rule the way he did, we have been preparing for the appellate process for some time now."
Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum plans to appeal the decision in the next few months
After that is the State Supreme Court. Because the ruling was made based upon the Oregon State Constitution, it will have the final say about Raschio's ruling.
Another appeals process is underway that is based upon the US Constitution.
It's aggravating and alarming to me that rational and reasonable measures to protect people from mass shootings, incompetency and outright illegal ownership of guns are stalled in the courts. But that's how it goes in a nation that is governed through the rule of law. Eventually a gun nut will be deprived of their freedom based upon these laws and by then their ability to delay justice will be very quickly at a dead end.
Oregon judge enters the final order striking down Measure 114, a voter-approved gun control law
Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert Raschio signed the general judgment on Monday. The judgment finalizes the opinion Raschio issued in November.
www.kgw.com
January 9, 2024
OREGON, USA — An Oregon judge has entered the final order striking down a gun control law that was narrowly approved by voters in 2022.
Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert Raschio signed the general judgment on Monday. The judgment finalizes the opinion Raschio issued in November finding the law violated the right to bear arms under the Oregon Constitution...
"Voters were clear that these life-saving policies should be the law in Oregon," Rev. Mark Knutson said. "We know these policies have been upheld by courts in other states, and though we anticipated Judge Raschio would rule the way he did, we have been preparing for the appellate process for some time now."
Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum plans to appeal the decision in the next few months
After that is the State Supreme Court. Because the ruling was made based upon the Oregon State Constitution, it will have the final say about Raschio's ruling.
Another appeals process is underway that is based upon the US Constitution.
It's aggravating and alarming to me that rational and reasonable measures to protect people from mass shootings, incompetency and outright illegal ownership of guns are stalled in the courts. But that's how it goes in a nation that is governed through the rule of law. Eventually a gun nut will be deprived of their freedom based upon these laws and by then their ability to delay justice will be very quickly at a dead end.
It's not the police job to protect the public, nor is it their job to actively prevent crime.
The job of law enforcement according to the Supreme Court is " to investigate crimes and apprehend suspects "
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I think you misinterpreted Bud's post. Agree that his text could be interpreted the way you did but I think he was saying two separate things, not one.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
When rapid gunfire is heard coming from a room that is filled with children. That room contains a suspect that should be apprehended.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
What else might be the cause?
OldMedUser
Well-Known Member
So what about the motto police almost everywhere use, To Serve and Protect?
Agree. I do not agree with this approach to law enforcement, and belive it should be changed. The police oath to "serve and protect" should be codified. From a purely logistical stand point it's way safer to just wait them out and apprehend the suspect upon thier exit. Still not what happen, but saying the officers should rush into a gun fight is not a practical understanding of "police work"
The lack there of
It's the oath they take. Oaths that are not supported by law only carry as much weight as oath taker puts on them. When one is dealing with a mater of putting their own life on the line they put little weight in what phrases they may have been forced to mutter in the past
In short it is just that a meaningless motto
Last edited:
OldMedUser
Well-Known Member
So the same reasoning tRump is using to say he never took an oath to protect the constitution then. Got it.
The weasel's way out.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
If they want to militarize the police, then make cowardice an offense like in the military. If they want to look and dress like soldiers (meaning one who is willing to be slain in Greek) then they should be as accountable as people in the military for things like honor too. They had ballistic shields, body armor, helmets and AR-15s. Shit they could have even sent in a drone to scope it out and distract the shooter.
The key differences being that the 14thA is codification of the oath of public office
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I stand corrected.
Then-Parkland school resource officer who stayed outside during mass shooting found not guilty
SWAT teams can bust down doors, shoot dogs and haul innocent people out of bed and naked onto the street in a mistaken drug raid without consequence but in the face of a blood crime in progress can sit back and wait.
Seems wrong to me. But I agree this is the state of law enforcement in the US.
Budley Doright
Well-Known Member
Hopefully there is a lot of reflecting by the responders ………A LOT!!!
rasterman
Member
Maybe they should stop passing laws that violate constitutionality on their face, and take more rational measures to solve so-called gun violence. The last time I checked, it's usually criminals violating "common sense" gun laws when committing mass shootings.Judge Rascio -- a circuit court judge elected to preside over Harney County, home to all of 7,575 people who was hand picked by the gun lobby to misread measure 114 and pronounce that the measure does what is most clearly won't do, has run out of time. His weasel words can no longer delay the judicial process over this measure. More than one year after he ordered a stay in implementation of the measure, he finally signed the general judgement and the measure has finally left the halls of Harney County's courthouse. It can now finally move into an appeals court where it will be reviewed by judges who actually know something. As with in other MAGA legal cases, Rascio could only delay the process. Deliberate or othewise his misreading of the measure aren't the final words and maybe in another year, the loophole that allows criminals to circumvent background checks will be closed and bans on the sale of high capacity magazines will finally become law.
Oregon judge enters the final order striking down Measure 114, a voter-approved gun control law
Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert Raschio signed the general judgment on Monday. The judgment finalizes the opinion Raschio issued in November.
January 9, 2024
OREGON, USA — An Oregon judge has entered the final order striking down a gun control law that was narrowly approved by voters in 2022.
Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert Raschio signed the general judgment on Monday. The judgment finalizes the opinion Raschio issued in November finding the law violated the right to bear arms under the Oregon Constitution...
"Voters were clear that these life-saving policies should be the law in Oregon," Rev. Mark Knutson said. "We know these policies have been upheld by courts in other states, and though we anticipated Judge Raschio would rule the way he did, we have been preparing for the appellate process for some time now."
Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum plans to appeal the decision in the next few months
After that is the State Supreme Court. Because the ruling was made based upon the Oregon State Constitution, it will have the final say about Raschio's ruling.
Another appeals process is underway that is based upon the US Constitution.
It's aggravating and alarming to me that rational and reasonable measures to protect people from mass shootings, incompetency and outright illegal ownership of guns are stalled in the courts. But that's how it goes in a nation that is governed through the rule of law. Eventually a gun nut will be deprived of their freedom based upon these laws and by then their ability to delay justice will be very quickly at a dead end.
rasterman
Member
Exactly. Want to stop gun crime? Do your part and carry a firearm.
rasterman
Member
I don't know, could be unarmed teachers, unarmed custodians or maybe unarmed teachers' assistants.
Unfortunately it is almost impossible to secure a conviction of an on duty officer. There are many issues at play that need to be addressed.
Quantified immunity is way to broad and all encompassing. Police need some level of benefit of the doubt, and use of judgment to do their jobs effectively, but the parameters need to be narrowed.
Fraternal mentality. Just about every "industry" has proven incapable of self regulation. Can you really expect one to take action against their "brother" for the sake of another? The idea that we should trust a PDs "internal affairs " division is a joke. We probably need to establish a new law enforcement agency who's sole geristiction is other law enforcement agencies
National Police unions. I am generally a supporter of labor unions, but when they get to large and have the power of a collective public need and negotiate we absolutist non good faith negotiations we get to where we are.
Legal president. Not just Supreme Court rulings but 200years of case law have set unrealistic standards, the bar for the level of proof and reasonable actions have been set to such an extream level. No judge wants to be the first to go against the grain of president especially when it's against other government agency.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I'm not expecting that a person who wants high capacity military style rifles to be sold at gun shows that enable convicts and mentally disabled people to be able to circumvent a background check and buy them to agree with this law. Then again, some people are members both the NRA and pedophile associations. I wouldn't expect those people to support stricter gun laws or child protection laws as well. Nor would I expect that they would even know what those laws say. They are simply against them.
Which is why I don't expect you to know that elements of Oregon Measure 114 are already on the books in other states, have passed US Constitutional challenges and have been shown to save lives. The only real obstacle to this measure becoming law in Oregon was a ruling by an elected judge in a rural county with less than 7500 people living in that county. So, yes, the judge in Harney County says the law is unconstitutional according to his interpretation of the law and his interpretation of Oregon's Constitution. That doesn't mean he's right, it just means we'll see what happens when better judges review his ruling and the arguments made by the state to defend Measure 114. Its the same old story. NRA's lawyers will face off in court with Oregon State's attorneys and we'll see if Rasterman's ruling holds up.
The measure is reasonable, it doesn't restrict anybody who already has the right to own a gun regardless of their reasons from owning a gun. It grandfathers in all the other murder weapons that people might already own. It was written to save lives, not take away anyone's gun, not even people who shouldn't own a gun and don't go on to commit a crime or menace others with the gun. If we lose in court, we'll be given a reason for the failure and can go back to rewrite one that will pass review. Our purpose is to reduce gun deaths, which I hope you would find to be a reasonable purpose. Other reasonable people support the kinds of measures spelled out in this one. Including many gun owners. This measure could not have passed without their support.