A bill set for the November ballot would make it illegal to possess a weapon with a mag capacity over 10 rounds. If you live in Oregon or know someone who does, you need to make sure they get this information. This is a gun confiscation bill, check it out at Oregonvotes.org

Don’t see anything about it at your link.

It will effect basically all semi auto gun owners, not just new sales. And it will also effect tube fed rifles like my Rossi .22lr and lever action tube fed rifles too. Kate got her A LOT of Bloom berg $

What would they do with the people that already have the guns or the magazines?

And I thought they were already crazy because you can't even pump your own gas. Is it all the Cali refugees coming up there?

The funny thing is the Oregon constitution has a tremendously strong stance on the 2nd ammendment, more so than Federally. It's very specific. But we have judges that are worse than the 9th circuit. And we have lowlife democrats that don't care about law or consequences because of the voting block Eugene to Portland on I5.

Rick, they'll probably do a "voluntary" surrender.

Aside from the obvious constitutional absurdity what about financial loss? I’d be out thousands to comply.

The man don't care.

Also, what's the plan for enforcing compliance?

Think the man would have a hard time finding every standard capacity magazine out there.

And like the CA ban,an out of state seller isn't responsible for checking laws the recipient needs to follow, so ive got a few Rubbermaid totes full of Pmags and steelies to put on gone broker

There should be outrage... 😟

My guess is compliance would be in the form of extreme punishment if caught rather than seeking them out.... ala the MJ tax stamp

They're still taxing Michael Jackson..?? 😕

Wonder what our founding fathers would say about this. A battle will be waged here that will partially define who we are. I hope the constitution prevails as it should. I for one do not want to wake up to a diminished America.

"Capable of holding more than 10 rounds" so it doesn't matter mag size because it's capable......and they are to be surrendered.

seems like a broad interpretation that wouldn't fit the intent but it's your back yard and I know nothing about it. i will concede to the cbid proximity rule.

"The proposal defines an assault weapon as any semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine, any feature like a folding or telescoping stock and that can accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition."

"The proposal would require any person in legal possession of an assault weapon to sell, surrender or remove the weapon from the state, or render it inoperable, within 120 days of passage, according to the language. "

ok so it's not pistols it's rifles, and the use of "and" and "or" becomes very important.

crap law either way

Insane in da membrane... 😟

CA already has that law. Can't own mags with more than 10 capacity.

Z is saying it means something different. Not a matter of mags with over 10 capacity, but a gun that can accept a mag over 10 capacity.

In other words guns legal in Cali running mags meant to be legal in cali because they are limited to 10 would not be legal in Oregon because they could accept a larger mag capacity (not that you necessary have said magazine). You can't just ditch the magazine (expensive enough)


It looks to me like conjunction junction is in play though just from what Z posted.

"semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine, any feature like a folding or telescoping stock and that can accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition."

Based on this and this alone....

Specific to rifles apparently

detachable magazine AND Folding(or telescoping) Stock AND can (read as ability to) accept more than 10 rounds of ammo


this would exclude marlin 60s etc. The folding or telescoping stock eliminates most.

still a crappy law.