Feelings Beat Facts Every Time

 

 

11.02.2026

A recent article in the “Oregon Capital Chronicle” serves as a powerful reminder that there are some people you cannot negotiate with.

The headline of the story tells it all: “Oregon has some of the nation’s strongest gun control laws. Some groups want more.”

Boy do they ever.

In the aftermath of the murders at the Silver Rail school in Bend, you would hope that even mildly rational people would be rethinking the wisdom of disarming good guys in a world that has more than its fair share of savages.

You would hope in vain.  Oregon’s usual collection of harridans have reared their unhinged heads to demand, once again, that anyone willing to protect the innocent be disarmed.

Amie Wexler, executive director of the Portland-based Alliance for a Safe Oregon, told the Capital Chronicle that the 16-year-old murderer (who was eliminated by an armed citizen) probably would not have killed anyone “Had the mom in this case known she had to undergo a safety course to get her weapon.”

“She would have understood Oregon law better and not allowed unfettered access to a 16-year-old who had these nihilistic online tendencies.”

OK, Amie clearly lives in an alternate universe. But she is a piker compared to Oregon’s most pathological proponent of the murder of defenseless kids, Penny Okamoto.  Let’s take a look at what that crackpot has to say:

“Investments into school security aren’t sufficient…shooters can shoot their way past glass doors and metal detectors.” 

And what is her suggestion?

“Governments should create agencies that investigate and come out with recommendations to prevent shootings the same way they explore recommendations for people to respond to earthquakes, fires, and tsunamis, and the firearm industry should pay for these prevention programs the same way chemical companies pay for cleanup at Superfund sites.” 

No, really. She said that. “Governments should create agencies…”

But wait. It gets better.  Here is a follow-up quote from this airhead:

“I am against the firearm industry allowing gunfire to be the leading cause of death for kids and teens in the United States and not lifting a finger to change that.”

So in addition to being on a fairly low rung of the IQ ladder, Okamoto is also… a liar. Because that statement  is flat out false and note that Penny, and all the other civilian disarmament freaks, only quote sources (when they do at all) from gun ban groups. In this case, of course, she just made up that nonsense with no source.

A simple internet search will demonstrate to anyone who can handle the truth that her comment is bogus. And it becomes more bogus when you remove from the firearm’s death figures suicides, inner city gang banging “children” killing other inner city gang banging “children” and legal interventions.  And for those who argue that the suicide statistics are appropriate to be included, we can assure you that people of any age determined to die find a way.

Oregon  in general, and this collection of half wits in particular, are far more concerned with how people commit suicide than why. Maybe because Oregon has among the worst mental health care in the country.

And it’s not just the usual nanny staters at work.  The Capital Chronicle itself states:

“Measure 114 would also close a loophole that allows people to buy a gun even if their background check isn’t completed within three days. “

Translation… when the government imposes a restriction on your rights and then gives you the means to address their failures to do their job, that is a “loophole” not a safeguard. There are exactly zero legacy news sources in Oregon without a far-left bias.

But of all the players determined to prevent good people from having the means to respond to toddler murderers, the most dangerous are the people passing laws in Salem.

They have proven over and over and over that their ultimate goal is the complete elimination of firearms in the hands of the law-abiding while regularly helping evil people avoid the consequences of their actions.

There are those claiming to advocate for the rights of gun owners who think the answer is cozying up to the people who vote against our rights, that obsequious gestures will make them reconsider their desire to turn Oregon into Canada. It’s not going to happen.

The far left that controls the Oregon legislature is not passing these dangerous laws because they “just don’t understand what good people we are”. In fact, they know exactly what they are doing. 

You cannot trust them. You cannot bargain with them. And you cannot negotiate with them in good faith. Because they are faithless.

We simply must get the people we elect to protect our rights to stop pretending the other side just has a different point of view. It’s time for them to stop “working across the aisle” bragging about their “friends on the other side” and acknowledge what they are up against.  Before more children die.

This Had To Happen.

 

10.29.2026

While it’s always a bad idea to ascribe to malice what can be explained by stupidity, it’s also a mistake to overlook the possibility that it can be both.

In a move that has simultaneously defied anything approaching common sense and fit perfectly into the agenda of the Portland City Council, that collection of Stalin worshippers has announced a change in policy anyone with a brain stem could have predicted.

In the wake of the murders in Bend of a teacher and several tiny children, an incident ended by the heroic actions of a civilian gun owner, the Portland City Council has voted unanimously (something unheard of by that collection of screaming loons) to reverse course on their “guns in public buildings” policy.

You may recall that the geniuses in the Oregon Democrat Caucus, with the acquiescence of the spine-free Republicans, passed SB 243.

243 basically ended Oregon’s preemption statute and allowed local governments to ban concealed handgun license holders from their buildings. Unless, of course, they voluntarily agreed to give up their right to defend themselves and others.

So, after watching the failure of every anti-gun nanny stater’s policy, and the success of an armed civilian, the people responsible for turning Portland from a decaying city into an absolute flaming outhouse have decided to….ban CHL holders from all city buildings.

Now you might be thinking, “no, this cannot be, even communists cannot be this stupid or hateful”.  But to demonstrate just how repellant these people can be, here is an actual quote from actual Portland City Councilor Angelita Morillo:

“Because I am not as old as you, I will sit here and I won’t have to go to the bathroom for the vote.”

This is a Portland City Council member and not a 5th grader.

Now let’s examine some quotes from Portland City Council member Jaimie Dunphy who proposed this insane policy.

“Adding guns to a tense situation turns it into a terrifying one. Heated debate is part of defending democracy, but gun violence is not. No one should fear for their safety or their family’s for participating in government, and that’s why the right number of guns in this room, outside of the hands of trained security, is zero.”

By the way, this was the argument used by the supporters of SB 243.   But weirdly, according to the KOIN 6 TV:

“Dunphy noted the elementary school did not have an armed officer on campus on the day of the shooting. He also noted that “good guys with guns” are in city buildings during council meetings.”

Now, admittedly,  the reporters at KOIN are idiots who aspire to be imbeciles. (If you need more proof of that, take a look at this KOIN story, which, while stating “safety experts are hailing the rapid response from police, who arrived on scene within minutes,” somehow neglects to say one single word about who actually stopped the killing and saved countless lives.) So they may have screwed up the quotes they ascribe to Dunphy.  But rest assured, Dunphy has plenty on the record demonstrating what a hateful buffoon he is. 

Failing to enact the bill would be “unconscionable,” said Dunphy, a paragon of virtue.

But while we look in utter astonishment at the latest actions of this detestable collection of unhinged Pol Pot followers, let us not lose sight of the fact that none of this would have been possible without the “leadership” of Senators like Anthony Broadman, who was the most aggressive proponent of this insane legislation.

And for those not sufficiently disgusted, we remind you that Senator Mike McLane, the Senate Republican’s chief gelding, issued a joint press release with Broadman after the murders in Bend without a single mention of who stopped them.

Broadman and his fellow travelers in the legislature created this mess knowing it would get people killed.  They must fix this in the coming legislative session.

 

Is The Tide Turning?

10.27.2026

For far too long, Oregon has been in the death grip of far-left activists who happily ignore reality to promote their radical agenda.  At the top of that agenda is disarming the law-abiding while protecting criminals.

Dead children have always been a positive revenue stream for the “Moms Demand” and the “Ceasefire” collectives.

Amie Wexler, executive director of the Portland-based Alliance for a Safe Oregon, pushed back on the Republican policy proposals, such as the move to increase school security and police officers, as lacking evidence and not taking into account the experiences of students from diverse ethnic backgrounds who statistically suffer higher levels of racial profiling by law enforcement inside and outside of schools.

But the recent murders in Bend, which included little children, have demonstrated with tragic clarity the outcomes of the policies of the civilian disarmament crowd. 

At least for the moment, those who have profited for decades on the bodies of murdered children are desperately trying to repackage their message.  Not only did a civilian with a firearm stop the carnage, but the killer acted in spite of the anti-self-defense ghouls having gotten virtually everything they have demanded.

There was no cop on the scene to stop the killing because… racism.

There was no “assault weapon” used. You know the guns that are designed to “kill as many people as quickly as possible)™

The school had a strict “no self-defense” policy.

And yet, a demented punk still managed to murder 4 people. Who would have thought?

Let’s not forget that the person who so heroically stepped up to eliminate the killer was forced to break the law to do so. That, is insane.

While it’s too close to call the outcome of the election, it’s a safe bet that the Democrats who are responsible for this carnage will still outnumber the Republicans who enable them, but we may never be in a better position to call out these deadly policies and demand change.

It won’t be easy, and the death worshippers will be digging in their heels to keep not only trained civilians but police out of schools. And we still don’t know if the courts will make it all but impossible to legally obtain a firearm.

But this is the fight our kids deserve.  Dig in, folks, we are going to hold these people accountable.

Keep Your Thoughts and Prayers…

10.16.2026

 

Another school shooting and the meaningless platitudes from the politicians and the press have been predictable and predictably deplorable.

While at the time of this writing we know virtually nothing about the murderer at the Silver Rail School, the hero who stopped his rampage has been identified as Kaylub Giamanco, who is reported to have children at the school.

As always, early reports of these events are filled with errors, so the exact details of what happened are still not available, and we may never know what happened second by second.  But what we do know is a killer entered a school full of little kids and started shooting people, and Mr. Giamanco heroically engaged and stopped him. That is not in dispute.

But what is also not in dispute, based on the comments from the press and the politicians, is that they have learned nothing.

Or maybe, they have learned, they just choose to ignore the cold, hard facts that are staring them in the face.

The murders at Silver Rail Elementary in Bend, Oregon, once again prove that one thing stops a killer: a person armed and willing to intervene. Period.

The school’s website and numerous media reports describe the security upgrades the school made. Cameras and locks. Requirements for ID. But of course, no armed personnel.

And while every improvement in safety is welcomed, the reality is, they didn’t work. A man with a gun did.

Though you would hope that the people who profit off this kind of horror would just shut up for a minute, you would be wrong.  The Oregon Nurses Association, demonstrating an astonishing lack of self-awareness, issued this comment:

“ONA and the American Nurses Association (ANA) have spent years advocating for policies which help prevent gun violence, including universal background checks, closing gun show loopholes, community violence prevention, firearm injury prevention, school safety, and expanded access to mental health services”

They didn’t mention that their efforts, while all implemented, have been a complete failure. Nor did they, like almost everyone else who rushed to put out a press release, make any mention of what did work. The self-serving hypocrisy is staggering.  But don’t think this kind of disgraceful behavior is limited to far-left nanny staters.  Here is a complete quote from Republican Senator Mike McLane:

“Oregonians in all corners of the state will wrap this community in love and support.” “Central Oregon is devastated. We are grieving. We are horrified by the senseless violence,” “Our hearts are with the Silver Rail Elementary community and Bend.” 

Notice anything missing? Like an even passing reference to the armed hero who stopped this carnage?

McLane’s pathetic comment came in a joint press release with far-left Senator Anthony Broadman. Here is Broadman’s comment:

“As a father and a neighbor, I grieve and pray for the families who face devastating loss today. Knowing that children and an educator had their lives cut short by violence, in a place that should be safe and full of vitality, troubles the soul of every good human being,”

Broadman also ignored who stopped this killing spree. But that should be no surprise since that disgraceful hypocrite has been one of the legislature’s most rabid promoters of disarming Oregonians and creating the kind of killer-friendly places our schools have become. 

Broadman has worked tirelessly to prevent licensed and armed Oregonians from being allowed in any public building, not just schools.  McLane’s crawling into the sack with Broadman is one more example of the Republicans “reaching across the aisle” to the people who are getting children killed.

Not disgusted yet?  How about a quote from Republican Vikke Breese Iverson:

“The senseless violence against our children today is heartbreaking. My commitment is to the families, students, and teachers as we learn details of today’s horrific event. I’m grateful to every first responder who stepped in with urgency to protect our community. May the weight of God sit heavy with any soul who justifies this evil deed.”

Or this one from House Republican “Leader” Lucetta Elmer:

“My heart is with every student, parent, teacher, and family member affected by this tragedy. Every parent should be able to send their child to school with the confidence that they will be safe, and every child deserves to learn in an environment free from fear.”

Not a single word acknowledging how this nightmare ended.

Thanks for the platitudes, girls, but it is you and your caucuses’ complete lack of spine and principle that has made our schools an attractive place for the deranged.

Of course, the Oregon Senator from New York chimed in.

Ron Wyden’s press team wrote the following:

“My heart goes out to the innocent victims of today’s horrific shooting at Silver Rail Elementary School and their loved ones now facing the awful consequences of yet another school shooting in America. The best way to honor these victims is to at long last pass common-sense gun laws that reduce the risks of more children, parents, teachers, and staff forced to live in fear of similar nightmares for their schools.”

Exactly what “common sense” laws did you have in mind, Ron? Would you like to make a suggestion from your Manhattan COOP about prosecuting the hero who stopped the murderer?

Here’s a statement from the laughably named “Oregon Department of Emergency Management”:

“Our hearts are with everyone impacted by this tragedy, especially the victims and their loved ones. We also recognize the 9-1-1 telecommunicators, first responders, law enforcement officers, emergency medical personnel, school officials, and community partners who responded to this heartbreaking incident. The Oregon Department of Emergency Management (OEM) continues to maintain situational awareness to support additional resources or assistance that may be needed.”

The “community partners?” Not the heroic and selfless citizen who did the job you  could not?

Portland’s KGW TV, which has become the public relations firm for the anti-self-defense crowd, devoted an entire section to: “Gun control organizations speak out”. Organizations that support self-defense got… nothing.

At least Republican House Rep Skarlatos stepped up:

“Today, according to law enforcement sources, a law-abiding Oregonian who was legally carrying a concealed firearm made that same choice. That person followed the shooter and stopped him before he could take more lives. … That kind of courage is rare, and it should be recognized. There are families in Bend tonight whose children are coming home because one person was prepared and willing to act.”

Of course, Skarlatos, unlike most of the cowards who populate our political ranks, has some real-world experience with violent confrontation.

Ironically, even the worst governor in the country made at least a passing reference to the hero in her press release.

It’s time for the people who keep making laws that make you and our children less safe to stop the insanity and admit the truth.  Nothing stops bad people except good people prepared and willing to risk themselves for others.  We love and respect our police, firefighters, and paramedics, but they are NOT “first” responders. YOU are.

The elections are upon us.  Let’s not let the politicians forget what happened at Silver Rail.

About That NFA “Guidance”

 

10.11.2026

By now you have probably heard about or read the ATF’s “guidance” on the new rules concerning short-barreled firearms and suppressors.

You can read the letter about this that ATF published here.  A page with FAQs is available here.

Here is a summary:

For various policy reasons, ATF will cease enforcement on October 9, 2026, of the following NFA provisions as applied only to short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, silencers, and “any other weapon[s]” as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(e):

• The requirement to apply and obtain prior approval to make NFA firearms
• The requirement of those engaged in the business to register NFA firearms within 24 hours of making
• The requirement to apply and obtain prior approval to transfer NFA firearms
• The requirement to register a firearm in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record.
• The various prohibitions on making, receiving, transferring, and possessing unregistered NFA firearms, other than the prohibitions in 26 U.S.C. § 5861(h), (k) (prohibiting possession of firearms with obliterated serial numbers or those illegally imported)
• The prohibition against transporting unregistered NFA firearms in interstate commerce (26 U.S.C. § 5861(j))
• The NFA requirement to mark all NFA firearms
• Any other NFA provision specifically enjoined by the district court’s judgment.

One of the biggest takeaways from this policy decision is this; while the court case that ended the registration requirement only covered the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, the ATF has stated that it will cease enforcement of the registration requirements for everybody.

While this is certainly a positive development, it does not seem that this policy will benefit Oregonians.

Oregon law still requires that these items be “registered” as required by Federal law, and while it would appear that since that requirement is gone, Oregonians are covered, they probably are not. While this conclusion is not without doubt, there is plenty of reason to believe that Oregonians are still required to register.

1. The Trap of Oregon’s State Statutes (ORS 166.272)

Under Oregon law, the possession of a firearm silencer and short-barrel firearms is broadly criminalized as a felony.

• Oregon law does not have an independent state-level registry or a blanket legalization framework for these items.
• Instead, Oregon statute provides a very specific affirmative defense to prosecution: possessing the item is only legal if it is “registered as required by federal law.”

2. “Non-Enforcement” vs. “Not Required”

Because the ATF has shifted to a policy of prosecutorial discretion—meaning they are choosing not to enforce federal NFA registration—some assume federal registration is no longer “required.”

However, because the federal government is declining to enforce registrations rather than abolishing the underlying statute, a legal vacuum is created:

• If an Oregonian acquires or possesses a suppressor or SBR without a federal registration, they technically fit the ATF’s new federal enforcement-discretion guidelines.
• Crucially, they lose their state-law affirmative defense. Because the item is no longer registered under federal law, it fails the literal wording of Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 166.272).

Keep in mind, an “affirmative defense” means that you are considered guilty of a crime unless and until you can provide some proof that you fall under the requirements of the “affirmative defense” against that prosecution.

Furthermore, the ATF’s open letter represents an exercise of prosecutorial discretion. Because the underlying federal statutes have not been repealed by Congress, a future presidential administration or ATF director could revoke or modify this policy. Oregon gun owners who rely on non-enforcement rather than active registration remain vulnerable if federal policies shift.

Two key things to be aware of:

1. The ATF is still accepting “voluntary” registration of these devices so people in states like Oregon have a way to comply with Oregon law.
2. The requirement that the ATF be alerted when you cross state lines with short barreled firearms is still in effect.

Irrespective of the outcome of the coming election, it is a near certainty that the Oregon legislature is going to move to the left.  We really hope we are wrong about this, but that’s the way the wind is blowing.

However, what we learned last session was that the Republicans, when they have the will and when they hear from you, have the means to effect positive changes in Oregon’s gun laws.  Let’s not let them forget that.

Another Victory in NFA Lawsuit

10.06.2026

In another positive turn of events, the Department of Justice has formally surrendered and confirmed it will not appeal the historic federal court ruling striking down the National Firearms Act (NFA) registration requirements for suppressors and short-barreled firearms.

While the Trump DOJ’s position on firearms has been, to say the least, uneven, this is another step forward.

For decades, federal bureaucrats at the ATF have used the unconstitutional, oppressive 1934 NFA to harass, tax, and track law-abiding gun owners for daring to own basic hearing protection and short-barreled firearms. Now, thanks to the Silencer Shop Foundation lawsuit, a federal court ruled that these federal registration mandates and tax schemes are completely unconstitutional, operating outside Congress’s enumerated powers.

What This Means Right Now

Because the federal government refused to appeal, the court’s permanent injunction stands:

• No More Federal NFA Registry for Covered Items: Covered buyers and customers buying suppressors and SBRs through covered channels no longer have to beg the ATF for permission, wait months on end, or pay extortion fees just to exercise their natural rights.
• Standard 4473 System: Transfers in free states are moving through standard, immediate Form 4473 NICS background checks—just like purchasing a standard hunting rifle.

The Catch: What Oregonians MUST Know

While this is a massive federal victory, do not let your guard down.

This ruling does not repeal Oregon’s state-level anti-gun statutes. Extreme politicians in Salem and partisan judges continue to do everything in their power to disarm you and restrict your access to firearms and accessories. Federal court wins only matter if state authorities are forced to respect them, and anti-rights extremists in Oregon will undoubtedly look for new ways to punish law-abiding gun owners.

The federal decision leaves machine guns, destructive devices, and state-level prohibitions untouched.

We have won a major battle against federal overreach, but the war for your Second Amendment rights is far from over. We will keep monitoring the ATF’s next moves and Salem’s predictable tantrums.

Ground Breaking Case Headed To US Supreme Court

 

09.04.2026

As you know, the US Supreme Court has finally agreed to take up a case on whether or not our most common firearms are protected under the Constitution.

The case is  “Viramontes v. Cook County”.

Oral arguments are scheduled to take place during the fall of the 2026–2027 Supreme Court term (which opens October 5, 2026). An exact calendar date for the argument session has not yet been announced.

Clearly, this will be a landmark decision for the future of gun rights in Oregon, but will also have an immediate impact on nearby states that have bans on conventional firearms like Washington and California.

While recent Supreme Court decisions have been ignored by lower courts, such as the one which heard our lawsuit against Measure 114, a decision that states that modern semi-automatic firearms are protected nationwide would be a massive victory.  It is also likely that a positive ruling would have a ripple effect on bans of standard magazines, such as the one in Oregon’s pending Measure 114.

We are happy to inform you that the Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation is part of a coalition of gun rights organizations that have submitted an amicus brief in the case.

We could not continue to take on these fights without you.  Thank you for your support.  The amicus brief is attached here:

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/Final-Brief-3Sep26.pdf

Federal Gun Rights Restoration … Restored At Last.

08.20.2026

 

Since 1992 Congress has denied funding for a program that would allow persons with federal felony convictions to apply for firearms rights restitution.

No matter how well qualified a person was, no matter how absurd the “felony” was, rights restoration was not possible.  The program existed but could not be used thanks to the funding refusal.

Over the many years Oregon Firearms Federation has fought for your rights we have heard from countless good people who had felony convictions that should have never prevented them from getting their gun rights back.

It is a federal crime, punishable by up to 5 years in prison to open your spouses junk mail.

It’s a federal crime to transport a water lily across state lines. (16 U.S. Code § 3372))

Sharing your streaming video password can get you 5 to 10 in a federal slammer.(18 U.S. Code § 1030)

“Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.”

Now those days appear  to become to a very belated end.  On August 17th  Attorney General Todd Blanche finalized a federal regulation and launched a new process allowing eligible individuals who are prohibited from possessing firearms to apply for restoration of their federal firearm rights.

In spite of the lies and hysteria you will certainly hear from the anti-rights crazies, this does not automatically restore firearms rights for felons.  There is still a process and there are still stringent requirements.

But for the countless thousands who lost their rights and now are very much deserving to have them restored, it is  once again possible.

The press release from the US Department of Justice can be viewed here.

A link to the Rights Restoration Webpage can be viewed here.

The text of the final rule, can be viewed here.

The rule will take effect thirty days after publication in the Federal Register.

A list of pro gun lawyers is available on our website here.

This is another step forward for the restoration of sanity in America.

Another Gun Rights Victory.  But Not For You.

 

08.19.2026

In another victory for gun owners, the District Court for the Northern District of Texas has declared that ATF’s regulations on unfinished receivers are unconstitutional and “void for vagueness.”

The court correctly determined that the ATF’s rules provide no reasonable guidance as to what is and is not actually a “frame or receiver,” which would be considered a “firearm” under federal law.

In its ruling, the court noted:

“The decision of when a hunk of metal or plastic “may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver” is left to the subjective determination of the ATF and does not provide fair notice to the reader about when a component becomes subject to enforcement. 27 C.F.R. § 478.12(c). A “frame” or “receiver” can sometimes include “a forging, casting, printing, extrusion, unmachined body, or similar article,” depending on whether the piece has “reached a stage of manufacture where it is clearly identifiable as an unfinished component part of a weapon.” But who’s to say when that stage is? The Final Rule does not provide any concrete examples other than an “unformed block of metal, liquid polymer, or other raw material.” Id. So, at some unknown point between an “unformed block of metal” or “liquid polymer” and a fully completed firearm, “a forging, casting, printing, extrusion, unmachined body, or similar article” becomes a “frame” or “receiver.”

Of course, none of this is accidental.  ATF is notorious for creating rules and regulations that are virtually impossible to decipher, can be interpreted however ATF wants to, and frequently make no sense at all.

Who can forget the “pistol brace” debacle?  First, we were told they were legal, then only under some circumstances, then maybe not at all, then only if approved on a case-by-case basis.  Countless people, attempting to comply with the ever-shifting whims of the bureaucrats at ATF, registered their pistols as SBRs, exposing themselves to scrutiny from ATF only to have the rules vacated by the courts.

And let’s not forget the ATF’s inconvenient habit of killing people who have committed no crime. The family of Bryan Malinowski can tell you all about that. These folks cannot be taken lightly.

If you’ve ever read the ATF’s definitions of different firearms, you know they are absurd.  So their “definitions” of what constituted something that could one day “become” a firearm are equally ridiculous.

This ruling is a welcome moment of common sense.  But as is so often the case, at this time, Oregon gun owners do not benefit from it.

First, the ruling applies in the district where it was created, other districts could reach other conclusions.

Second, Oregon has its own, terribly drafted prohibition of personally made firearms. In 2023, Oregon’s Democrats passed HB 2005, which effectively criminalized making your own firearms.  Of course, the Republicans helped them do this by providing quorum for the vote. Then they staged a comical photo op promising to pay for a lawsuit.

Needless to say, that was all a massive scam.

The current Oregon law, as created by HB 2005, says : “Frame” has the meaning given that term in 27 C.F.R. 478.12.

That CFR includes the following: 

“The terms “frame” and “receiver” shall include a partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver, including a frame or receiver parts kit, that is designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver, i.e., to house or provide a structure for the primary energized component of a handgun, breech blocking or sealing component of a projectile weapon other than a handgun, or internal sound reduction component of a firearm muffler or firearm silencer, as the case may be.”

Since at least one court has now determined that parts of CFR 488.12 are void, it would appear that, once again, the Oregon legislature has, if you will pardon the expression, shot itself in the foot.

As noted, this positive ruling only applies to the plaintiffs in the case and is not a nationwide victory. It does, however, give Oregon’s Republicans a powerful tool to demand the rollback of HB 2005 and its clearly baseless and unconstitutional provisions.  Elections are coming. Let’s see if any Republicans step up and address this opportunity.

Going Postal

 

 

 

08.13.2026

First, a correction. In our last alert, we said that in the recent court ruling concerning SBRs, SBSs, and suppressors,  AOWs were not included. That was not accurate. There were multiple plaintiffs in that case, and the court said that removing the regulations on AOWs only applied to SOME of the plaintiffs.  We regret that error.

Now the Office of Legal Counsel has issued an opinion saying that the ban on possession of firearms in Post Offices is not lawful.

Please keep in mind, this is an opinion. It does not change current enforcement.

However, if you read the existing “rule,” you can see that the ban never made sense. The rule says that a firearm can be carried in a Post Office “for any lawful purpose”.

How this has been twisted into a ban on law-abiding gun owners carrying guns in Post Offices is baffling.   But now the Federal Office of Legal Counsel has correctly noted that Congress never banned firearms in Post Offices.

The opinion does say “A post office is unquestionably a facility within the meaning of section 930. S”.  This raises an interesting question which OFF attempted years ago to resolve with no success. There are still many places in rural America where Post Offices are located in private businesses and even person’s homes. The opinion appears to take no note of that fact.

In the opinion, the OLC noted: “We would have significant constitutional concerns if Congress had created such a blanket ban on the lawful carrying of constitutionally protected arms into a building frequented by the public since the Founding. But we ultimately need not reach that issue here, as Congress has exempted the“lawfulֻcarrying”ֻofֻ firearmsֻ orֻ otherֻ dangerousֻ weaponsֻ “incidentֻ toֻ huntingֻ orֻ otherֻ lawfulֻ purposes.” 18 U.S.C. § 930(d)(3). Because carrying arms for self-defense when entering a buildingֻ heldֻ openֻ toֻ theֻ publicֻ isֻ aֻ paradigmaticֻ“lawfulֻpurpose[],”ֻthatֻ exception permits the lawful carrying of constitutionally protected firearms in post offices. Id.”

The opinion goes on to state: “Section 930(d) lists three exceptions to the general prohibition against possessing firearms in federal facilities. The prohibition does not apply to:

(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a state, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;

(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or

(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.”

Emphasis added.

The opinion also says : “You have asked whether the Department should continue to take a narrowֻviewֻofֻtheֻ“lawfulֻpurposes”ֻexception,ֻallowingֻ theֻ impositionֻ ofֻ criminal penalties on otherwise law-abiding individuals who carry weapons into a post office for the purpose of self-defense. It should not.You have asked whether the Department should continue to take a narrowֻ viewֻ ofֻ theֻ“lawfulֻ purposes”ֻexception,ֻallowingֻ theֻ impositionֻ ofֻ criminal penalties on otherwise law-abiding individuals who carry weapons into a post office for the purpose of self-defense. It should not.”

Emphasis added.

The opinion goes on to say : “That Congress historically addressed the problem of violence at post offices and against postal workers through“materially different means” suggests that there is no history or tradition of restricting firearms in post offices.”

Just as in the recent decision concerning NFA items, this opinion is far from the last word.  But it is another positive step in the long battle to claw back our God-given rights.

Silence Is Not Yet Golden

08.10.2026

 

The recent win over NFA regulations in the Fifth Circuit Court is a welcome step forward. And while the ruling only applies to the plaintiffs in the case, and there is still time for the DOJ to appeal it, there is no question that the court recognized an undeniable fact.  A law that is based on collecting taxes, which collects no taxes, cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny. The ruling covers suppressors, SBRs, and short-barrel shotguns. It does not include machine guns or AOWs. (Correction. AOW’s were included for SOME of the plaintiffs. Several cases were consolidated and the “Jensen” plaintiffs were not included in the protection of AOW’s since they did not raise AOW’s in their case.)

In addition to the “Silencer Shop,” three organizations were plaintiffs: Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, and the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition, Inc.

Members of these organizations are covered by the decision. So if you are not already a member of GOA, this would be an excellent time to become part of that great organization.

As pointed out in this article by John Crump, while the ruling does not apply to everyone (yet), there will be a jurisdictional nightmare trying to apply it since the Feds do not have a list of every GOA member.  But in the meantime, Oregon gun owners have another issue to deal with.

If this ruling is not struck down by a DOJ challenge (and as of the time of this posting, they had not announced one), Oregon State gun law may well still stand in the way of new lawful acquisitions of the covered devices. Here is the problem-causing statute:

 166.272 Unlawful possession of machine guns, certain short-barreled firearms, and firearms silencers. (1) A person commits the crime of unlawful possession of a machine gun, short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or firearms silencer if the person knowingly possesses any machine gun, short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or firearms silencer.

      (2) Unlawful possession of a machine gun, short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or firearms silencer is a Class B felony.

      (3) A peace officer may not arrest or charge a person for violating subsection (1) of this section if the person has in the person’s immediate possession documentation showing that the machine gun, short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or firearms silencer is registered as required under federal law.

      (4) It is an affirmative defense to a charge of violating subsection (1) of this section that the machine gun, short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or firearms silencer was registered as required under federal law. [1989 c.839 §13a; 1997 c.749 §8; 1997 c.798 §1]

(Emphasis added)

In the absence of a way to “register” one of the devices under the NFA, there seems to be no legal way to acquire one under current Oregon law.  It appears that based on section (4)’s use of the word “was” that items previously acquired and registered will still be legal.  But in the absence of a change in Oregon statute, we can see no legal way to buy or own a new SBR, SBS, or suppressor.

  This court ruling is not a done deal yet. Not by a long shot, but we learned in the last legislative session that when the Republicans stand up for gun rights, we can have wins. Let’s prepare for a battle to correct this dangerous statute and demand that any candidate asking for your vote promises to do all he can to repeal it.

GUNS AND THE CONSTITUTION

Explore the Constitution while improving your shooting skills.

 

 

Umatilla County Republican Party and Patriot Academy Launch First Annual Constitutional Defense Course at Historic Bar M Ranch.

The Umatilla County Republican Party, in partnership with Patriot Academy of Fredericksburg, Texas, will host its first annual Constitutional Defense Course from October 1-5, 2026, at the historic Bar M Ranch Conference Center and Mountain Retreat near Adams, Oregon.

The five-day intensive training experience is limited to 40 participants and is designed to provide education, practical instruction, and fellowship centered on constitutional rights, personal liberty, and responsible firearms training.

Nestled in the mountains of Northeastern Oregon, the Bar M Ranch offers participants a unique opportunity to experience a setting rich in American history. Attendees will walk trails once traveled by President Calvin Coolidge and stay at accommodations associated with President Herbert Hoover while enjoying the ranch’s nationally recognized conference and retreat facilities.

The course will feature hands-on instruction, expert-led training, and discussions focused on the foundations of constitutional freedoms, including Second Amendment rights. Organizers say the program is intended for individuals seeking to expand their knowledge, develop practical skills, and connect with others who share an interest in constitutional education and civic engagement.

“Participants will experience a rugged and scenic environment specifically suited for learning, personal growth, and community building,” event organizers said.

The all-inclusive package includes assigned lodging in shared cabins or historic ranch accommodations, three meals daily, and access to all course activities. Evening campfires and fellowship opportunities are also included.

Registration and Pricing

Shooter Registration: $2,300 per person

Non-Shooting Guest Registration: $1,150 per person

Early Payment Discount: 10% discount for shooter and guest registrations paid in full by July 10, 2026

Participants are required to bring:

A semi-automatic pistol

A holster

Personal ammunition (800 rounds)

Limited firearm rentals may be available, with pricing to be announced. Ammunition purchases may also be arranged on-site upon request.

Transportation Options

Optional one-way airport shuttle service will be available:

Tri-Cities Airport: $150 (approximately 94 miles)

Walla Walla Regional Airport: $100

Pendleton Airport: $100

Local Attractions

Because the ranch is located approximately 35 miles from the nearest town, organizers plan to offer optional excursions for an additional fee, including visits to:

Pendleton Underground Tours

Pendleton Round-Up Grounds

Happy Canyon Hall of Fame

Pendleton Woolen Mills

Wildhorse Resort & Casino

Tamástslikt Cultural Institute Museum

Local winery tours

Registration Information

For additional information or to register, visit:

Bar M Ranch Conference Center: https://www.barmranch.com/confrence-center

Bar M Ranch Cabins: https://www.barmranch.com/ranch-cabins

Patriot Academy Registration: https://www.patriotacademy.com/coach/register/10320

CRACKPOT BALLOT MEASURE FAILS!

 

07.24.2026

After a somewhat contentious, and not very productive, meeting of the Explanatory Statement Committee for the “ban on food” measure IP 28 we are very pleased to share this info we just received from the Secretary of State:

The Oregon Secretary of State’s Elections Division has completed the signature verification process for IP 2026-028 and found that the petition does not have the minimum number of valid signatures needed to qualify for the 2026 General Election ballot.  

The public hearing to receive public comments on the draft financial estimate and draft explanatory statement has been cancelled, along with any future reconsideration meetings for the FEC or ESC.

This very, very, welcome development will save good Oregonians a fortune in court costs. Willamette Week is reporting that Tina Kotek is “relieved” that the measure failed… Of course she is. Now she won’t have to call a special session to change its election date.

You can view the press release here.

 

CRACKPOT BALLOT MEASURE ALERT

 

07.23.2026

The entire country knows about IP 28.  This is the crackpot ballot measure, funded by out-of-state crackpots, that the media has sold as a ban on hunting and fishing.

Of course, it does do that. But it should really be sold as a ban on jobs and food.  The measure is so demented and so radical that even the people who created it say they do not expect it to pass “this time.”  They are just trying to get people “used to the idea.”

Well enough unhinged Oregonians are “used to the idea.” Enough that it has qualified for the ballot. That alone should scare the hell out of you.
UPDATE AND CORRECTION THE MEASURE HAS NOT QUALIFIED FOR THE BALLOT YET. THE COMMITTEE WAS FORMED TO COMPLY WITH THE DEADLINES FOR THE VOTER GUIDE.

You may recall that many people said of MZ 114, Oregon’s gun ban, that it would never pass. You may also recall that Oregon’s disgraced former Secretary of State, Shemia Fagan, declared it passed before all the votes were counted.  Now, years later, we are still trying to put a stop to that madness.  Please do not assume this measure cannot pass. It may be the most idiotic thing Oregonians have ever approved of, but don’t get too comfortable.

The Secretary of State has announced the dates for the meeting of the “Explanatory Statement Committee.” According to the far-left Secretary of State, “the ESC is responsible for preparing an impartial, simple, and understandable statement explaining the measure, not to exceed 500 words. “

As we learned from MZ 114, the truth is far from that. The dice were totally loaded when the explanatory statement was created for that measure, and as you would expect, the State had the deck stacked from the beginning.

If the rational people on the committee get steamrolled, as they were on the 114 committee, the statement voters see could bear no resemblance to what the actual ballot measure says.  For better or worse, most people do not read the entire measure.  Those who do will wonder what alternate universe they are living in.

The following is from the Secretary of State’s press release:

Initiative Petition 28 – Criminalizes breeding practices, injuring/killing animals, including for food, hunting, fishing. Creates transition fund. Exceptions. 

ESC Members for Initiative Petition 28:  

• David Michelson
• Isaac Farias
• Rocky Dallum
• Amy Patrick
• Bob Hermann 

The ESC will meet according to the following, updated schedule:  

Friday, July 24, 2:00-3:00 p.m. 

• Agenda: Draft explanatory statement. 

Monday, July 27, 12:00-1:00 p.m. 

• Agenda: Draft explanatory statement. 

Monday, August 3, 2026, 9:30 – 11:30 a.m. 

• Agenda: Reconsideration of explanatory statement.  

The entire release and link to watch the committee can be viewed here:

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/ORSOS/bulletins/421ce1f

The release notes : “The public is invited to provide comments during the public hearing to be held on Thursday, July 30, 2026, from 9:00-10:00 a.m. “

One hour. One hour for Oregonians to comment on the most insane measure in Oregon history. 

The “Public Hearing” link above appears to be only for a remote public hearing.

Please see the paragraph labeled “Public Participation.”

It provides no info on a physical location for this meeting and no information on how one signs up to get a spot to testify in the one hour scheduled for public input. Calls to the Secretary of State were not returned as of the time this alert was sent. If they provide that information this alert will be updated on our website.

Still More Good News

Third Circuit Appeals Court Win.

 

07.17.2026

 

In a groundbreaking win for the US Constitution and the 2nd Amendment, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has declared New Jersey’s ban on semi-automatic rifles and standard-capacity magazines to be unconstitutional.

It’s hard to overstate the importance of this victory. New Jersey is a gun-banners’ dream state, and for far too long, its residents have been treated like subjects whose rights are doled out by the state when it serves their purposes.

Closer to home, this ruling places our neighbor Washington, with its equally egregious bans, in the crosshairs.

It also should be a stout kick in the butt to Oregon’s Supreme Court, which has still not announced whether it plans to uphold the clearly unconstitutional Measure 114’s ban on standard firearms components, meaning magazines.

This ruling is the polar opposite of the Seventh Circuit’s ruling affirming a ban on modern rifles in Illinois, creating a circuit split. Fortunately that does not matter now since the US Supreme Court has declared that it intends to rule on semi-auto bans in its next term.

This Third Circuit ruling is huge because it made clear that not only AR-15s, but all semi-auto rifles are protected. Furthermore, the court also said magazines (which the court continues to call “large capacity”) are also protected.

Here are some opening quotes from the decision:

“Applying the framework announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), we agree with the District Court that New Jersey’s ban on Colt AR-15s violates the Second Amendment. However, because the record supports the same result for all semi-automatic rifles—not only Colt AR-15s—we will MODIFY the District Court’s order so that it deems the Assault Firearm Provisions unconstitutional with respect to the full class of semi-automatic rifles. We will AFFIRM that part of the order as modified.

The LCM Provisions also violate the Second Amendment, so we will REVERSE the District Court’s order with respect to those. Because the LCM Provisions violate the Second Amendment, we need not address the Takings Clause challenge.”

Of course, we are in the 9th Circuit, the most overturned lunatic fringe of US Courts, but this is still a stunning victory.

The entire west coast has become “occupied territory” for those of us fighting for Second Amendment Rights, and thanks to the tireless efforts of people like you, Oregon is still the least bad state on the coast. While we clearly have long fights ahead of us, (we are STILL in federal court over Mz 114) this victory should be a moral booster for all of us.

Thanks to all of you who have been in this fight for so long.

Below are links to reactions from Mark Smith and William Kirk to the ruling.

Mark Smith https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=y1ROQxtApe0&ra=m   

William Kirk –   https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=qAG_unoDGGY&ra=m 

The Decision –  https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6504/attachments/original/1784307428/2026.07.17_125_OPINION.pdf?1784307428