JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
His emails also have trackers embedded in them. I emailed him about that a few years ago and he acknowledged it, and vigorously defended them, saying they were necessary. I unsubscribed and never looked back.

Trackers? :s0114:

They're called images. And links. Don't download the pictures or click on a link and you won't be "tracked".

Also, email is the least of your worries ;-).
 
Good grief, you guys totally missed the point. The dude purports to be on our side, and then knowingly injects trackers into his email. The links aren't simple links, they bounce through tracking servers first (unless he's changed it, as I said, I unsubbed years ago). It's trivial to write an email that doesn't do that.

Don't worry about email being the least of my worries. I'm quite well aware of what's happening on my computer, thank you.
 
Good grief, you guys totally missed the point. The dude purports to be on our side, and then knowingly injects trackers into his email. The links aren't simple links, they bounce through tracking servers first (unless he's changed it, as I said, I unsubbed years ago). It's trivial to write an email that doesn't do that.

Don't worry about email being the least of my worries. I'm quite well aware of what's happening on my computer, thank you.

Your point was that the dude is somehow nefarious because his emails contain "trackers." You are free to your opinion but it is incorrect - the presence of "trackers" does not indicate ill intention. You also state that sending out an email without them is trivial, which is partly right, partly wrong. Let me explain:

Most Email Service Providers (gmail, yahoo, msn, etc.) have strict guidelines about mass mailings in that: you are not allowed to do it. Does it happen? Sure. Would I expect a politician to play nicely with an ESP's User Agreement? Yes, yes I would. So, popping out an email to a few hundred thousand people is not as easy as you cranking out an iMessage.

So, Mr. Politican can either set up his own mail server or utilize one of countless bulk mail service providers. It is highly probable that they go with option B there, as it is the more cost effective solution. Many of these services justify their existence by gaining high deliverability and low junk/spam placement. The marketer that is hired to send these messages justifies their existence by reporting back on actions taken (if there was a call to action) or on content consumed. How would they know about that last one? They infer it by your interaction with the email.

If you download the images, they know you've opened the email. Many imageless emails will contain a 1px x 1px image so that this can be tracked - this is called a tracking pixel. Links are wrapped by the bulk email provider so that your click will go first to that provider before forwarding you to the final destination so that your interaction with the link is tracked. Can it be done without the redirect? Of course it can - and often is (look up "query string"). By the way, if you have a gmail account, even gmail ends up proxying the images and wrapping the links so that *they* know your interaction. Why do they do this? It feeds their inbox placement algorithm - if you stop interacting with a bulk sender, eventually those emails stop showing up in inbox and they start going to junk.

So, now you know - there's nothing of ill intent where email tracking is concerned...just a lowly marketer trying to justify their salary at the other end. You are, of course, free to not wish to be tracked. And, if you still want to receive content from, literally, any business or politician...then I suggest changing your email settings to display text only emails (disable HTML support). This will allow you to get the email sans any tracking feature.

I quipped about email being the least of your worries - it was a joke. Your response is interesting, though. I'm sure you're very well aware of what takes place on *your* computer...but do you know what takes place on Google's? Microsoft's? Are you aware of second and third party data sources/purveyors? The point buried in that joke was that sending the fact that you've opened an email back to a political aid - and by you, I mean your email address (which is anonymized, right?) - gives nothing away, especially if you've taken other internet safety precautions.

Happy trails,
 
Oregon Senate Republican Leader Fred Girod faces a recall effort because he was among GOP lawmakers who allowed the chamber to reach a quorum last month while it debated whether to ban firearms in state buildings.
 

Who would take his place if he's recalled? I don't know how that works? If it's something like der fuhrer k8 gets to pick the replacement? If the seat remains empty 'til the next election, is that considered any kind of a win?
 
Last Edited:
Is anyone really surprised by SB 396? I started shopping for my first gun (since moving out of the country as a teenager) about five years ago and when I saw 80% lowers I thought "how the f__* are those legal in the US?" I get it now and why people buy them (I wouldn't...I'm not that precise when working with hands) but I'm still surprised that they exist as a product.

Whether you are pro or against background checks we all know they are required and 80% lowers make that process completely avoidable for a motivated person trying to avoid undergoing one. From the perspective of all those voters who don't care about the 2nd amendment or guns at all, a person wanting to make an unregistered firearm must be a criminal.

Separately is there even such a thing as an "undetectable" firearm? I can't get into Washington County Courthouse without taking off my shoes!!!
What the hell would it shoot?
 
Genie, get back in that bottle! lol

"Whether you are pro or against background checks we all know they are required and 80% lowers 21st century technology makes that process completely avoidable for a motivated person trying to avoid undergoing one."

Fixed that for you.

All SB 396 will do is criminalize otherwise good citizens, ruin a few people's livelihoods, and piss off those who recognize it as part of the agenda to remove their right to keep and bear.
 
Where should the line be drawn, if not at 80%?

I just watched a guy build an AK from a pile of parts and a HD shovel. Should hammers and shovels require a background check now?
No. I don't really have a strong opinion on the issue. If I can make something that safely and accurately shoots a round and I can legally possess I don't think I should be prohibited from doing so. I've just always been surprised the ATF has permitted the 80% lower market to exist in the first place. Honestly I've always wondered why the lower is the regulated part. It seems to me that if they wanted to have all firearms be subject to background checks the barrel and replacements make more sense to be the regulated part. Again not endorsing regulation just surprised.
 
There is no question that these bills, in every state and at the federal level, are designed to harass gun owners and burden private gun ownership. Instead of fretting over the irrational and unconstitutional nature of the bills, do something. Donate to pro 2A litigation groups, write your representatives. Tell undecided voters that gun control is a proven failure in all the jurisdictions who have the strictest laws. NYC, Chicago, Oakland, Los Angeles. And if those cities blame other jurisdictions' lax laws for imported guns, why don't those other jurisdictions have the higher gun crime rate?

Venting on these message boards does not accomplish anything.
Venting doesn't but bringing it into conversation and informing people does help.
 
Does anyone know where the Fred Girod recall petition is? I have some free time and would like to help go door to door getting signatures for a recall even though I'm not in his district.
 
Your point was that the dude is somehow nefarious because his emails contain "trackers." You are free to your opinion but it is incorrect - the presence of "trackers" does not indicate ill intention. You also state that sending out an email without them is trivial, which is partly right, partly wrong. Let me explain:

Most Email Service Providers (gmail, yahoo, msn, etc.) have strict guidelines about mass mailings in that: you are not allowed to do it. Does it happen? Sure. Would I expect a politician to play nicely with an ESP's User Agreement? Yes, yes I would. So, popping out an email to a few hundred thousand people is not as easy as you cranking out an iMessage.

So, Mr. Politican can either set up his own mail server or utilize one of countless bulk mail service providers. It is highly probable that they go with option B there, as it is the more cost effective solution. Many of these services justify their existence by gaining high deliverability and low junk/spam placement. The marketer that is hired to send these messages justifies their existence by reporting back on actions taken (if there was a call to action) or on content consumed. How would they know about that last one? They infer it by your interaction with the email.

If you download the images, they know you've opened the email. Many imageless emails will contain a 1px x 1px image so that this can be tracked - this is called a tracking pixel. Links are wrapped by the bulk email provider so that your click will go first to that provider before forwarding you to the final destination so that your interaction with the link is tracked. Can it be done without the redirect? Of course it can - and often is (look up "query string"). By the way, if you have a gmail account, even gmail ends up proxying the images and wrapping the links so that *they* know your interaction. Why do they do this? It feeds their inbox placement algorithm - if you stop interacting with a bulk sender, eventually those emails stop showing up in inbox and they start going to junk.

So, now you know - there's nothing of ill intent where email tracking is concerned...just a lowly marketer trying to justify their salary at the other end. You are, of course, free to not wish to be tracked. And, if you still want to receive content from, literally, any business or politician...then I suggest changing your email settings to display text only emails (disable HTML support). This will allow you to get the email sans any tracking feature.

I quipped about email being the least of your worries - it was a joke. Your response is interesting, though. I'm sure you're very well aware of what takes place on *your* computer...but do you know what takes place on Google's? Microsoft's? Are you aware of second and third party data sources/purveyors? The point buried in that joke was that sending the fact that you've opened an email back to a political aid - and by you, I mean your email address (which is anonymized, right?) - gives nothing away, especially if you've taken other internet safety precautions.

Happy trails,
I am extremely well versed in how email, and networks in general, work, but thank you for attempting to educate me.

I did not say or think that he has ill intent, simply lack of care. It may not bother you, it does bother me.
 
HB 2510, the Democrat's bill to force you to keep your self defense guns locked up and useless AND hold you responsible for crimes committed if they were stolen, has been…delayed.
:
We do NOT know why, but we can tell you it is almost certainly NOT good news. Deals are being made, and given the makeup of Republican "leadership" that means we are likely about to lose even more rights.
 
Yesterday Oregon HB-2510, the lock up your guns bill, was moved to April 19 for a third reading. The bill requires firearms to be locked at home and in transit when not in use EDIT: "under the control of the person or an authorized person..." HB-2510 also makes the owner of a stolen firearm "strictly liable for the injury" for two years after a theft if the firearm was not secured as mandated or the theft was not reported promptly. There are several other onerous components to this bill. HB-2510 is an "emergency" bill, and can not be challenged in the future if it passes now.

The bill: https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2021R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB2510/Introduced

Status: https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2021R1/Measures/Overview/HB2510

NRA Reviews:
https://act.nraila.org/actions/campaigns/11523
https://www.nraila.org/articles/202...torage-requirements-on-law-abiding-gun-owners

Please take a few moments to write / email your representatives regarding the extremeness of this (and other) anti-gun bills being rammed through without open public comment. The impact of the pending series of Oregon anti-gun bills will have an enormous impact on all firearms owners. Just a few sentences will suffice.

I lean to defending Oregon sportsmen, as hunting has been an Oregon legacy for many families. Some liberal acquaintances are more sympathetic to the outdoor lifestyle, but not the need to carry / self-protect (not to diminish our second amendment rights). Whatever – please send a few calm sentences to your Oregon House and Senate representatives.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yesterday Oregon HB-2510, the lock up your guns bill, was moved to April 19 for a third reading. The bill requires firearms to be locked at home and in transit when not in use.

Not according to this...

firearm is not carried by or under the control of the person or an authorized person, secure the firearm: (A) With an engaged trigger lock or cable lock that meets or exceeds the minimum specifications established by the Oregon Health Authority under section 7 of this 2021 Act; (B) In a locked container that meets or exceeds the minimum specifications established by the Oregon Health Authority under section 7 of this 2021 Act; or (C) In a gun room. (b) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this subsection, a firearm is not secured if: (A) A key, combination or other means of opening a lock or container is readily available to a person the owner or possessor has not authorized to carry or control the firearm. (B) The firearm is a handgun, is left unattended in a vehicle and is within view of persons outside the vehicle.

When I am driving in my car, to the range let's say, I consider that gun, in it's case/in the back seat/on the floor/in the trunk/in the glove box, to be under my control. It also says you can't leave your gun in the car "In Sight" Well DERP! Responsible gun owners don't do that.


This whole thing is STILL just a bunch of BS, but lets not misstate what it says.
 
Not according to this...

firearm is not carried by or under the control of the person or an authorized person, secure the firearm: (A) With an engaged trigger lock or cable lock that meets or exceeds the minimum specifications established by the Oregon Health Authority under section 7 of this 2021 Act; (B) In a locked container that meets or exceeds the minimum specifications established by the Oregon Health Authority under section 7 of this 2021 Act; or (C) In a gun room. (b) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this subsection, a firearm is not secured if: (A) A key, combination or other means of opening a lock or container is readily available to a person the owner or possessor has not authorized to carry or control the firearm. (B) The firearm is a handgun, is left unattended in a vehicle and is within view of persons outside the vehicle.

When I am driving in my car, to the range let's say, I consider that gun, in it's case/in the back seat/on the floor/in the trunk/in the glove box, to be under my control. It also says you can't leave your gun in the car "In Sight" Well DERP! Responsible gun owners don't do that.


This whole thing is STILL just a bunch of BS, but lets not misstate what it says.

Thanks for the more detailed clarification. I didn't mean to be fear-mongering. "Under Control" is more specific than "not in use." EDIT: clarified initial post.

Still, much of the wording bill is very broad, and the open-ended liability for two years extreme. I doubt there will be proactive enforcement, but I can see components of the law used as add-ons. Other parts that are not well defined are tamper-proof locks, gun rooms, etc.

Mainly, I do want to encourage contacting representatives regarding the latest flurry of anti-gun bills coming up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top