941 out of Judiciary and up for Senate vote

[Jim Colvill]

(d) A gun dealer may charge a reasonable fee for facilitating a firearm transfer pursuant
to this section.

It's up to the dealer. I can't see any dealer turning down free money.

 

[RW-Ore]

Can the SCOTUS be recalled ?[ Just thinking out loud]

 

[Jim Colvill]

Can the SCOTUS be recalled ?[ Just thinking out loud]

Nope...it's a position for life

 

[RW-Ore]

It's up to the dealer. I can't see any dealer turning down free money.

Dealers have to keep records of the transaction for five years. That has to be worth something.

 

[tiggers97]

The cynical answer: a $10 sales tax on each gun sold. I know it's a long shot but since they are all Democrat perhaps, maybe, by an act of god they will listen seriously to a registered D.

Be sure to bring up that you are a registered democrat, but this goes to far. And you won't be voting or giving $$$ to the democratic party (voting and $$$, life blood of politicians). They don't care about the votes of people they know who won't vote for them. They do care about losing votes from people they are counting on. You, sir, have 4 times the power.

 

[Deebow]

Laws are for the law abiding.

The political masturbation of the Oregon Senate Democrats is going to have the intended effect of gratifying them with their worthless bill made law, while nothing will change for the criminally minded or those with evil intent.

Let them pass their bill. Nothing will change.

Oh, and yeah, this is what you get with one party rule.

 

[U201491]

They have no clue.

 

[RW-Ore]

They already took your right to buy a gun from a gun store without a BGC
Then they took your rights to buy a gun from a gun show without a BGC
Now they want a universal back ground check
You keep giving their going to continue to take , it will not end because they demand power.

 

[RW-Ore]

They have no clue.

View attachment 225666

Taku that is what they have to be taught , just a little bit more and hell will break out.

 

[U201491]

Best thing everyone can do is just keep what they have because you know what is next.
That it will be education time of the true purpose of the 2nd.
This "Ain't" Australia. !! We are not British Subjects, not "subjects" of any form.
Living in tyranny is NOT LIVING.
Something they cannot figure out yet.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

The cynical answer: a $10 sales tax on each gun sold. As I said, I know all about Burdick and she won't get my vote next time she comes up. What else to do? I'll send copies of my arguments to the Governor and my Representative as well. I know it's a long shot but since they are all Democrat perhaps, maybe, by an act of god they will listen seriously to a registered D.

Gov. Brown has a short term. Getting a Republican in would go a long way to stopping further gun rights losses like CA.
Not looking for a debate. Just wondering if this State has any hope left for gun owners. Would you as a DEM consider voting against your party for this overreach?
I mean would you vote for a Republican Governor to put a "governor" so to speak on this fast tracking Democratic Super Majority?

 

[RW-Ore]

If it comes to that I get Prozanski. Kidding , kidding , kidding.
We cannot let it get to that point.
What I stated before , they took some of your rights when they added BGC to FFL's
They infringed on your rights when you allowed BGC's on gun shows
Now their taking another chunk with the universal back ground check.
It's so easy you let them take what they want , when they want.
Where does it stop ???

 

[U201491]

It's up to the dealer. I can't see any dealer turning down free money.

Just how many dealers are secretly promoting the UBC to make profit from it. I believe there are probably quite a few that will use this to their profit advantage and quietly backing it. Just curious who they might be.
Yeah.......... I know the concept sucks, but reality is sometimes not what people want to hear.

 

[Jim Colvill]

Gov. Brown has a short term. Getting a Republican in would go a long way to stopping further gun rights losses like CA.
Not looking for a debate. Just wondering if this State has any hope left for gun owners. Would you as a DEM consider voting against your party for this overreach?
I mean would you vote for a Republican Governor to put a "governor" so to speak on this fast tracking Democratic Super Majority?

Would I vote for a Republican?! Are you nuts?

Yes, I would vote for a Republican. I have in the past. I registered as a Democrat mainly so I would have a voice in the primaries. I am not, nor ever have been a single party voter nor am I a single issue voter. If the Republicans can field a candidate who also speaks to the other concerns and issues I have, I would be happy to vote for him/her/it. Elections are a ways off and I must deal with the now and those who are in office as the moment and do the best I can with it. If anyone sees another Tom McCall out there please send him up and I'll be the first at the polls to vote for him/her/it.

 

[Koda]

Unfortunately, the SCOTUS has the power to interpret the constitution, and in the case of background checks, they've already ruled it's not a violation of the 2nd amendment to require a background check. Like it or not, we're already screwed on that level.

if it was just a background check that would be correct...

 

[Koda]

Dealers have to keep records of the transaction for five years. That has to be worth something.

dealers have to keep records for 20 years for every transaction. Furthermore, if during that time they go out of business or otherwise close shop they are required by federal law to turn over those records to the feds.

 

[BDA.45]

I WILL NOT COMPLY

 

[RW-Ore]

What ever Koda I'm not a lawyer. What I'm trying to get across is the FFL has to keep the records for a period of time and that has to be worth something as far as cost goes.

 

[RW-Ore]

I WILL NOT COMPLY

I am with you BDA .45 their will be no compliance with unjust laws.

 

[U8395279]

My Senator is Ginny Burdick, (yeah, I know all about her) but I still had to take a shot at an e-mail to her office.

Dear Senator Burdick
I urge a reconsideration of SB941 for the following reasons:
1. The background checks called for are, for the most part, unenforceable. Even the Oregonian and many County LEOs admit this. Criminals, by definition, would not be deterred by the restrictions.
2. The bill, as written, makes no allowances for those who possess a valid Concealed Handgun License. CHL holders have already been vetted by both the Oregon State Police (the required background check required to get the CHL) as well as their county LEO who issues the license.
3. The bill, as written, makes no allowances for those who possess a valid 03 FFL commonly referred to as the Curio & Relic license. This is a Federal license issued to people, such as myself, to purchase guns which meet BATFE criteria as a curio or relic. These are essentially guns which are at least 50 years old or have a historical or collectors value. To force all guns to go through a UBC regardless is an undue burden on those who comply with BATFE rules and negates any value to that license.
4. Taking all points into account , SB941 becomes just another piece of superfluous legislation which addresses a non-existent problem, which would not prevent a single instance of gun related violence and is nothing more than political grandstanding with a piece of feel good legislation. The root causes of violence, such as poverty and mental health care, remain ignored. The time and effort of the Senators and Representative of the State of Oregon would be better put to use on the myriad of other challenges which we face.
Sincerely,
James Colvill
Beaverton, OR

I understand that Burdick is your Senator, but honestly, asking her to support gun rights is sort of like asking Satan to become baptized.

.