JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
6,985
Reactions
21,487
Ceasefire Oregon To Meet w/Law maker over 2019
Or grease fire as I like to call them, was invited to discuss New Firearms Safety act.
Contents are unknown, but are to take place after the November holidays.

Person whom was in contact in their last meeting, stated they are looking to rebuild the
ballot measure failures and ram them thru in the next session.

Person who wished to remain anonymous : They are not only at the reported training aspect, gun registration appears to be on the table as well.

I post this stuff periodically, its always ignored here and by OFF until its too late.
I was going to stop posting intel, but hey its my civic duty, I can inform, I can't make people listen.

******************************************************************
EDIT
This was posted by me in another thread thought id post this as a addon
This particular item in Washington was something Sen Prozanski Considered in SB941, it was something at the time was able to have worked out of it as well as retain family transfers private. When I was speaking with him over this particular measure idea, it was something at the time they wanted to wait on. Its not on Kates agenda. But Prozanski may revisit this, someone want to pass this along to Kevin Starret, he never listened and refused to meet over SB941 so he is not aware of those conversations. Might be time OFF got their heads out of the sand and see what been going on. 1639 could be here next session, but I have not heard nor seen a draft.
Perhaps they are on to me LOL
 
Let's get started on our own initiative petition, something to disallow personal freedoms from further being infringed upon. If you want the blue votes with it, include cannabis.
A petition that serves to:
A) prevent further erosion of 2a rights across the state by deeming further initiative petitions in opposition illegal, and reversing currently active laws restricting firearms laws in this state
And
B) prevent any initiative petitions that serve to repeal laws that serve to protect or allow certain personal freedoms.

Basically tie state cannabis laws in there, making it so of the state wants to further restrict access to firearms, they would also have to restrict access to legal cannabis. If something like that made it through, we would be set.
I am not a politician or bureaucrat. I would be willing to sacrifice what time and little money I have to help.
 
Let's get started on our own initiative petition, something to disallow personal freedoms from further being infringed upon. If you want the blue votes with it, include cannabis.
A petition that serves to:
A) prevent further erosion of 2a rights across the state by deeming further initiative petitions in opposition illegal, and reversing currently active laws restricting firearms laws in this state
And
B) prevent any initiative petitions that serve to repeal laws that serve to protect or allow certain personal freedoms.

Basically tie state cannabis laws in there, making it so of the state wants to further restrict access to firearms, they would also have to restrict access to legal cannabis. If something like that made it through, we would be set.
I am not a politician or bureaucrat. I would be willing to sacrifice what time and little money I have to help.


But would the people in the city go for it?

They want to pass Portland only laws and maybe in allowing that it could also be tied in with a measure that would allow all city or county ordinances to supercede state law in their juristiction?

Or we could just trade all our guns in for flame throwers. But I doubt the fire department would be able to keep up with all the people defending their homes.
 
EDIT
This was posted by me in another thread thought id post this as a addon
This particular item in Washington was something Sen Prozanski Considered in SB941, it was something at the time was able to have worked out of it as well as retain family transfers private. When I was speaking with him over this particular measure idea, it was something at the time they wanted to wait on. Its not on Kates agenda. But Prozanski may revisit this, someone want to pass this along to Kevin Starret, he never listened and refused to meet over SB941 so he is not aware of those conversations. Might be time OFF got their heads out of the sand and see what been going on. 1639 could be here next session, but I have not heard nor seen a draft.

I don't get it.... what is the something that Prozanski considered but is something he wanted to wait on but it's not on Kate's agenda and he may revisit that should be passed on to the guy that never listened and is not aware of those conversations??? Is there a Direct Object in there somewhere, somehow, someway? ;)

I think I need a nap.
 
But would the people in the city go for it?

They want to pass Portland only laws and maybe in allowing that it could also be tied in with a measure that would allow all city or county ordinances to supercede state law in their juristiction?

Or we could just trade all our guns in for flame throwers. But I doubt the fire department would be able to keep up with all the people defending their homes.
I believe they would.
A lot people in this city are high as giraffe testes all the time. Most of them also consider themselves to be compassionate to a fault. If it appears that they are protecting a threatened groups civil rights, and they can protect those in concert with their own, they will likely do so.
 
I don't get it.... what is the something that Prozanski considered but is something he wanted to wait on but it's not on Kate's agenda and he may revisit that should be passed on to the guy that never listened and is not aware of those conversations??? Is there a Direct Object in there somewhere, somehow, someway? ;)

I think I need a nap.
It was the mandatory firearm registration. I think.
 
Imagine,

If you had to fill out a 4473 to buy something at a dispensary and then say you needed a "license" to own a federally controlled/outlawed item.

Of course, trying to pin marijuana with the same rules as guns would most certainly cost tons of unrest and most certainly cost political votes.

I personally have nothing against weed, I do not even know if its taxed like cigarettes or other substances you can get at almost every store but I mean it seems easier to go get high out of your mind than it is to purchase a boom stick. Just sayin.
Ok reading around, I see they cannot tax weed in legal states because its still considered a federally illegal substance, but they can sure tax a lot to the other aspects like property, electricity and other things around it. Just not the substance itself. Interesting.
 
Last Edited:
Imagine,

If you had to fill out a 4473 to buy something at a dispensary and then say you needed a "license" to own a federally controlled/outlawed item.

Of course, trying to pin marijuana with the same rules as guns would most certainly cost tons of unrest and most certainly cost political votes.

I personally have nothing against weed, I do not even know if its taxed like cigarettes or other substances you can get at almost every store but I mean it seems easier to go get high out of your mind than it is to purchase a boom stick. Just sayin.
This is part of the point.
I left the cannabis industry very recently. You would be surprised who purchases the herb, or not.
Police
Sheriff
An OSP guard, who retains residence in Idaho
All had been served in the place I formerly worked, in Portland.
It is much easier to obtain cannabis than a firearm. You formerly had to have a license (paid prescription) to purchase it, so there's that, I suppose.
If the combo of conservative voters and veterans who use cannabis happened to agree with the libs who do as well on that end, while also covering the other? It would work. The wording needs to be proper, but I believe it would.
 
Imagine,

If you had to fill out a 4473 to buy something at a dispensary and then say you needed a "license" to own a federally controlled/outlawed item.

Of course, trying to pin marijuana with the same rules as guns would most certainly cost tons of unrest and most certainly cost political votes.

I personally have nothing against weed, I do not even know if its taxed like cigarettes or other substances you can get at almost every store but I mean it seems easier to go get high out of your mind than it is to purchase a boom stick. Just sayin.
Ok reading around, I see they cannot tax weed in legal states because its still considered a federally illegal substance, but they can sure tax a lot to the other aspects like property, electricity and other things around it. Just not the substance itself. Interesting.
Also, cannabis has a 20 percent tax in the city of Portland.
 
Phrasing, verbatim and wording seems to be a lot of red tape in these issues. I believe that was an issue with IP43/44 the (defined) part of it anyway.

Hasn't Oregon also decriminalized a lot of hard drug use as well? bringing them down to misdemeanors or something to that effect? I recall this from a class I took last year to obtain a CHL.
 
Phrasing, verbatim and wording seems to be a lot of red tape in these issues. I believe that was an issue with IP43/44 the (defined) part of it anyway.

Hasn't Oregon also decriminalized a lot of hard drug use as well? bringing them down to misdemeanors or something to that effect? I recall this from a class I took last year to obtain a CHL.
Yes.
Hard narcotics possession of less than 2 grams carries little more than a ticket, while previously, possession of a single gram was a felony.
 
Yes.
Hard narcotics possession of less than 2 grams carries little more than a ticket, while previously, possession of a single gram was a felony.
Additionally, one could argue that the passage of that law infringes on the safety of non users, as property and violent crimes appear to be on an upswing.
 
Meanwhile owning anything firearm related thats not allowed constitutes a felony and being plastered on the news as a maniac. :rolleyes:
 
Found a bit of what those taxes collected from cannabis go towards, from your link:
6.07.145 Net Revenues Distribution.
(Added by Resolution No. 37217 (approved at November 8, 2016 election); amended by Ordinance No. 189004, effective July 1, 2018.) Net revenues remaining after collection, refunds, credits, and costs related to administration of the tax will be distributed by the City as follows:

A. In the course of developing the City's budget, the Bureau of Revenue and Financial Services shall report the projected balance in the Recreational Cannabis Tax Fund at the beginning of the next fiscal year.

B. Allocation of revenue from the Recreational Cannabis Tax Fund shall occur annually as part of the public budget adoption process followed by Council, with funding allocations made annually by City Council.

C. These funds shall be allocated in the Adopted Budget for the following purposes:

1. Drug and alcohol education and treatment programs, including but not limited to services that facilitate or increase access to drug and alcohol education and treatment, and programs that support rehabilitation and employment readiness.

2. Public safety, including police, fire, and transportation safety purposes that protect community members from unsafe drivers. Examples include but are not limited to police DUII training and enforcement, support for firefighter paramedics, street infrastructure projects that improve safety, and other initiatives to reduce impacts of drug/alcohol abuse.

3. Support for neighborhood small businesses, especially women-owned and minority-owned businesses, including but not limited to business incubator programs, management training, and job training opportunities; and providing economic opportunity and education to communities disproportionately-impacted by cannabis prohibition.
 
Found a bit of what those taxes collected from cannabis go towards, from your link:
6.07.145 Net Revenues Distribution.
(Added by Resolution No. 37217 (approved at November 8, 2016 election); amended by Ordinance No. 189004, effective July 1, 2018.) Net revenues remaining after collection, refunds, credits, and costs related to administration of the tax will be distributed by the City as follows:

A. In the course of developing the City's budget, the Bureau of Revenue and Financial Services shall report the projected balance in the Recreational Cannabis Tax Fund at the beginning of the next fiscal year.

B. Allocation of revenue from the Recreational Cannabis Tax Fund shall occur annually as part of the public budget adoption process followed by Council, with funding allocations made annually by City Council.

C. These funds shall be allocated in the Adopted Budget for the following purposes:

1. Drug and alcohol education and treatment programs, including but not limited to services that facilitate or increase access to drug and alcohol education and treatment, and programs that support rehabilitation and employment readiness.

2. Public safety, including police, fire, and transportation safety purposes that protect community members from unsafe drivers. Examples include but are not limited to police DUII training and enforcement, support for firefighter paramedics, street infrastructure projects that improve safety, and other initiatives to reduce impacts of drug/alcohol abuse.

3. Support for neighborhood small businesses, especially women-owned and minority-owned businesses, including but not limited to business incubator programs, management training, and job training opportunities; and providing economic opportunity and education to communities disproportionately-impacted by cannabis prohibition.
The most interesting thing about all of that is that those groups aren't actually allowed to accept that money yet, because as far as the federal government is concerned, it's still dope money.
 
Additionally, one could argue that the passage of that law infringes on the safety of non users, as property and violent crimes appear to be on an upswing.

Whats sad about that is more people would fight to get high and demand protection in that regard. Than they would for say preserving and enforcing the 2A and propping up protective layers around it, which state and co. seem to keep finding little ways to skirt around it effectively.
 
I don't get it.... what is the something that Prozanski considered but is something he wanted to wait on but it's not on Kate's agenda and he may revisit that should be passed on to the guy that never listened and is not aware of those conversations??? Is there a Direct Object in there somewhere, somehow, someway? ;)
I think I need a nap.

I would be happy to post in more details, but most do not even read what I post on this stuff.
I guess its makes sense to me, as its the same follow up I've been posting on for years on here.
I really do not have a proper forum to share all this stuff here, figure if it sticks people will listen or ask.
 
I don't get it.... what is the something that Prozanski considered but is something he wanted to wait on but it's not on Kate's agenda and he may revisit that should be passed on to the guy that never listened and is not aware of those conversations??? Is there a Direct Object in there somewhere, somehow, someway? ;)

I think I need a nap.

The governor has to sign all new garbage ,announcing new garbage might effect the governors reelection. Once the head communist is in place its checkmate and we are all sitting ducks.
 

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