Oregon Get ready for April 2nd. OFF says hearing on Firearm bills coming.

[arakboss]

Check this link frequently and look for 4/2 date under meetings drop down:
Judiciary Senate 2019 Regular Session - Oregon Legislative Information System


Anti Gun Bills Scheduled - Oregon Firearms Federation

Potential bills that could come up from OFF's list:
SB 5 Imposes strict liability on shooting ranges and shooters for rounds that leave the property and cause injuries. Allows the city or county where the range is located to be sued if city or county failed to regulate the range after they had notice that a "dangerous condition" existed. "Dangerous condition" is not defined.


SB 87 Raises minimum age to purchase firearm or "firearm component" to 21. Allows gun dealers to impose anyminimum age over 21. Defines firearm component (among other things) as anything that "enhances the shooting accuracy of a firearm." Requested by former BOLI chair Brad Avakian.


SB 275 Mandatory lockup and liability. Basically IP 44 in legislative form.



SB 322 . Allows sheriffs to issue CHL's to persons in adjoining counties. This would help people like the residents of Wheeler County when their sheriff and all deputies quit.


SB 323 Reciprocity for CHL holders of states that recognize Oregon CHL's.


SB 481 Requires that a person who demanded your firearms be confiscated be informed if they are returned.


SB 501 Requires permit to PURCHASE firearm. Bans mags over 5 rounds. Requires trigger locks. Limits ammo purchase to 20 rounds a month. Requires background checks for ammo purchases. Imposes waiting period or 14 days.



SB 539 Bans use or discharge of exploding targets, tracer ammunition or fireworks on land owned by public body during periods established by certain State Forester declarations relating to fire danger.


SB 646 Exempts transferee who is certified participant in Address Confidentiality Program from private firearm transfer criminal background check requirement.


SB 697 Exempts transfer of firearm to museum from criminal background check requirement for private firearm transfers.

SB 781 Allows injured person to bring civil action against city or county that fails to regulate discharge of firearms on private property after having notice of dangerous condition.

SB 801 Authorizes public schools to provide firearm safety and accident prevention class to all students in first grade. Declares emergency, effective on passage.

SB 817 Creates crime of unlawful storage of firearm. Punishes by maximum of 364 days' imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both. Punishes second and subsequent convictions by maximum of five years' imprisonment, $125,000 fine, or both. Requires gun dealers to post notice concerning obligation to store firearms in safe manner. Prohibits sale, delivery or transfer of firearm to person convicted of unlawful

Read More

 

[nammac]

Here we go. We need to flood the state capital with pro gun people. Keep their busses in supports out in the hallway...

 

[SUPER X]

Anti Gun Bills Scheduled - Oregon Firearms Federation

Potential bills that could come up from OFF's list:
SB 5 Imposes strict liability on shooting ranges and shooters for rounds that leave the property and cause injuries. Allows the city or county where the range is located to be sued if city or county failed to regulate the range after they had notice that a "dangerous condition" existed. "Dangerous condition" is not defined.


SB 87 Raises minimum age to purchase firearm or "firearm component" to 21. Allows gun dealers to impose anyminimum age over 21. Defines firearm component (among other things) as anything that "enhances the shooting accuracy of a firearm." Requested by former BOLI chair Brad Avakian.


SB 275 Mandatory lockup and liability. Basically IP 44 in legislative form.



SB 322 . Allows sheriffs to issue CHL's to persons in adjoining counties. This would help people like the residents of Wheeler County when their sheriff and all deputies quit.


SB 323 Reciprocity for CHL holders of states that recognize Oregon CHL's.


SB 481 Requires that a person who demanded your firearms be confiscated be informed if they are returned.


SB 501 Requires permit to PURCHASE firearm. Bans mags over 5 rounds. Requires trigger locks. Limits ammo purchase to 20 rounds a month. Requires background checks for ammo purchases. Imposes waiting period or 14 days.



SB 539 Bans use or discharge of exploding targets, tracer ammunition or fireworks on land owned by public body during periods established by certain State Forester declarations relating to fire danger.


SB 646 Exempts transferee who is certified participant in Address Confidentiality Program from private firearm transfer criminal background check requirement.


SB 697 Exempts transfer of firearm to museum from criminal background check requirement for private firearm transfers.

SB 781 Allows injured person to bring civil action against city or county that fails to regulate discharge of firearms on private property after having notice of dangerous condition.

SB 801 Authorizes public schools to provide firearm safety and accident prevention class to all students in first grade. Declares emergency, effective on passage.

SB 817 Creates crime of unlawful storage of firearm. Punishes by maximum of 364 days' imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both. Punishes second and subsequent convictions by maximum of five years' imprisonment, $125,000 fine, or both. Requires gun dealers to post notice concerning obligation to store firearms in safe manner. Prohibits sale, delivery or transfer of firearm to person convicted of unlawful

Stiff penalties. .A multiple repeat career car theft and the guys that smash and grab in buisnesses gets off with my 13 months now . This looks like a personal attack .or mabey its just my negative perspective, see yall in the hoosegow

 

[BSG 75]

If you can't make it to the Capitol to testify in person you can submit written testimony instead. In fact, I expect not everyone who goes to testify will get a chance. When I went to testify in 2013 there were so many people there to testify they ran out of time before I got a chance, even though I spent all day waiting for a chance. Your written testimony will be read by the committee members.

Since they will be reading hundreds of people's written testimony be succinct and to the point so their eyes won't glaze over. Long rambling diatribes about the Second Amendment and freedom will get you nowhere with those politicians. You have to come up with practical, "common sense" reasons why the bill is a bad bill.

For example, in 2013 SB-347 was introduced by Ginny Burdick. It would have made it a crime to possess a firearm on school grounds, even for those with an Oregon CHL. In an attempted compromise Sen. Prozanski amended it (SB 347-3) to "requiring all firearms to be stored in a locked metal safe or vault provided by the school or the district or other entity". Rather than banning all firearm possession CHL holders could bring a firearm onto school grounds if they left it locked up with the school until they left the school. Here is an example of written testimony against that bill:

SB 347-3 Would Decrease Public Safety

The proposed amendment to SB 347, SB 347-3, would decrease public safety by increasing the risk of a negligent ("accidental") discharge of firearms.

Under current law, Oregonians with a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) are allowed to possess a firearm while on school grounds. I am not aware of any adverse incidents caused by CHL holders on school grounds. SB 347 would make possession of firearm by a CHL holder while on school grounds illegal unless it was authorized by the school district. SB 347-3 would allow CHL holders to store their firearms in a "metal safe or vault" on school grounds, where they would be inaccessible and useless if the need for them arose.

Currently, the most common reason for an adult who is not a school employee to be on school grounds is to drop off or pick up their own children. Often that is done without the adult leaving their vehicle, although they are on school grounds. Again, there have been no problems associated with CHL holders doing that.

If SB 347 becomes law, a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun and carrying would be in violation of the law while waiting in their vehicle on school grounds to drop off or pick up their own children. In order to comply with SB 347-3, the licensed person would have to park their vehicle, get out, walk to the school office, unholster and handle their firearm, and hand it to a school employee for placement in the "metal safe or vault".

Any unnecessary unholstering and handling of a firearm increases the risk of a negligent ("accidental") discharge of the firearm.

The firearm would be handled by a school employee who might have no prior experience with firearms and who might be extremely uncomfortable handling a firearm.

Handling of the firearm by a possibly untrained, inexperienced, uncomfortable, and nervous school employee increases the risk of a negligent ("accidental") discharge of the firearm.

How much money would be wasted by schools installing "metal safes or vaults" that are rarely or never used?

Increased risk of negligent ("accidental") discharge of firearms and money wasted installing "metal safes or vaults", with no obvious benefit. It makes no one safer and in fact increases risk to the public.

SB 347-3 is a solution to a non-existent problem. It should be rejected.


Thank you for your attention.

Notice there is no long-winded ranting about freedom and the Second Amendment. Practical reasons were given why the bill was bad i.e. increased risk of negligent (accidental) discharges, and the cost to schools of installing safes. The bill never made it out of committee.

Here is another example of the type of written testimony you could submit, this against a "large capacity" magazine ban:

Chairman x and members of the committee:

I strongly oppose HB 3265, the "large capacity" magazine ban for the following reasons:

1. Over 15,000 rank and file cops were polled on various gun control measures. Police officers overwhelmingly said laws limiting magazine capacity would not reduce violent crime. PoliceOne's Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers' perspectives
   
2. Magazine capacity laws do not prevent mass shootings. California has had a ban on "large capacity" magazines for many years and continues to have mass shootings, including the Thousand Oaks shooting, the San Bernardino shooting, and the Oikos University shooting in just the past 6 years. The Parkland, FL school shooter did not use "large capacity" magazines. Report: Parkland Shooter Did Not Use High Capacity Magazines | National Review
3. Law-abiding citizens need "large capacity" magazines for the same reason police officers use them: for self-defense. Studies have shown in a high stress life-or-death self-defense shooting even police officers miss with most of their shots A Hail of Bullets, a Heap of Uncertainty Those extra rounds in a "large capacity" magazine can mean the difference between life and death for a citizen in a self-defense shooting, especially since they lack the advantages of body armor, backup, and radios that police have. If police with those advantages need "large capacity" magazines, citizens need them even more.
4. A "large capacity" magazine is nothing more than a plastic or metal tube with a spring inside.
   
   They aren't much different in construction from this:
   
   They are not inherently dangerous, hazardous, or toxic. They are not weapons in contrast to knives, hammers, baseball bats, and other common household items. We should not criminalize mere possession of harmless items.

Thank you for your attention.

Again, no lectures about the Second Amendment. Instead, data, facts, and practical reasons why the bill is bad.

This page has complete instructions and FAQ about submitting written testimony:
Committees Submit Exhibits

 

[arakboss]

If you can't make it to the Capitol to testify in person you can submit written testimony instead. In fact, I expect not everyone who goes to testify will get a chance. When I went to testify in 2013 there were so many people there to testify they ran out of time before I got a chance, even though I spent all day waiting for a chance. Your written testimony will be read by the committee members.

Since they will be reading hundreds of people's written testimony be succinct and to the point so their eyes won't glaze over. Long rambling diatribes about the Second Amendment and freedom will get you nowhere with those politicians. You have to come up with practical, "common sense" reasons why the bill is a bad bill.

For example, in 2013 SB-347 was introduced by Ginny Burdick. It would have made it a crime to possess a firearm on school grounds, even for those with an Oregon CHL. In an attempted compromise Sen. Prozanski amended it (SB 347-3) to "requiring all firearms to be stored in a locked metal safe or vault provided by the school or the district or other entity". Rather than banning all firearm possession CHL holders could bring a firearm onto school grounds if they left it locked up with the school until they left the school. Here is an example of written testimony against that bill:



Notice there is no long-winded ranting about freedom and the Second Amendment. Practical reasons were given why the bill was bad i.e. increased risk of negligent (accidental) discharges, and the cost to schools of installing safes. The bill never made it out of committee.

Here is another example of the type of written testimony you could submit, this against a "large capacity" magazine ban:



Again, no lectures about the Second Amendment. Instead, data, facts, and practical reasons why the bill is bad.

This page has complete instructions and FAQ about submitting written testimony:
Committees Submit Exhibits

Excellent info. Thank you.

 

[arakboss]

Any NWFA members willing to volunteer to help us get some written testimony drafted up, converted to PDF and sent off to the right place?

To add to what @BSG 75 said, make sure when you email your testimony that it is in a PDF file. If you need help converting letter to PDF file, ask for help on this thread.
The email address is for this testimony is:
[email protected]

The testimony will need to be sent in by noon on April 1st to be guaranteed it will be available to committee.

If you are planning on submitting testimony in person, I would send in PDF files documenting any exhibits you might be presenting in the April 2nd hearing by noon on April 1st.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

Any NWFA members willing to volunteer to help us get some written testimony drafted up, converted to PDF and sent off to the right place?
The email address is for this testimony is:
[email protected]

Count me in. I believe I have fairly decent writing skills. The pdf version should be sent to the email address above, correct?

I assume we still don't yet know which bills are being considered and need to be addressed?

It would also be good to know how to support the effort in person, how to show support/opposition with flags, signs, etc. I've never taken part in this sort of thing before. I'm sure others are in the same boat.

 

[BSG 75]

Count me in. I believe I have fairly decent writing skills. The pdf version should be sent to the email address above, correct?

I assume we still don't yet know which bills are being considered and need to be addressed?

It would also be good to know how to support the effort in person, how to show support/opposition with flags, signs, etc. I've never taken part in this sort of thing before. I'm sure others are in the same boat.

Written testimony should be sent to the committee hearing the bill. For gun control that is usually Judiciary for the House or Senate, depending on which chamber the bill was introduced in. The title of the bill tells you, SB for Senate, HB for House. Recently the Democratic House leadership has been assigning gun control bills to committees other than Judiciary because it was chaired by a pro-gun Democrat (yes there are a few of them) so they sent gun control bills to other, friendlier committees. Each bill can be tracked on the Legislature's web site so you know which committee will be hearing the bill and when they will meet to hear testimony on that bill.

Taking a cue from the gun controllers, they all show up wearing the same red T-shirt that says "Moms Who Want Some Action" or whatever . Seeing that sea of red makes them look numerous and united. In 2013 there were numerous teacher's union members (this was after the Sandy Hook school shooting) wearing the same light blue T-shirts with some pro-gun control slogan on it. Gun rights supporters aren't that organized. I bought a suit that I wore when I went to testify but many of the pro-gun rights people looked like they just climbed down from their tractor. At least make sure your flannel shirt and overalls are clean.

 

[arakboss]

Count me in. I believe I have fairly decent writing skills. The pdf version should be sent to the email address above, correct?

I assume we still don't yet know which bills are being considered and need to be addressed?

It would also be good to know how to support the effort in person, how to show support/opposition with flags, signs, etc. I've never taken part in this sort of thing before. I'm sure others are in the same boat.

Yes the address above is the correct one for the senate judiciary committee testimony to be sent to in PDF format.

Still waiting for bill numbers. I emailed Sen. Thatcher who vice-chairs the committee and asked if she knows what bills they will be dealing with. We'll have to keep an eye out for the bill numbers.

If you can make to the Capitol on April 2nd you can occupy the hearing room and hope for a chance to testify. Angry moms in red shirts will likely be there in some numbers.

 

[arakboss]

Written testimony should be sent to the committee hearing the bill. For gun control that is usually Judiciary for the House or Senate, depending on which chamber the bill was introduced in. The title of the bill tells you, SB for Senate, HB for House. Recently the Democratic House leadership has been assigning gun control bills to committees other than Judiciary because it was chaired by a pro-gun Democrat (yes there are a few of them) so they sent gun control bills to other, friendlier committees. Each bill can be tracked on the Legislature's web site so you know which committee will be hearing the bill and when they will meet to hear testimony on that bill.

Taking a cue from the gun controllers, they all show up wearing the same red T-shirt that says "Moms Who Want Some Action" or whatever . Seeing that sea of red makes them look numerous and united. In 2013 there were numerous teacher's union members wearing the same light blue T-shirts with some pro-gun control slogan on it. Gun rights supporters aren't that organized. I bought a suit that I wore when I went to testify but many of the pro-gun rights people looked like they just climbed down from their tractor. At least make sure your flannel shirt and overalls are clean.

Yes the house ditched Rep. Barker who was more pro-gun then most Democrats. He was sore about it and still has a spot on the committee. I think he will be a fairly reliable no vote for the most extreme anti-rights bills moving through the House Judiciary Committee.

I am wearing a white button down shirt, with tie and dark blue jeans. I would wear a group t-shirt if we ever got on the same message.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

OK, I will get to work as soon as I know what bills are being considered, hence what topics need to be addressed. As far as on-site support, I would likely be just a warm body, but I assume that in itself is valuable. Although I do have some nice suits, I was thinking more along the lines of an OreGunian T-shirt, jeans and holding a Gadsden flag to make my alignment clear.

I'm new to the whole 2A fight, and am always amazed by the lack of organization. We knew that this was coming, and should be in a position to know exactly who from our side is showing up, know that it's more than enough, we should be showing up in uniform, well prepared, and so forth. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised?

Ok, hope everyone else at NWFA will be doing their part.

 

[BSG 75]

If you can make to the Capitol on April 2nd you can occupy the hearing room and hope for a chance to testify. Angry moms in red shirts will likely be there in some numbers.

If you show up to testify in person you sign in on sheets and indicate whether you are for or against the bill. They will have groups of 3 or 4 people come up to the desk to testify, alternating groups for and against. A group of three for the bill will testify, then a group of three against, then a group of three for, etc. Seating in the room is limited so only those who are up next to testify are in the room - like the on-deck area at a baseball game. Everyone else who is waiting to testify will be in one of several other meeting rooms used for overflow. The other rooms have closed circuit TV so you can watch the testimony. In 2013 we filled several overflow rooms. I was sitting next to a gun control supporter watching the testimony on TV. When the pro-gun people were testifying she would shake her head in disgust. When the gun control people were testifying I would face palm and shake my head.

These videos give some idea of what testifying looks like:

 

[arakboss]

If you show up to testify in person you sign in on sheets and indicate whether you are for or against the bill. They will have groups of 3 or 4 people come up to the desk to testify, alternating groups for and against. A group of three for the bill will testify, then a group of three against, then a group of three for, etc. Seating in the room is limited so only those who are up next to testify are in the room - like the on-deck area at a baseball game. Everyone else who is waiting to testify will be in one of several other meeting rooms used for overflow. The other rooms have closed circuit TV so you can watch the testimony. In 2013 we filled several overflow rooms. I was sitting next to a gun control supporter watching the testimony on TV. When the pro-gun people were testifying she would shake her head in disgust. When the gun control people were testifying I would face palm and shake my head.

These videos give some idea of what testifying looks like:

Very powerful testimony.

 

[tiggers97]

Another 'trick' I've seen the mad moms use when hearings come up; a couple will show up extra early and start reserving seats enmass at the front of the hearing room for their red-shirt friends who are still on a bus on I5. Most people are polite and find a different seat, not wanting to take someone else's chair.

Saving seats for someone not present isn't allowed. I don't remember if the rules were posted outside, or someplace else, but no one is supposed to be able to reserves seats for a public hearing, except for seating for 'invited speakers' by the committee.

So if you do get there early, politely take a seat. Any seat. If they give you a dirty look or ask you to move, just smile and remind them of the rules. Remember, they don't want to be nice to us and do NOT want to be our friends.

 

[arakboss]

I heard back from Sen. Thatcher's office and they didn't have any info on what bills will be heard on April 2nd. They said to watch the meeting schedule at this link:
Judiciary Senate 2019 Regular Session - Oregon Legislative Information System

Scroll down to "meetings" box and hit the drop down arrow. That will show all the dates they currently have scheduled. Click on a date and it will give you a list of what is going on that day. The lastest date listed right now is 3/28.

 

[dancinghippos]

Yes the address above is the correct one for the senate judiciary committee testimony to be sent to in PDF format.

Still waiting for bill numbers. I emailed Sen. Thatcher who vice-chairs the committee and asked if she knows what bills they will be dealing with. We'll have to keep an eye out for the bill numbers.

If you can make to the Capitol on April 2nd you can occupy the hearing room and hope for a chance to testify. Angry moms in red shirts will likely be there in some numbers.

It might also help to refute the popular anti-2A arguments one by one. The arguments we hear people make on camera that we know are false, those arguments will also be contained in the anti-2a testimonies.

 

[arakboss]

It might also help to refute the popular anti-2A arguments one by one. The arguments we hear people make on camera that we know are false, those arguments will also be contained in the anti-2a testimonies.

What would you say are the top 5 anti-2A arguments and how would you refute each one? Yes we might copy your homework.

 

[Martini_Up]

Tyrannical plans of government to erode liberty of the people.

And lies too. Those in government assert this will save the people injury and death. But it won't. It can't. If it could then making the law, " don't hurt anyone in any way" would have saved the people injury and death long long ago.

Lies to take away liberty to make it easier to control the people so when their tyranny and lies become unbearable, the people have zero recourse. Then the people serve the government.

Good night.

 

[dancinghippos]

MYTH: "The violence is because guns are so easy to get now"

Until 1968, modern guns like AR-15's, semi-automatic pistols, even mortars and bazookas, could be bought by mail. Teens in rural areas stored their hunting and competition guns in school lockers. Teens in urban areas (mine, for example) practiced with .22 rifles owned by their ROTC units at school. Yet there were no school shootings then. Guns are harder to get now, with background checks and so many restrictions in state laws. There is something else in play that is not being addressed by gun laws. And people who are not concerned over murder laws aren't going to care about yet another gun law.

In 1997, the UK banned possession of most firearms. Because of gun registration, they knew exactly who owned them. The homicide rate rose 60% over the next decade, and only started falling when they turned it into a surveillance state. And now they are discussing bans on public possession of knives. All while the true causes of violent behavior in young men are still ignored.

 

[dancinghippos]

MYTH: "Guns are made only for harm. They have no redeeming value"

People who say that often believe that you should submit to attack rather than risk harm to your attacker. We hear that often from religious groups who support anti-gun legislation. That is their personal belief, but they have no right to force it on you. Firearms put your 120-pound mother on par with a 220-pound attacker. Firearms raise the risk to predators, and lower the risk to Good Samaritans. Firearms are used millions of times to fend off attackers without even being fired.

1 Samuel 13:19
Not a blacksmith could be found in the whole land of Israel, because the Philistines had said, "Lest the Hebrews will make swords or spears!"

This issue has been around for a while now. Guns raise predators' risks to unacceptable levels.