Ginny Burdick is going to try to ban high cap magazines again

[RifleEnthusiast]

Where are you LGC members? I too am curious if you have a response to one of your parties members comments...

I am not a member of the LGC, but mostly liberal in thoughts, yet I still fully support gun rights, why do we piss off citizens that legally own/use guns just to "maybe" reduce the number of guns that non-law-abiding citizens may get their hands on, that to me is just wrong, and as has been said a million times, laws by design are for law abiding citizens, criminals don't care, you're just pissing off people who would legally buy/own/use.

 

[drew]

Read it today, I think in the Oregonian and was arguing with a co-worker about it...What can we do to stop this, other than supporting the NRA? call? are there grassroots movements/campaigns against these kinds of bills?

You might look into the Oregon Firearms Federation. They are a lobbying group but I tend to like what they do compared to the NRA. http://oregonfirearms.org/

 

[RifleEnthusiast]

You might look into the Oregon Firearms Federation. They are a lobbying group but I tend to like what they do compared to the NRA. Oregon Firearms Federation

I guess I am looking at a more proactive, more responsive organization that will come out loud and face this BS right away.

 

[drew]

I guess I am looking at a more proactive, more responsive organization that will come out loud and face this BS right away.

I'd suggest at least signing up for their alerts. They do a good job of following things in Salem. I've seen alerts from them before they were available from other news outlets or even the legislature's web site has been updated.

Here's their release on the mag ban proposal: https://www.oregonfirearms.org/

 

[RifleEnthusiast]

I'd suggest at least signing up for their alerts. They do a good job of following things in Salem. I've seen alerts from them before they were available from other news outlets or even the legislature's web site has been updated.

Here's their release on the mag ban proposal: MAGAZINE BAN COMING

Great, thanks for the information..I will def. contact them and see how I can help on my part.

 

[BSG 75]

This situation is what you get when you marry what should be an independent movement for the protection of a civil right, A2, with the Republican Party

Why do you think that happened? Do you think it was a random event? Do you think gun rights advocates flipped a coin and said "heads we marry the Republicans, tails we marry the Democrats" and it came up heads? No, it happened because gun rights advocates couldn't help but notice that while not all Democratic politicians are anti-gun, virtually all of the anti-gun politicians are Democrats. They probably got a cold shoulder or open hostility when they approached Democratic politicians, and a far more welcoming and simpatico response when they approached Republican politicians. Don't blame gun rights advocates for going where they felt welcomed. Don't be naive, things happen for usually logical reasons.

However, there is nothing stopping you as a liberal who supports gun rights from trying to persuade Democratic politicians to support gun rights. Good luck.

 

[MikeE]

Why do you think that happened? Do you think it was a random event? Do you think gun rights advocates flipped a coin and said "heads we marry the Republicans, tails we marry the Democrats" and it came up heads? No, it happened because gun rights advocates couldn't help but notice that while not all Democratic politicians are anti-gun, virtually all of the anti-gun politicians are Democrats. They probably got a cold shoulder or open hostility when they approached Democratic politicians, and a far more welcoming and simpatico response when they approached Republican politicians. Don't blame gun rights advocates for going where they felt welcomed. Don't be naive, things happen for usually logical reasons.

However, there is nothing stopping you as a liberal who supports gun rights from trying to persuade Democratic politicians to support gun rights. Good luck.

You make a good point, but politics is not about being cozy and comfy. Making alliances is about thinking outside the box.

 

[DMax]

I have no idea what the 'Liberal Gun Club' thinks of this, but I will tell you what THIS liberal thinks FWIW.

This situation is what you get when you marry what should be an independent movement for the protection of a civil right, A2, with the Republican Party, and associate the RTKABA with every right wing bigoted and stupid 'conservative' cause of the last thirty years. When the Republican Party has an epic FAIL, like the Oregon Republican Party has, then you got nothing.
No relationships with the other party.
No trust for A2 supporters among people that could be our allies.
And most importantly, no understanding of the opposition.

For example - the left of the Democratic party is really pissed off at Ginny Burdick for supporting Kitzhaber's 'special session' to extend Nike's sweetheart tax deal. Labor does not like this at all. But how can A2 supporters make common cause with labor after associating with a right wing movement that calls union members scum and thugs and supports anti-labor legislation? Despite the fact that union members have a large percentage of gun owners in the ranks.

This is what you get when your politics is completely self-indulgent.

Furthermore, you can't beat something with nothing.The high cap magazine ban is stupid, but it exists. Suddenly, the combination of an event - the mall shooting - and a lopsided political alignment makes this bill very possible. How are pro A2 organizations going to stop it - by calling people names? Good luck with that.
These shootings have been going on along time. Poor kids killing other poor kids over drug deals has been happening even longer. But the A2 movement has yet to come up with a coherent response, relying instead on political bullying and inertia. Now the political balance is shifting against that tactic, and again, we got nuthin'.

In a perfect world, the A2 movement would propose an anti-violence agenda that could draw support from the right and left. It's long past time that A2 supporters gave that some thought.


I'm sure this post will attract the usual nasty invective, to which i do not give a rat's rear end. It is the real world, muchachos, and you are in it.

What do you expect from to different beliefs when the only thing in common in a large majority of one party and a small majority of another party is 2A not really something that can stand on its own.

 

[mr11b]

The best thing we can do is contact our representatives, as others have already done. Here is the direct link to find the contact information for your specific rep's. I found it on OFF's website. <broken link removed> I'm taking 10 minutes out of my morning to call each of them to express my concern over the proposed bill. If all of us who have concerns did the same I'm sure it would amount to more calls then most of these politicians are used to, especially on a Friday

 

[deen_ad]

Link: http://www.kptv.com/story/20331776/state-senator-proposes-ban-on-high-capacity-gun-magazines

As far as I'm concerned, we can talk about banning guns/magazines after we've banned cheese burgers. I'm tired of obese Americans abusing saturated fats. It's time to take a stand! Who's with me?

Useful stats: Page 5: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf. It says I'm going to die of Parkinsons before I will die from a gun shot. 1 in 4 will die from heart disease. But less than 1/2 of 1% will die from gunshot in Oregon.

Add "medical mistakes" and the total gun deaths pales by comparison!

Deaths from avoidable medical error more than double in past decade, investigation shows

"The total number of iatrogenic deaths shown in the following table is 783,936. It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States"

From: Medical system is leading cause of death and injury in US - Health Supreme

"Of the total 323,993 deaths among Medicare patients in those years who developed one or more patient-safety incidents, 263,864, or 81 percent, of these deaths were directly attributable to the incident(s)."

From: In Hospital Deaths from Medical Errors at 195,000 per Year USA

"In 2003 there were 6,328,000 car accidents in the US. There were 2.9 million injuries and 42,643 people were killed in auto accidents."

From: How many deaths are caused by car accidents a year

"In the U.S. for 2006, there were 30,896 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 16,883; Homicide 12,791; Accident 642; Legal Intervention 360; Undetermined 220."

FIREARMS TUTORIAL

There are over 25,000 laws on the book's regarding guns and gun ownership. Now, since gun deaths are lower then medical mistakes and vehicle accidents where do you think more emphasis on "control" should be placed?

Over 380,000 Washington residents have Concealed Carry Permits. How many incidents at local Fred Meyers, Wal*Marts, Lowes, Target, etc. have you seen or heard of involving a CPL holder?

The Police And Personal Protection
Police are under no legal obligation to provide protection for any individual. Courts have ruled the police have an obligation only to society as a whole. (Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1, 1981 )

Handgun Bans: The British Experience
The crime rate in London is now higher than the crime rate in New York. Crimes with firearms have risen dramatically since the ban on handgun ownership was passed by Parliament. ("Gun law stalks Britain`s," The Express, May 14, 2001)

Study Of The Federal "Assault Weapon" Law
The congressionally-mandated study of the federal "assault weapon" law found that: "At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders." (Urban Institute, "Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994," March 13, 1997, p. 3.)

Handguns Are Effective Defensive Tools
Two of every three defensive uses of firearms are carried out with handguns. Private citizens benefit from handguns for the same reason that the police do: handguns are easy to carry and they are effective defensive tools. (Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, Gary Kleck, Aldine de Gruyter, 1997)

Felons And Gun Registration
In Haynes v U.S. (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that felons do not have to register illegally possessed guns, because the Fifth Amendment protects them against self-incrimination.

Firearm Tracing
Most firearms that are traced by the BATF have not been used to commit violent crimes, and most firearms that have been used to commit violent crimes are never traced. That is one of the main reasons that the Congressional Research Service has concluded that the tracing system should not be used to make broad determinations about the kinds of guns that are used in crimes.

The annual number of accidental gun deaths among children has declined 90% since 1975. Today, the odds against a child dying in a gun accident are a million to one. Seventy-eight times as many children die in accidents involving or due to motor vehicles, suffocation, drowning, fire, bicycles and falls. (National Center for Health Statistics)

80 MILLION gun owners did nothing wrong today, several hundred CRIMINALS did!!

 

[oneharmonic]

I'd suggest at least signing up for their alerts. They do a good job of following things in Salem. I've seen alerts from them before they were available from other news outlets or even the legislature's web site has been updated.

Here's their release on the mag ban proposal: MAGAZINE BAN COMING

So I'm going to have to drive 15 minutes out of my way to Vancouver to purchase high-capacity magazines?

Brilliant idea Miss Burdick.

 

[GOG]

We had this type of stupidity and other anti 2A legislature to deal with on a regular basis in Kalifornistan. The Calguns Foundation swings some weight there and I and many others are supporters. It's a large and successful organization.

Here in Oregon you have the Oregon Firearm Federation/OFF. When I knew for certain that we were moving here, I joined. I suggest that other 2A minded folks do the same.

Link:Oregon Firearms Federation.

Sadly, we can't beat these people as individuals, they just keep coming with their asshattery. The most eloquent letters mean nothing, they think they automatically have the moral high ground because they operate on feelings rather than intelligence. The Constitution and Bill of Rights don't count with them, they are "visionarys". So spend a few bucks and be part of an organized group.

 

[pokerace]

I guess I am looking at a more proactive, more responsive organization that will come out loud and face this BS right away.

You won't find any more proactive..OHA does nothing. the NRA rep for Oregon is gone. I never here anything from the gunclubs..

 

[mr11b]

Like a lot of you, I've been reading the news on the shooting at the mall. I've also read the transcripts from Sen. Ginny Burdick's radio interview and of course read her drafted bill on banning hi capacity magazines. We all know she clearly hasn't educated herself on the topic she deems knowledgeable enough to introduce legislation on. One thing has stood out to me that might really be minimal in the grand scheme of things, however I think it's pertinent. Especially since she quotes it on the radio. How many shots did the shooter actually fire?

We know he had hi capacity magazines, but for all intents and purposes law enforcement has not said how many casings were found. It appears everyone jumped on witness statements of " at least 60 rounds" another account said "at least half a dozen" 6? However throughout news articles as expected, the higher number is used as the count.Think about how even 10 rounds fired inside a building, as fast as someone can pull the trigger would sound to someone not used to it... Loud and like a "machine gun" as also quoted. If he fired 20 rounds or less, that's the same as one magazine change as proposed by Sen Ginny Burdicks bill. If translated to this specific situation, a driving force in her timing of going public with the drafted bill. We all know he had plenty of time to and the ability to perform a mag change, as stated by law enforcement. Maybe this is more of rant, just curious if you guys have noticed the same. Just something I think is important when discussing Sen Ginny Burdick's wild ride... However the most important thing is RIP to the victims of this tragedy and (insert long tirade of things not allowed on this forum) the coward...

 

[DuneHopper]

It is because government studies and figures have shown that the 11th bullet has been identified to cause a fatality.
I guess if I empty out my Sig 40Cal 185 HP 10 times it will be harmless COOL!
Thank goodness the government is here to take care of us (SARCASM ):smash:

 

[orygun]

I sent Ms. Burdick a letter (e-mail) this morning. I plan to do a copy and paste to send it to my State Senator and Representative.

In fact, I just did.

 

[DuneHopper]

I sent Ms. Burdick a letter (e-mail) this morning. I plan to do a copy and paste to send it to my State Senator and Representative.

In fact, I just did.

Would you mind putting what you typed, maybe others can use it to send to her and perhaps the url or email address ?

 

[orygun]

Would you mind putting what you typed, maybe others can use it to send to her and perhaps the url or email address ?

Ms. Burdick,

In the wake of the Clackamas Town Center shooting there have been many people asking, "What can we do to stop this?" I suppose it's just natural for a person to make a knee-jerk decision on how to fix this "problem".
It's apparent to me that you and I do not share similar views when it comes to firearms. I've grown used to that living in this part of the state. However when I saw in print and heard you quoted on the radio stating a false statement, I decided to write you.
You made a blanket statement about hunting and magazine capacity that is not entirely true. I will admit that I'm not as surprised as I should be that a "lawmaker" doesn't understand laws that she or he is quoting.
On page 30 of the ODF&W 2013 Oregon Big Game Regulations book is this line, which I have copied and pasted.

&#9632; Semiautomatic rifles with a magazine capacity greater than five cartridges prohibited (except for western gray squirrel).

As you can see only semi-automatic rifles are restricted to 5 rounds. And, this rule does not apply to all species. I encourage you to check this out for yourself.
If you were just ignorant of the laws, that's one thing that can be corrected. This is where you can now get informed and stop making un-true, blanket statements.
I would like to assume that you were not actually lying to make your point

One more point that I would like to make, passing more laws restricting firearms will only affect the law abiding citizens, like myself. It will do nothing about the millions of firearms and high capacity magazines that are already "out there". If one is as desperate to do something as vile as Jake Roberts did, do you really think that more laws will have any effect on them? Jake Roberts broke the worst law anyone could when he shot those three people, killing two. He broke several laws before he got to the point of pulling the trigger. I don't think another law would have mattered too much.

Sincerely,

Bruce Poppino
West Linn

 

[DMax]

Does anyone know where to get or what the gun crime stats were before and after the Calif Mag law went into affect? I could not find anything on this.

 

[BillB1960]

I've written a letter to "Dingbat" Burdick as well as my State Senator Bruce Starr but I don't expect much out of them.

A couple things that keep coming up for me are first that logic is immaterial when arguing with a gun grabber particularly one that has a soapbox like "Dingbat" Burdick. It's not about whether or not bans are effective, it's about being able to tell your 'subjects' what they can and can't do. It's about making sure that only 'right thinking' people with the 'right ideas' are in charge. These people truly believe they are our stewards, that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves, that we and everyone else must rely on the government for our very lives. This is the fundamental bedrock of the liberal/progressive agenda and being a liberal that owns a gun doesn't make you not a liberal, it just makes you an armed liberal which frankly is a little scary.

People, even many 2A supporters fail to realize the overarching purpose of the 2A. I keep reading about needing weapons to protect ourselves from "foreign invaders". That's not why we have the 2A, the military will do that for us, that's what they take an oath to do and they'll do a much better job than we can, Red Dawn and it's remake notwithstanding. The Founding Fathers wrote the Bill of Rights not long after a successful revolution against their own government. That's what was top of mind when they penned the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The "well regulated militia" which gets so much press is specifically to prevent our own government from subjugating us. If any weapon should be protected by the 2A is should be civilian weapons with military roots like high capacity semi automatic rifles. Just like back in the 18th century muskets were used by both the military and civilians we need to have weapons which match up against the weapons carried by our soldiers.

Please bear in mind, the only SA rifle I own is a Ruger 10/22, hardly a high powered "assault rifle". I don't own 1 single piece of camouflage clothing, no web gear, I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck and I don't think 9/11 was orchestrated by the government. I do however believe that there is a significant threat to our individual liberties and it starts with a "reinterpretation" of the 2A. The 2A is what we use to defend ourselves from "reinterpretations" of the other 9 rights enumerated by the Bill of Rights. Right now the SCOTUS is only 1 vote shy of a major reinterpretation of the 2A. The last two 2A votes which came up were decided by a vote of 5-4 in favor. If you take the time to read the dissenting opinion on the 2010 case of McDonald vs City of Chicago written by Justice Stevens it includes this statement by Justice Breyer, "In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self defense. There has been, and is, no consensus that the right is, or was, 'fundamental.'" Folks these are the people who make the ultimate decisions on whether or not we are even allowed to own firearms and this is what they're saying as recently as 2010.

It's nice that we've been on a roll recently as it seems that more and more states are affirming our 2A rights and making it easier to carry concealed. But I'm really concerned that over the next 4 years the make up of SCOTUS will change and we could easily be on the cusp of a major change in policy at the very top.