JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
I can hardly manage reading her garbage. She continues to spout off false information about the 'majority' of Oregonians and what she seems to think they want in the way of MORE restrictions on law abiding gun owners. Then proceeds to say it's a small, yet vocal minority that shuts down discussion and stifles debate.

I wonder, if she gets her way and manages to pass a requirement for background checks on all private sales, how exactly does she imagine enforcing such a law? I mean, unless you had a full gun registry in effect so you could track every serial number. But they always say they don't want a registry (lie, lie, lie). But, nevertheless, I'm sure the bad guys will be sure not to do private sales, knowing it's now illegal these criminals to buy a gun. Oh, wait, it's already illegal for them to buy a gun. I guess I'm just not smart enough to be a state senator.
 
For a minute there I hopefully thought Ginny was only going to focus on weed revenue this year,(get ready to pay up burn outs!), but yeah, the same old crap on gun control.
This time of course they have a Super Majority thanks to the Unions and the usual voting crowd who believes all their scary war on this, war on that, planet is burning up, here's some free stuff BS.

They'll never be able to keep guns out of criminals hands and they know it. Unfortunately the voting public doesn't know it or care too much I guess.:mad:
 
"If marijuana regulation is done correctly, Oregon will position itself at the center of an emerging industry that will help further stimulate the economies of both urban and rural areas."
---Ginny Burdick

Isn't it amazing how people are thrown in jail for selling weed until such a time as .gov can figure a way to get into the business of dealing drugs, then it becomes "an emerging industry"..."to help further stimulate the economy"....
 
...and more lies from the stupid bubblegum

"Currently, anyone who purchases a firearm from a licensed gun dealer or at a gun show has to undergo a criminal background check conducted by the State Police.Private sellers are not legally required to do background checks. This omission is putting guns into the hands of criminals."


Anyone notice what she did there? Tried to use wordsmithing to make the uninformed believe private sales at gun shows "are legal"
 
...and more lies from the stupid bubblegum

"Currently, anyone who purchases a firearm from a licensed gun dealer or at a gun show has to undergo a criminal background check conducted by the State Police.Private sellers are not legally required to do background checks. This omission is putting guns into the hands of criminals."


Anyone notice what she did there? Tried to use wordsmithing to make the uninformed believe private sales at gun shows "are legal"
Not only that but: have any of us guys "really" sold a firearm to a shady person?
Not even close! The "market" she is talking about is by criminals for criminals.. Which is about 2% of "private" sales.. Meanwhile 98% of OUR sales have nothing to do with the criminal element. Its a farce.

I dont sell to gangster looking guys or folks who cant speak english. Yes, I profile.

If she wanted less of a fight she'd state that BGC's would be FREE and instantaneous and a non issue for CHL holders for private sales.

Not handing out ideas.. But seriously these anti-firearm folks dont know bubblegum!
 
I can hardly manage reading her garbage. She continues to spout off false information about the 'majority' of Oregonians and what she seems to think they want in the way of MORE restrictions on law abiding gun owners. Then proceeds to say it's a small, yet vocal minority that shuts down discussion and stifles debate.

I wonder, if she gets her way and manages to pass a requirement for background checks on all private sales, how exactly does she imagine enforcing such a law? I mean, unless you had a full gun registry in effect so you could track every serial number. But they always say they don't want a registry (lie, lie, lie). But, nevertheless, I'm sure the bad guys will be sure not to do private sales, knowing it's now illegal these criminals to buy a gun. Oh, wait, it's already illegal for them to buy a gun. I guess I'm just not smart enough to be a state senator.

Just like how the lamestream propaganda ministry suppresses the real numbers of pro-gun people at rallies, but pumps up the number of mad bully moms at anti-gun rallies. :confused:
 
The only ones impacted by her 'common sense' gun laws are us, the law-abiding gun owners. It won't reduce gun crime. I won't prevent shootings like Sandy Hook. It's a feel-good proposition meant to help those who fear guns to feel like they've 'done something'. And it all comes at the expense of the rights of law-abiding gun owners. I'm so disappointed with my fellow Oregon voters for putting people like this in power. Lemmings the lot of them.
 
Not only that but: have any of us guys "really" sold a firearm to a shady person?
Not even close! The "market" she is talking about is by criminals for criminals.. Which is about 2% of "private" sales.. Meanwhile 98% of OUR sales have nothing to do with the criminal element. Its a farce.

I dont sell to gangster looking guys or folks who cant speak english. Yes, I profile.

If she wanted less of a fight she'd state that BGC's would be FREE and instantaneous and a non issue for CHL holders for private sales.

Not handing out ideas.. But seriously these anti-firearm folks dont know bubblegum!

Not only that, but she is an absolute fool if she thinks the criminals that sell to other criminals will follow ANY law they pass. They're bubblegumming criminals! They don't follow laws, no matter how many they pass.
 
A vocal minority that stifles debate with threats and intimidation?

You mean threats of not voting for her and her ilk, or contributing to the opposition in the next election? :eek:

Communicating a threat of violence is a crime and phoning one in, or emailing one in is virtually impossible for the average bubba to do without it getting traced back to its source. :rolleyes:
 
I sent her a note.
Senator:


I received your news letter today and in it you made a statement about gun safety background checks.

I don't know if you have been informed but you need to look up , or have your staff look up the

resolutions sent to Salem by the following counties.

Baker

Lake

Yamhill

Wheeler

Douglas

Wasco

They all are against any more infringement on the second amendment period.

In an email from commissioner Jay Bozievich of Lane county , they also have a resolution in the works

stating the same as the six counties previously mentioned.

They will not stand by and allow the second amendment to be infringed.

You also state that private sellers of firearms are not legally required to do back ground checks and that

is where the criminals and mentally ill are getting their firearms.

Can you please show me facts from the Oregon State Police or the FBI stating that this is where the bad

people are receiving firearms ?

It has already been proven that Bloomburg , Mothers against firearms [or what ever they are called

now] and the Brady bunch cannot be trusted to tell the truth they have been caught in lie after lie.

Would you or one of your staff please e-mail me the facts that you have accumulated so I can do my own fact checks.

Thank you in advance
 
A vocal minority that stifles debate with threats and intimidation?

You mean threats of not voting for her and her ilk, or contributing to the opposition in the next election? :eek:

Communicating a threat of violence is a crime and phoning one in, or emailing one in is virtually impossible for the average bubba to do without it getting traced back to its source. :rolleyes:

I was wondering that too. If there are threats and intimidation, then why aren't the police involved? Why aren't people being arrested? Pretty simple, it's not happening. More lying from the anti-gun liberals. But then what should we expect from the same ilk that claim they were on a chopper that was shot down only to later recant when called on it. These folks live on lies, fear mongering to get their way. It's all they know.
 
I was looking at the claims made, and the resulting effects based on those claims, for the 2000 gun show. She is using the same language as then. She needs to be challenged to show factual evidence that the gun show background check did what she said it would befor asking to expand it. So far I haven't seen anything to support that it did anything she claimed it would.
 
Last Edited:
If guns should be named, I think I'll start calling my Lorcin Ginny. It looks like it should do the job it is supposed to do. It makes noise but frequently misses the mark. I certainly wouldn't call it attractive. It takes up space that could better be used by, well, just about anything else. The only people that defend it's usefulness really just don't know any better. No matter how I try to coax or reason with it, it'll never be "right". Come to think of it, I should really just get rid of this POS. Best place for it is the bottom of the river.
 

Upcoming Events

Redmond Gun Show
Redmond, OR
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top