Keeping Tabs on SB941

[etrain16]

I'm in brent bartons district, if he votes for SB 941 I'd like to see a recall, I'll try and get the info on how many signatures would be needed. I work full time 7am-3:30pm sat-sun off. I will try to be chief petitioner. I should have got this info weeks ago I didn't know he would vote for SB 941 but I should have guessed. I believe district 40 has enough pro gun people to get signatures. I really do.

I already notified Brent Barton that if a recall is warranted due to his vote in favor of SB 941, that I would assist in that effort. I don't have a lot of free time, but there are ways I can help and would like to do so. I reminded him that Clackamas County on the whole is pro-gun. I reminded him that our County Commission opposes SB 941 and so does our Sheriff. He would be foolish to vote in favor. Unfortunately his ratings from OFF and NRA would indicate he would be in favor. Hopefully he's smarter than that.

In fact, @WinterBaer45, if you are willing to be a chief petitioner, you should call their office and tell them that very thing. Just knowing there is someone out there ready and standing by to begin a recall effort may have a very powerful effect on his decision. I'm sure he can already see what it's doing to the others.

As I recall, Brent won by about 2,000 votes, not a huge margin, but not tiny. If he were recalled, I believe there is a chance we'd get an R in place because of the current makeup of the Clackamas County Commission. Brent needs to be reminded that Clackamas County traditionally is more conservative than Multnomah, and that this is not Multnomah. He's fairly young, and I doubt he would really want to deal with a recall this early in his political career.

 

[WinterBaer45]

If for a recall we have to get 15% of the votes for governor in the district, and the current governor had no votes, that would mean recall should be accomplished with no signatures just the petition right?

 

[CounterOfBeans]

Good luck enforcing it

How many Washingtonians stopped buying and selling on this site because this site now tells them they must comply with I-594? Given that there are members on this site who are police, I imagine sting operations could be set up pretty easy to "enforce" it. If 941 wins, no doubt NWF will post the same "must comply" sticky for it too.

 

[CounterOfBeans]

I already mentioned this on the SB 941 thread I started, but for those on this thread who haven't seen this yet, here's some anti-941 argument ammo to throw at your reps/senators. It's an existing law that THEY passed called ORS 174.030 (bold, underline & font size emphasis at the end of the quote are mine):

"174.030 Construction favoring natural right to prevail. Where a statute is equally susceptible of two interpretations, one in favor of natural right and the other against it, the former is to prevail."

In a Constitutional law based system that is designed specifically to protect rights, it is presumed (used to be anyway) that lawmakers have the good faith to not pass laws that infringe the rights of those who voted them in. So if they passed a law out of abundant caution (ORS 174.030 above) to specifically make sure that law interpreters (judges, attorney generals, etc.), good faith and credibility requires them to also err on the side of protecting rights. They have no room to wiggle. They must abide by the same principle by voting no on SB 941. This is fire for their feet. If someone were to copy and paste this law five or six times onto a word document, then print it out a bunch of times, then cut the pages to separate each of the quotes into little mini flyers to had out to people (including lawmakers they visit), ORS 174.030 might get some traction in stopping 941. It's great ammo for the pro-gun-rights side of the argument it seems anyway. My 2 cents.

 

[tkdguy]

Please continue to send polite and informative prompts to these reps to oppose sb 941/ tkdguy

 

[B5Ben]

In fact, @WinterBaer45,As I recall, Brent won by about 2,000 votes, not a huge margin, but not tiny. If he were recalled, I believe there is a chance we'd get an R in place because of the current makeup of the Clackamas County Commission. Brent needs to be reminded that Clackamas County traditionally is more conservative than Multnomah, and that this is not Multnomah. He's fairly young, and I doubt he would really want to deal with a recall this early in his political career.

IF a recall is successful and the people of the district vote him out, the County Commission will appoint someone from his own party to complete the term. There is no possibility of a R replacing a D via a recall in Oregon. Best case is the the CC will appoint a pro 2A Dem in his place.

If for a recall we have to get 15% of the votes for governor in the district, and the current governor had no votes, that would mean recall should be accomplished with no signatures just the petition right?

A recall needs 15% of the total votes cast for ANY candidate for Governor, not just the one elected.

I say go for it. We chose to start our recalls prior to the House hearings/votes to make sure they knew we were underway prior to SB941 passing the House. Gov. Brown had already stated her support for the bill and would sign immediately upon it being delivered to her desk.

 

[tiggers97]

IF a recall is successful and the people of the district vote him out, the County Commission will appoint someone from his own party to complete the term. There is no possibility of a R replacing a D via a recall in Oregon. Best case is the the CC will appoint a pro 2A Dem in his place.

Maybe something to keep in mind, if your county commission refused to pass an ordinance against SB941.

 

[B5Ben]

The recalls still send a strong message, and that is that their constituents are paying attention to what the elected representatives are doing in Salem. If you are bought with large campaign contributions and vote with their interests over the people of your district, then you will face the consequences. Our only recourse as voters between terms is recall. The other is not re-electing them next time around.

 

[tiggers97]

The recalls still send a strong message, and that is that their constituents are paying attention to what the elected representatives are doing in Salem. If you are bought with large campaign contributions and vote with their interests over the people of your district, then you will face the consequences.

Speaking of money, Vermont has been doing a great job of fighting back against Bloomberg and his out-of-state money. Maybe it's why there have been no real amendments to this bill?
<broken link removed>
<broken link removed>
<broken link removed>

 

[B5Ben]

Thanks for that link. It just went up on facebook.com/RecallRiley

 

[Ed Guinn]

Encountered that today as well. "Thats crazy" was the response of a coworker. (I try not to talk much about politics at work, but my boss does, and was overheard by the coworker). A lot of people just dont know. Short of some type of viral marketing or holding signs at overpasses, I'm not sure how to get a better more consistent message out there. Maybe after the legislature session (and/or the recall session ) we get an annual "education and outreach" session going. Heck, I know one class of kids from the hearing I would like to talk with. Or an "activist" training session for ourselves.

For those of you who are taking action, thank you - and please keep it up.
Just got this email response today, to one sent by me to all Senators.

Fellow Oregonian,

Thank you for your interest and input on SB 941-A. This bill has been contentious, and it has been helpful to know your views on this issue. I have received thousands of emails, letters, and phone calls from Oregonians on this specific bill, and I wanted to keep you updated on the issue. The bill was passed by the Senate just over a week ago on a 17-13 vote. Now it is on its way to the House Floor after it passed the House Committee on Rules on a party line vote. Below is a speech that I gave on the Senate Floor about SB 941 on Tuesday, April 14th:

"The previous speaker talked about the Oregon constitution and our Federal constitution, and those were the oaths that we swore to uphold. As I look at this issue knowing that the courts have watered down those rights over time, the question really comes down to this: does this bill improve safety to the point where it's necessary to make law abiding citizens into criminals? And I thought who can answer that question? So I went to the top law enforcement person in my county which is the county sheriff. He's had the better part of three decades of a career in law enforcement, and I thought he surely will know the answer to this question. So I asked him this question, 'Have you ever, in your career, had a person to person sale or transfer where you are aware that it turned into a significant crime of any kind?' His answer was one word, 'Never.'

So that's the answer. Either there isn't a problem or law enforcement won't be able to enforce it because they simply won't know. Because clearly, at least in Deschutes County, there hasn't been an instance like this where it has been an issue. I didn't come to Salem to vote to turn thousands of law abiding citizens in Deschutes County into criminals for what, literally, is no more safety. We all know that criminals are not going to abide by this law. They do not buy guns from people who can identify them later. They steal them.

I've received a lot of comment on this bill. Between 2013 and this session, I think my email and phone count is nearly 10,000. Now, not all of those are from my district. A lot of them are from the rest of Oregon, but my feedback has run about 95% no to about 5% yes. There has been person after person after person who has said that this isn't going to fix anything and asking me to defend their constitutional rights. Having looked at this issue and focusing on what I think the attempt really is, this bill does not measure up. We had the opportunity today to go further in solving the issue of gun violence with mental health funding. This legislative body chose not to do that today, and I think that's sad. Today, the right vote on this bill is to protect the constitutional rights of the people we represent, and I will be a 'no' vote today for that reason: SB 941 doesn't make people safer but it does cost many their freedom."

Thank you for contacting me with your views. As always, let me know if there is any way I can be of assistance.

Best Regards,



Senator Tim Knopp
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Plus this latest from OFF:
04.29.15

The Capitol rumor mill is in overdrive, and while it's true that Salem is the place where truth goes to take a vacation, one thing is certain, the fight to stop universal gun owner registration is far from over.

As we told you, it looked like SB 941, the gun owner harassment act of 2015, might be on the House Floor as early as today. While things can change at lightning speed when gun grabbers want to bend the rules, as of right this minute the bill is not even scheduled for a "Second Reading" which usually happens the day before it's voted on. What does this mean for us?

It can only mean one thing. They don't yet have the votes to ram it through. As you know, this bill has been fast tracked from the beginning. Bypassing all normal scheduling, the anti-rights zealots have done all they can to race this bill forward. Now it looks like it might be as late as Monday before it is voted on. It could even be later.
This means that your tireless efforts are having an effect and some Democrats are having second thoughts about their career futures should they vote for this deranged attack on your rights.

To be sure, there are plenty who continue to parrot the mindless lies about "dangerous loopholes" and "internet gun trafficking" even when they know what they are saying is false. Michael Bloomberg continues to throw vast amounts of money on a media onslaught against liberty, but... if <broken link removed> had this nailed down, they would have voted on it already.

That's why now is the time to turn up the heat. If you've been working hard at contacting legislators, we are going to ask you to do it again. If you've never made your voice heard, now is the time to do it.

As we told you on Monday, there are a handful of Democrats who we think need to hear from you now.

We've listed them below but want to add one more to our previous list. Please also contact Rep. Paul Evans. His phone number is , email [email protected]

Evans is no friend of gun owners. His rant in the hard left blog "Blue Oregon" shows just how extreme he is. In it, he calls for registration of "automatic weapons," (which he defines as "hand guns as well as rifles,") with the county sheriffs.

Aside from how much he demonstrates his ignorance of firearms and current law, he also calls for amending the US Constitution to redefine the Second Amendment. However, we have reason to believe Evans would like to portray himself as pro-gun. So he's wavering. Please contact Evans, and the legislators below, with a message that your rights are not negotiable. Sample text follows after the contact info for the other House Reps who need to hear from you.

Rep Brent Barton [email protected]

Rep Deborah Boone [email protected]

Rep Brian Clem [email protected]

Rep Betty Komp [email protected]

Rep Caddy McKeown [email protected]

Rep Brad Witt [email protected]

______________________________
___________



Dear Representative,

The supporters of SB 941 have made it clear that this bill will not stop criminals. In fact, the Oregon State Police report that they virtually never take action against prohibited people who try to buy guns. So who does this bill actually affect? People like me. People who obey the law. People who want to be able to safely store a firearm for a friend or neighbor. People who want to be able to protect someone whose life is in danger. People who vote.

I am outraged that the promoters of this attack on my rights continue to lie about this bill. They continue to parrot the disproven claims about how many people want to have their privacy invaded and their names put in a government data base. They continue to repeat the lies about "unregulated internet gun sales" and they continue to call my rights "a loophole." I am not a criminal and will not be treated like one.

My rights, my privacy and my property are not "loopholes." Vote no on SB 941.

Yours,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My thoughts:
Our Rights don't end where emotions begin.
Please continue to do all you can, and talk to everyone you can.
We have to prevent a divisive and costly legislative experiment from being enacted.
This debacle is completely wrong for Oregon, and distracts from the real work to do by elected(invited) representatives of ourselves: We the People - not $,$$$,$$$,$$$'s Inc.
Thanks for your interest and efforts, members and guests.

 

[U201491]

From: Senator Tim Knopp
----------------------------------------------

Fellow Oregonian,

Thank you for your interest and input on SB 941-A. This bill has been contentious, and it has been helpful to know your views on this issue. I have received thousands of emails, letters, and phone calls from Oregonians on this specific bill, and I wanted to keep you updated on the issue. The bill was passed by the Senate just over a week ago on a 17-13 vote. Now it is on its way to the House Floor after it passed the House Committee on Rules on a party line vote. Below is a speech that I gave on the Senate Floor about SB 941 on Tuesday, April 14th:

"The previous speaker talked about the Oregon constitution and our Federal constitution, and those were the oaths that we swore to uphold. As I look at this issue knowing that the courts have watered down those rights over time, the question really comes down to this: does this bill improve safety to the point where it's necessary to make law abiding citizens into criminals? And I thought who can answer that question? So I went to the top law enforcement person in my county which is the county sheriff. He's had the better part of three decades of a career in law enforcement, and I thought he surely will know the answer to this question. So I asked him this question, 'Have you ever, in your career, had a person to person sale or transfer where you are aware that it turned into a significant crime of any kind?' His answer was one word, 'Never.'

So that's the answer. Either there isn't a problem or law enforcement won't be able to enforce it because they simply won't know. Because clearly, at least in Deschutes County, there hasn't been an instance like this where it has been an issue. I didn't come to Salem to vote to turn thousands of law abiding citizens in Deschutes County into criminals for what, literally, is no more safety. We all know that criminals are not going to abide by this law. They do not buy guns from people who can identify them later. They steal them.

I've received a lot of comment on this bill. Between 2013 and this session, I think my email and phone count is nearly 10,000. Now, not all of those are from my district. A lot of them are from the rest of Oregon, but my feedback has run about 95% no to about 5% yes. There has been person after person after person who has said that this isn't going to fix anything and asking me to defend their constitutional rights. Having looked at this issue and focusing on what I think the attempt really is, this bill does not measure up. We had the opportunity today to go further in solving the issue of gun violence with mental health funding. This legislative body chose not to do that today, and I think that's sad. Today, the right vote on this bill is to protect the constitutional rights of the people we represent, and I will be a 'no' vote today for that reason: SB 941 doesn't make people safer but it does cost many their freedom."

Thank you for contacting me with your views. As always, let me know if there is any way I can be of assistance.

Best Regards,



Senator Tim Knopp

 

[bolus]

I already notified Brent Barton that if a recall is warranted due to his vote in favor of SB 941, that I would assist in that effort. I don't have a lot of free time, but there are ways I can help and would like to do so. I reminded him that Clackamas County on the whole is pro-gun. I reminded him that our County Commission opposes SB 941 and so does our Sheriff. He would be foolish to vote in favor. Unfortunately his ratings from OFF and NRA would indicate he would be in favor. Hopefully he's smarter than that.

In fact, @WinterBaer45, if you are willing to be a chief petitioner, you should call their office and tell them that very thing. Just knowing there is someone out there ready and standing by to begin a recall effort may have a very powerful effect on his decision. I'm sure he can already see what it's doing to the others.

As I recall, Brent won by about 2,000 votes, not a huge margin, but not tiny. If he were recalled, I believe there is a chance we'd get an R in place because of the current makeup of the Clackamas County Commission. Brent needs to be reminded that Clackamas County traditionally is more conservative than Multnomah, and that this is not Multnomah. He's fairly young, and I doubt he would really want to deal with a recall this early in his political career.

Seriously. submit the recall petition. It costs nothing. Even if you plan to not do anything and collect no signatures. It registers another recall, it gets picked up by the news and the legislator knows that someone is upset enough to submit it. Just submitting the initial paperwork is worth doing.

Im surprised more have not shown up. Jason in Junction city did his all by himself.

Look what happened with Riley. We got one going. some adventurous people went and asked him questions and now he is in the paper supporting slavery. Even if we collect no signatures we still hit him.

 

[WinterBaer45]

Seriously. submit the recall petition. It costs nothing. Even if you plan to not do anything and collect no signatures. It registers another recall, it gets picked up by the news and the legislator knows that someone is upset enough to submit it. Just submitting the initial paperwork is worth doing.

Im surprised more have not shown up. Jason in Junction city did his all by himself.

Look what happened with Riley. We got one going. some adventurous people went and asked him questions and now he is in the paper supporting slavery. Even if we collect no signatures we still hit him.

I've called the clackamas county elections division and requested the total number of votes cast for Governor in House District 40, the guy Floyd is supposed to Email me the number sometime this afternoon.

 

[rick benjamin]

They may not have the votes to pass this abortion.
Write your representatives NOW!
Maybe they are concerned about downstream consequences....

Sent this one today

"Representative Fagan;

Your sponsorship of SB 941 crushed my opinion of you.
After the Clackamas town center shooting, you said you would propose a tax credit for citizens purchasing a gun safe.
Was an excellent idea to foster gun safety!
Had the owner of the stolen rifle used at the mall secured his rifle in a safe, the shooter wouldn't have had that rifle.
Didn't hear anything more about it, but my opinion of your thinking was up.

Every Memorial day for the past 20 years, my Marine buddy has borrowed my M1 service rifle to march in full uniform as a color guard.
My adult children borrow my guns when they want to target shoot at Douglas Ridge.
My friends new to hunting and target shooting have borrowed my guns to get their feel before buying their own guns.
I have secured my guns in a Cannon vault safe since before it was fashionable, 1979.

I am a law abiding citizen, but if your bill passes, you will move the line between lawful and criminal.
I won't have moved, but SB941 and your actions will have moved it.
I am one of many law abiding citizens that think this way.
If you vote against this bill, my opinion of you will rise by leaps and bounds.
If you vote for this bill, I will remember you.

Sincerely
Rick Benjamin
Damascus, Oregon 97089"

Write these folks also! They may swing the vote!

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

 

[WinterBaer45]

25,180 votes cast in 2014 for Governor in House district 40. Rep. Brent Barton
So that's what? 3,777 signatures for a RECALL ?

 

[Jim Colvill]

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Measures/Overview/SB941?pubDate=2015-04-29-16-38

941 goes to the floor for the second reading tomorrow and vote on Monday.

 

[SICARIO]

25,180 votes cast in 2014 for Governor in House district 40. Rep. Brent Barton
So that's what? 3,777 signatures for a RECALL ?

A walk in the park.

 

[Jim Colvill]

The vote is MONDAY according to a blast from OFF. Time for the push. Here is the latest missive I've sent to every member of the House. Short, sweet, to the point and easily digestible.





To the members of the House of Representatives of the State of Oregon,


Why SB 941 is a poorly written bill:

• It imposes an additional tax on Federally licensed collectors
• It imposes an additional tax on citizens who possess a valid Concealed carry license
• It will not prevent domestic abuse. Background checks winnow out only those convicted of a crime, not those who may commit domestic abuse
• It will not prevent known criminals from access to firearms
• It will criminalize citizens who loan firearms to friends for temporary use
• It will criminalize citizens who temporarily transfer possession to others for the safety of themselves or others
• It will overload a system which is already rife with glitches,errors,slow-downs and produces unnecessary delays and false denials
• It is labeled an emergency where none exists

For these reasons the only common sense is to vote NO on SB 941

 

[etrain16]

Seriously. submit the recall petition. It costs nothing. Even if you plan to not do anything and collect no signatures. It registers another recall, it gets picked up by the news and the legislator knows that someone is upset enough to submit it. Just submitting the initial paperwork is worth doing.

Im surprised more have not shown up. Jason in Junction city did his all by himself.

Look what happened with Riley. We got one going. some adventurous people went and asked him questions and now he is in the paper supporting slavery. Even if we collect no signatures we still hit him.

It's crossed my mind, but in my job, I work with various government agencies and I have to be very careful about attaching my name to something like that. I'm happy to help collect signatures though. Plus, someone else here is already looking into filing the recall himself. That's a good thing.

Tomorrow I'll be at the capitol. I'm hoping I'll get a chance to get in and speak to Rep. Barton directly. I may even inform him that a recall is already in the early planning stages, and it may be in his best interests to consider a no vote.