LAST CHANCE!!! LIGHT THEM UP!!

[tiggers97]

Another point I'm making, because it pisses me off, is that I'm being denied to even vote on this. Rep Gomberg got back to me stressing the need for discussion, and some seriously Bloomberg imfluenced statistics. What discussion? I am being silenced and excluded to the extent that they area able.

What "statistics" and what type of discussion?

 

[Sgt Nambu]

Hey, I think my Rep. is on the fence on some parts of the Bill! Emphasize the No Lending/safekeeping without a BG check/transfer part of the Bill! Arne K said he had a phone conversation with his aid that went well.

Call and write A.S.A.P., he might be persuaded!


View attachment 235926 Representative John Lively
Democrat - District 12 - Springfield
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1412
Capitol Address: 900 Court St. NE H-488, Salem, Oregon 97301
Email: [email protected]
Website: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/lively

OK, done!

 

[U201491]

Well, since everyone is showing theirs, I guess I'll show you mine

This is actually expanded on a response on Oregonlive I had to someone who said "This gun measure is so minor...". Hopefully it gives others brainstorming for something to write some ideas. Please plagiarize away

• Police do not have the resources to enforce the law. Even the OSP had the bill changed from "SHALL" investigate all denials to "MAY". i.e. they don't want to invest resources into something with a low return on law enforcement and public safety.

• Oregon is safer than States with Background checks". Using the same methods employed by Everytown for Gun Safety (CDC data from 2008-2012) using same method as Everytown, the gun homicide rates are:

1. o Oregon = 1.4 gun homicides per 100,000 residents.
2. o California = 3.8.
3. o In states with background checks = 3.7

• It raises the costs of used firearms. i.e. the equivalent of a poll-tax, or unfunded mandate. Most people will just buy new for anything under $500. Good for the gun-manufacturers!
• The burden is on the stores to act as the middleman to enforce a government law on the private transaction of two individuals exchanging a product the store doesn't even sell.
• Many small gun-stores may not participate: There are many private FFL's and big-box sporting stores who will NOT participate. That leaves the mom-and-pop stores who will have to raise their prices or refuse to participate due to insurance and liability issues. Thereby making it more difficult (a burden) to perform firearm transactions between two private citizens. Some unscrupulous gun store owners see it as an opportunity for new business and hope to see an influx of government conscripted customers that have no choice but the pay the price they set. A gun dealer from California testimony in favor of SB941 during the House hearings expressed exactly that sentiment!

• I was present at both the Senate and House testimonies for SB941. There was not one example of a life saved or crime prevented if SB941 had been implemented in the past. Lots of "maybes" "possibly" and "hopefully" statements, but not one "if SB941 were law, this crime would not have happened".
• The private sale "loophole" in Oregon is based on speculative information. No one knows in Oregon the sources of where criminals get their guns! We have convicts currently residing in Oregon prisons we could ask "where did you get your gun". So why not ask and make an informed vote based on actual statistical data, before passing a law that could see private citizens with nothing more than a parking ticket on file Be arrested and treated like felons?
• SB941 collects more information than needed to perform a background check. Unless we start passing laws that say "Person A can only buy shotguns, person B can buy only handguns", collecting firearm information should not be used as part of a check to determine if a person can legally possess a firearm, or not.
• Amendments that would have eased the burden on the state background check system and law-abiding citizens were identified, but roundly defeated on a partisan vote. Invalidating Class 03 FFL's? Ignoring the benefits of expanded background checks that Concealed Carry holders have to go thru? I guess Michael Bloomberg really is getting what he paid for!

Hopefully this gives you a taste as to some of the reasons why this measure is NOT "so minor" for a lot of people.

That is outstanding !!!! I pray they read it and heed what you say.

I have a hunch what they are counting now is If they get jammed switchboards and full to the brim mailboxes with subject lines of NO on SB941
The momentum on that needs to run full bore right to the bitter end.
Does everyone have the stamina to keep it up til then ?
If not we will lose. If we do we just might win this yet.

.

 

[dunerider21]

Just sent this message to everyone on the list.

Please consider a "NO" vote on this poorly crafted bill that only serves to punish law abiding citizens and NOT criminals or the mentally ill from obtaining weapons.
We can do better than this and retain our 2nd amendment rights that are guaranteed to us under the U.S. Constitution.
It does nothing to keep firearms out of the hands of those who sole purpose is to harm. It serves no purpose other than to reduce our freedoms. It is also falsely tagged with an emergency clause. If you truly feel this is what the majority of your constituents want, put it up for the people to vote on. I believe the majority of Oregonians would vote against it. There have been several law enforcement agencies that have gone on record as saying this will not help and they will not enforce it. I respectfully request you vote no on this bill. Thank you.

Jeff in Salem.

 

[Jim Colvill]

"Background checks will protect women" they said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/29/n...icmst=1409232722000&bicmet=1419773522000&_r=0

A former resident of a Bronx homeless shelter returned there Monday night, abducted its director, forced her to undress in her car, chased her as she tried to flee and then shot her in the street, killing her, police officials said on Tuesday.

Witnesses told detectives that the victim, Ana Charle, 36, ran naked in the street from the suspect, West Spruill, 39, who was also naked as he chased her and opened fire.

How did Mr. Spruill pass NY background checks and waiting period?

 

[Stomper]

I have sent them all a No on SB941 from three different email accounts!

 

[ROC]

Thank you for sharing your perspective on firearms policy. I am receiving a LOT of letters on current proposals and those letters reflect widely differing perspectives.


The "background check" measure being considered would require private sales to follow the same process as commercial sales. The intent is to prohibit sales to felons, domestic violence abusers, certain drug addicts, and people with documented mental illness.



What I have learned during these discussions is that about one in every 100 purchases in stores are screened out. And that occurs when purchasers know they will be checked. Since 2007, background checks have blocked more than 30,000 gun sales to prohibited people.



Current studies now document that one in 18 people trying to buy guns on the private market is prohibited from possessing firearms. Often this occurs on web pages advertising "no background checks!". Criminals and other prohibited buyers are five times more likely to try and buy guns from people than they are from stores.



Through this intense discussion, I've become convinced that background checks really do keep many guns out of the wrong hands. Background checks will not keep guns out of the hands of all dangerous people. Determined buyers will certainly find access in other ways. But we can make those sales more difficult and clearly illegal. We would also send a clear signal that gun ownership in Oregon is for those without serious criminal records or current mental health challenges



The remaining question is how we can screen these people with minimum burden on law-abiding citizens.



When a background check would be required is the object of much confusion and mis-information. The measure we are voting on includes a number of specific exemptions.



· At a shooting range

· For hunting, trapping, or target shooting activities

· If the firearm and the transferor are in the presence of the transferee

· To a firearm repair person or for production of custom made accessories

· For the purpose of preventing imminent death or serious physical injury.

· Transfer by law enforcement, military, or private security personnel in official duties

· Law enforcement gun buyback events

· Transfer of a firearm to a spouse, domestic partner, parent, stepparent, child, stepchild, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, first cousin, niece, nephew, or the spouse/domestic partner of any of the preceding list.

· Allows private parties more than 40 miles apart to send or deliver the firearm to a licensed gun dealer instead of appearing in person together



Background checks have long been required for most firearm sales. Many private owners already run checks when selling firearms. This important step relieves them of liability should that weapon later be used in a crime. Increasing requirements for background checks would add protections for law-abiding sellers.



I say this as a gun owner. I voted for two pro-gun measures recently and sponsored the only bill to expand gun rights to pass last year



Surveys of residents on the Central Coast show that 67% of those interviewed strongly support background checks for firearms regardless of where the gun is purchased. I understand that not everyone agrees. I respect all points of view on this difficult question and have considered them carefully as the discussion has evolved.



The health and safety of my constituents is my highest priority. We need to have a serious and thoughtful conversation about how to prevent future crimes and tragedies. A number of proposals have been discussed in the legislature over the past months. As this discussion unfolds we will all need to work together to find solutions to keep our communities safe.



Again, thank you for writing to me about guns. I respect and will carefully consider your opinion. If we ultimately disagree, I hope we will agree on other major issues as they appear this session.



If I may be of further assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to be in contact.


Warm regards,


David


Rep. David Gomberg

Oregon House District 10

900 Court St NE H-471

Salem, OR 97301

503-986-1410

 

[Stomper]

That was a very eloquent GFY, if ever there was one.

 

[Ratfink]

Just fired off this one-
Regarding SB941-

What happened here? Did I loose my voice? Did my concerns, opinions and desires about MY government get swept away in socialist reform I missed? We, "The People" still have a U.S. Constitution and a bill of rights correct? We have procedures for enacting laws the affect "The People" and did we vote those away?

Why is it that the democratic party, when opposed, forces legislation down our throats and does it so subversively as to not draw attention while doing it? (O'bama-care) What happened to "transparency" in government? Why not trust the very people who elected you to vote on these constitutional issues? Why, because you do not trust us to make "the right" decision but isn't that what democratic-government is all about? People choosing how to pursue "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness"? I am saddened by the handling of this poorly crafted, unenforceable bill that has been greased and slipped through the cogs of our state government without being exposed in the light of democracy. It would have been voted down by a people that see less is more in the form of government. We have our rights but some how they continue to be diminished by the very people we elect to protect them. We don't need more laws, we need to be allowed to thrive under our God given rights we already posses. Stop over-reacting and knee jerking to the mouse in the room and pay attention to the wolf howling outside the door. It's socialism and it's waiting to devour our rights.


Respectfully,

XXXXXX
Waldport Oregon


http://biblehub.com/kjv/acts/11.htm

 

[tiggers97]

Grr. I need to sit down (just starting my work day) and write a detailed response to that Everytown survey the pro-941 side is leaning on as justification. I looked at the report again late last night: only 4 transactions for 4 pistols (3ea hi-points, 1ea Glock 19). No $ on the glock. But ~$100 for the hi-points. A quick look at Armslist today for Firearms: Private Sellers gives a total of 1768 firearms for sale. Of that, 725 are "hand gun" category, with 543 as semi-auto pistols (or 31% of the total firearms for sale today on Armslist.

How many are hi-points for <$150? 2 (about 3 others were <$200.
How many total hi-points (all price points) listed for "no background checks"? Zero (8ea total for sale today, or 0.45% of firearms for sale on Armslist today).

And then Everytown takes that number and extrapolates it onto the entire population of firearms; including the other 68% of non-semi-auto handguns.

And I think everyone also knows the reputation on hi-points, and what type of hand gun one might see in a typical rap-gangbanger picture.

And again, the report offers no proof of the types of ads posted (actual ads, not a description), meaning there may be even MORE to the story that they don't want people to know about.
(Insert earlier example of counting redheads in Portland area by taking the sample at an Irish pub, and then blindly extrapolating it to the entire population and claiming 1 in 18 Portlandians are red-heads. )

Ok. I need to stop, but I hope every see's were this is going and can respond to people like Rep Gomberg in kind.

 

[JD42]

Done

 

[NWGlockgal]

I just sent out another batch of emails. I made sure that on the subject line that I put "A woman who opposes SB941". I am hoping that will get their attention and they will actually read it.

 

[WasrNwarpaint]

I just sent out another batch under 4 different emails

 

[diagoras]

Grr. I need to sit down (just starting my work day) and write a detailed response to that Everytown survey the pro-941 side is leaning on as justification. I looked at the report again late last night: only 4 transactions for 4 pistols (3ea hi-points, 1ea Glock 19). No $ on the glock. But ~$100 for the hi-points. A quick look at Armslist today for Firearms: Private Sellers gives a total of 1768 firearms for sale. Of that, 725 are "hand gun" category, with 543 as semi-auto pistols (or 31% of the total firearms for sale today on Armslist.

How many are hi-points for <$150? 2 (about 3 others were <$200.
How many total hi-points (all price points) listed for "no background checks"? Zero (8ea total for sale today, or 0.45% of firearms for sale on Armslist today).

And then Everytown takes that number and extrapolates it onto the entire population of firearms; including the other 68% of non-semi-auto handguns.

And I think everyone also knows the reputation on hi-points, and what type of hand gun one might see in a typical rap-gangbanger picture.

And again, the report offers no proof of the types of ads posted (actual ads, not a description), meaning there may be even MORE to the story that they don't want people to know about.
(Insert earlier example of counting redheads in Portland area by taking the sample at an Irish pub, and then blindly extrapolating it to the entire population and claiming 1 in 18 Portlandians are red-heads. )

Ok. I need to stop, but I hope every see's were this is going and can respond to people like Rep Gomberg in kind.

It's pointless to try to refute the meaningless statistics of these nitwits. One of the legislators on the House committee repeatedly asked for verification of the numbers (he obviously had some training in statistics) and their mealy-mouthed parrots just got a deer-in-the-headlights look and said "I'll have to get back to you on that"... etc... And if they do "Get Back" to him, it'll be with more manufactured numerical crap.

Gomberg just needs to be recalled. I'm in his district and we might as well just start the recall campaign right now - win or lose (and I hope everyone who's thinking of recalling these cockroaches will do so if they vote for this thing *whether or not* it passes). You can be sure Gomberg wrote that specious, dissembling, automated response weeks ago, in the full knowledge that he was going to get a schumerstorm of protest over this, and now he's barfing it back at any of his constituents who are in the "Against" column of his phone and email logs,, hoping to sound "Thoughtful" (Don't fry your *other* braincell, Gomberg...).

Meanwhile... we need to start contacting these cockroaches' contributors, and telling them what they're paying for. I have a list of all of Gomberg's (reported) contributors going back to when he crawled out of Satan's shirt pocket. I have the same lists for the legislators on OFF's list, as well. The "Upload A File" button doesn't work here... anybody know how upload files to this forum, somehwere?

 

[Ed Guinn]

It's pointless to try to refute the meaningless statistics of these nitwits. One of the legislators on the House committee repeatedly asked for verification of the numbers (he obviously had some training in statistics) and their mealy-mouthed parrots just got a deer-in-the-headlights look and said "I'll have to get back to you on that"... etc... And if they do "Get Back" to him, it'll be with more manufactured numerical crap.

Gomberg just needs to be recalled. I'm in his district and we might as well just start the recall campaign right now - win or lose (and I hope everyone who's thinking of recalling these cockroaches will do so if they vote for this thing *whether or not* it passes). You can be sure Gomberg wrote that specious, dissembling, automated response weeks ago, in the full knowledge that he was going to get a schumerstorm of protest over this, and now he's barfing it back at any of his constituents who are in the "Against" column of his phone and email logs,, hoping to sound "Thoughtful" (Don't fry your *other* braincell, Gomberg...).

Meanwhile... we need to start contacting these cockroaches' contributors, and telling them what they're paying for. I have a list of all of Gomberg's (reported) contributors going back to when he crawled out of Satan's shirt pocket. I have the same lists for the legislators on OFF's list, as well. The "Upload A File" button doesn't work here... anybody know how upload files to this forum, somehwere?

That's the stuff! Follow the money back to $$,$$$,$$$,$$$ INC. and expose this sell-off of our Rights.
We're not individuals acting alone, and need to join together even more cohesively now, members and guests.
We need all the correct legal advice and direction we can get - now more than ever - to prevent this kind of dirty backroom love it or shove it politics from infecting our beloved State in the future.
Here's an example of another approach from serious thinkers.
The latest from OFF:

05.01.15





A Message From Our Friends, The Patriots of Coos County.



County Commissioners Consider Second Amendment Ordinance on Cinco de Mayo



Local Second Amendment supporters are working to preempt the antigun zealots in the Oregon legislature who are barreling ahead with SB 941, the expanded background checks bill.



The proposed law is a mechanism to get every gun registered with the state government by forcing a background check every time a firearm transfers from one person to another. Registration will lead to confiscation and history will back that fact. The real reason the political elite want to take away your ability to self-defense is that they fear you.



Knowing their intentions, the people of Coos County have to use every political avenue at our disposal to protect the Second Amendment.



Currently, we have gathered over a 1,000 signatures to put the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance on the books as law in Coos County. We were hoping to put this on the ballot in September, but that may not be in time to preempt the passage of SB941 by the state.



Since time is of the essence, our group has asked the Coos County Board of Commissioners to put the item on the agenda and discuss enacting the ordinance through a vote of the board. It would mean the ordinance could be law thirty-days after their vote, and it would save the county from having to pay for a September election, which could cost up to an extra forty grand.



The board chair, Bob Main, requested the item to be placed on the agenda for a discussion at the next regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, May 5, in the Owen Building in Coquille. Sign in is about 9 a.m. The meeting starts at 9:30 a.m.



Now we need your help!



Please try to show up to this meeting and demand the commissioners do everything possible to protect our right to bear arms by enacting the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance.



Those who are already circulating petition sheets should gather as many signatures as possible before the May 5, then bring those signatures to the board meeting to demonstrate the amount of public support there is in our community for increasing the protections of Second Amendment rights. Anyone wanting to volunteer can send an email to [email protected] to request a signature sheet. Continue to gather signatures and we will work until the ordinance is law in Coos County, because there is a good chance two of the commissioners will not move to enact it.



The following is a list of places in Coos County to sign the petition:

Bandon:

v FCS Protection Services, 600 11th Street.

v Industrial Resources, 55340 Rosa Road.


Coos Bay:

v Hole in the Wall Guns, 818 South Broadway (U.S. Hwy 101)

v Snuffy's Pawn, 2610 Ocean Blvd SE


Coquille:

v The Sentinel, First Street

v Coquille Smoke Shop, 399 N Central Blvd


Empire:

v Empire Firearms, 1165 Newmark Avenue


North Bend:

v Bay Area Yamaha Cycles, 1397 Sherman Ave # 2

v Tidewater Shooting Supplies, 2147 Broadway Street

v World Pawn Exchange, 1980 Sherman Ave, (U.S. Hwy 101)





Our group's intention is not to cost the county money, or to cause political turmoil for the commissioners. Our only goal is to protect the rights of the people, but procedural barriers limit our recourses of action.



Coincidently, at the same meeting the board is going to discuss putting a Transient Lodging Tax on the ballot in November. Will the commissioners ask the people to support a tax increase then turnaround and deny them the defense of their rights---all in one session?



Those who cannot attend the meeting should call and email the commissioners for an answer to that question. Let them know they had better vote in favor of the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance before they go sticking their hands into the people's pockets.







Citizens can contact Commissioner John Sweet at (541)396-7541 and his email is [email protected].



Commissioner Cribbins number is (541)396-7539 and her email is [email protected].



Do not call Commissioner Bob Main, because he already supports enacting the ordinance, proving he has, and always will, step-up to defend Second Amendment Rights.



About the author:

Rob Taylor is a local activist and the founder of the website, www.CoosCountyWatchdog.com, which is a network of individual government watchdogs.

 

[tkdguy]

CEASEFIRE CALLS ALL HANDS ON DECK TO VOTE FOR SB 941

THEY WANT CONTACT TO:

[email protected] Salem

[email protected] 503-986-1432 Cannon Beach/Astoria

[email protected],.us 503-986-1420 Salem

[email protected] 503-986-1422 Woodburn

[email protected] 503-986-1431 Clatskamnie


Ceasefires' Information on SB 941 is as follows:

"Felons, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill can avoid the background check system by going to private sellers, no questions asked" AND YES, THESE PERSONS WILL DO SO THEY CAN BE IDENTIFIED IN A CRIME AND INCRIMINATE THEMSELVES! HUH?

FALSE CLAIM: TAKING THE RESPONSIBLE STEP OF REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECCKS FOR PRIVATE GUN SALES IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO REDUCE GU VIOLENCE IF FACTUALLY FALSE BECAUSE THE FBI HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE IS A DIRECT RESULT OF MORE FIREARMS IN THE HANDS OF LAW ABIDING CITIZENS.

LET'S KEEP UP THE PRESSURE 24 X 7 AND DEMONSTRATE SUPERIOR FORCE--BUT BE POLITE!

 

[tkdguy]

I just sent emails to the above reps. I will do all the reps across the board tonight or tomorrow. Please keep plugging away. tkdguy

 

[ROC]

From an email sent by Rep. Gail Whitsett -

Senate Bill 941 - Expanded Background Checks Bill will be up on Monday. None of the Republicans will be voting for this legislation. Call the Democrats repeatedly to express your opinion on this bill.

 

[ARKLITE881South]

There is a gun show this weekend in Albany, does anyone know if there will be any ANTI SB 941 Petitions laid out to sign??

 

[tkdguy]

Maybe you can make up a sign and remind everyone to call their legislator that day and evening--the vote is the day after!