Oregon OFF Strategy to stop SB 978

[DB is Here]

I am looking for a good argument as to why that won't help.

Did it stop Timothy McVeigh? Did it stop the truck driver in Nice, France? Evil will find a way...but I digress.

 

[nammac]

Can't legislate the heart of man...

It's not the rock, the gun, the truck, the car, or whatever... The problem is the heart of man.

Devaluing human life, the decline of morals and personal accountability are all indicators that things aren't going to be getting any better in the foreseeable future...

 

[NW Backpacker]

I am looking for a good argument as to why that won't help.

Criminals obtain their guns illegally. They do not get BGCs. They steal them, buy from another criminal, etc.

As you know, SB 978 will help criminals obtain handguns as law-abiding people are forced to leave their guns in the car to enter a public building. Hospital parking lots are a great place to get guns cheap.

 

[PiratePast40]

Criminals obtain their guns illegally. They do not get BGCs. They steal them, buy from another criminal, etc.

As you know, SB 978 will help criminals obtain handguns as law-abiding people are forced to leave their guns in the car to enter a public building. Hospital parking lots are a great place to get guns cheap.

Wondering how this will work. If you're forced to leave your firearm in your vehicle because the facility won't allow you to carry, and the gun is then stolen, are you still responsible for the crimes committed with the stolen gun, the same as if it was stolen from your home?

I believe that there have been several rulings that reinforce your right to protect yourself in your vehicle the same way as you can in your home. Under the proposed upside down reality, is this the new catch 22?

 

[DavidG]

As you know, SB 978 will help criminals obtain handguns.

I'm not sure I'm understanding this statement. How will it help criminals in obtaining firearms?

EDIT: Ok now I get it. They'll break in to the vehicle where the firearm is being stored, while in the public building.

 

[arakboss]

I'm not sure I'm understanding this statement. How will it help criminals in obtaining firearms?

EDIT: Ok now I get it. They'll break in to the vehicle where the firearm is being stored, while in the public building.

Yes and now they will know that vehicles in public building parking areas will have a higher likelihood of containing a firearm. Criminals gangs may be able to stake out these areas and watch for people leaving their firearms in vehicles.

 

[arakboss]

Wondering how this will work. If you're forced to leave your firearm in your vehicle because the facility won't allow you to carry, and the gun is then stolen, are you still responsible for the crimes committed with the stolen gun, the same as if it was stolen from your home?

I believe that there have been several rulings that reinforce your right to protect yourself in your vehicle the same way as you can in your home. Under the proposed upside down reality, is this the new catch 22?

I think if it is locked up with OHA approved device or container you will not be liable but the problem may be proving that the firearm was secured as required by SB 978-5.

 

[arakboss]

According to OFF, Senator Roblan may be planning to vote "YES" in the Rules Committee. That would mean the bill will go to the floor for a vote where it is likely to pass, even though he says he will vote NO on the floor vote. This way, he can ensure that the vote passes while still being able to say that he voted against it.

Recommended OFF strategy:

Please contact his office and tell him you don't care how he votes "on the floor" if he does not use his power to kill this bill in committee.

Roblan's Phone 503-986-1705
Roblan's Email [email protected]

Here is the full story from OFF:
Roblan's Game - Oregon Firearms Federation

More ideas from me:
It may be worthwhile to also try to get the following changes if nothing else:
1 - Add a grandfather clause to section 17 for firearms with serial numbers that were made before 1968. EDIT: Better yet, as noted in comments below, the grandfather clause should include "untraceable" firearm made before the date the act goes into effect (if it passes).
2 - Remove section 25 which allows public buildings to restrict CHL carry, or else we would have a hard time knowing exactly where we can and cannot legally carry concealed.

I have been giving more thought to Sen. Roblans predicament. If he votes no on SB 978-5 in committee he will likely get booted from his committee seat. If he votes yes on on SB 978-5 in committee vote and it passes floor votes in Senate and House to become law then he will stand a good chance at losing his Senate seat in the 2020 election. Personally I would risk my committee seat if I was in his shoes.

 

[partsed]

So no more voting your conscience, if you don't vote they way we want you to vote-then you get booted off the committee...... I agree, vote no and risk getting booted.

 

[nammac]

Sounds like it's getting time for rebellion in Salem. Somehow, I don't think the founding fathers intended for us to grovel for the rights they secured in the Bill of Rights... Imagine if this was the First Amendment and freedom of speech that was being attacked in this manner...

 

[arakboss]

I heard from another aid at a Republican Senator's office this morning who is assisting me in getting another opinion from the Legislative Council Office. The aid made this remark about emails/calls legislators are receiving: "many people emailing and calling are not helpful to the cause at all as the only thing they can say is F this F you F all legislators, resign or we will get you etc etc. This has a negative impact plus I am always baffled given this email is a public record. Please I have no doubt federal authorities track out emails as they relate to this issue."

Please spread the word that this will not be helpful for our cause. It's a free country so say what you want but if you want your words to do some good it might be wiser to be nicer. I have heard Sen. Roblan is getting a larger share of these negative emails and I plan on sneaking in another request for him to vote no on SB 978-5 in Rules Committee by folding it in to an email thanking him and his aids for having to put up with this BS.

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

"many people emailing and calling are not helpful to the cause at all as the only thing they can say is F this F you F all legislators, resign or we will get you etc etc.

Wonder what percentage are false flag operations?

 

[arakboss]

Wonder what percentage are false flag operations?

I have no idea but judging from some of the comments, I have read over on facebook, it's probably not all of them.

 

[nammac]

I understand people are frustrated and feel like they're getting nowhere with calls and emails, but we have to keep up the good fight. Let's keep pressure on those who can stop these bill, either kill them in committee or stop them from coming to the floor for a vote.

I as well will be issuing another round of emails and calls today. Remember, we are literally years late ramping up with a concerted effort against rights busting legislation, so we have to be in the fight for the long haul...

 

[arakboss]

I understand people are frustrated and feel like they're getting nowhere with calls and emails, but we have to keep up the good fight. Let's keep pressure on those who can stop these bill, either kill them in committee or stop them from coming to the floor for a vote.

I as well will be issuing another round of emails and calls today. Remember, we are literally years late ramping up with a concerted effort against rights busting legislation, so we have to be in the fight for the long haul...

Agreed, I sent this to Sen. Roblan's office:

Sen. Roblan, Rosie and Terry.

I just received an email from an aid to a Republican Senator and she said there have been a substantial number of rude and threatening emails/calls delivered to legislators recently. Rumors are your office has received a larger share of them. I am sorry you are having to deal with that type of negative contact. It baffles me as to how people think that type of contact is going to help influence another, to see their side of an issue.

The correspondence I've received from you and your staff is appreciated and I hope we can keep the dialog open so that I can continue to make my case for you to stop SB 978-5 (preferably in committee)

 

[DivCurlGrad72]

Maybe follow up with a Whitman's Sampler?

 

[arakboss]

Maybe follow up with a Whitman's Sampler?

If Roblan's office gets Whitman's then Sen. Burdick's office should get sour apples. She has not replied to any of my emails thus far, so she gets this one today:


Sen. Burdick,

As of this morning April 23rd the Mid-Session Update newsletter still contains this inaccurate statement. "Senate Bill 978 accomplishes this balance by taking several crucial steps to ensure our community is safer from guns without regulating the ownership of any firearm or ammunition."

Will you be making a correction to the newsletter soon or are you going to continue to spread misinformation about SB 978-5?

I have contacted several other Senators and after reviewing your newsletter statement and language in Section 17 (2) of SB 978-5, they agree with my assessment, that the statement is inaccurate.

In order for you to avoid further damage to your credibility, I would recommend that you correct the statement to reflect the actual impacts of the bill. From the hundreds of thousands of pre-1968 firearms to many thousands of home built firearms, there will be substantial regulation of firearm ownership, if SB 978-5 is passed. To say otherwise, as you did in the newsletter, is a great misrepresentation of the impact SB 978-5 will have on Oregonian's firearm ownership. If a bill needs to be promoted with misinformation, it's probably not a good bill. And that is certainly the case with SB 978-5.

You say you are from a family of firearm owners. Why don't you ask them how they would feel about their Grandpa's shotgun being criminalized to possess, Maybe their first rifle they received as child or that rifle they built with their bare hands. I hope you will put a lot of thought in to whether Oregonian's deserve to suffer under the laws proposed in this bill, before you decide to schedule a hearing. I can tell you Oregonian's deserve much better than SB 978-5.

 

[arakboss]

Maybe follow up with a Whitman's Sampler?

Hold the chocolates. I think I am going to have to share bad news soon. Please email your kindest most persuasive letters to Sen. Beyer. We are most likely going to need a no vote out of him.

 

[nammac]

Hold the chocolates. I think I am going to have to share bad news soon. Please email your kindest most persuasive letters to Sen. Beyer. We are most likely going to need a no vote out of him.

And the bad news is....

 

[arakboss]

And the bad news is....

waiting for reply back from Sen. Roblan's office but it looks like he won't kill it in committee.