Personal response from Senator Greenlick, sponsor of HB3200 just received

[Eludnu]

(Mods, If this should be posted elsewhere, please move it.)

Upon hearing that Rep Mitch Greenlick was deleting "pro-gun" emails without reading them and confirming he had turned off his phone due to too many calls, I was determined to make contact in a manner where I could be assured he would read my email.

Here is what I sent this evening followed by his reply:



Healthcare Background and HB3200. Thank you!


Dr. Greenlick,

Thank you for the commitment you have made over a lifetime to the healthcare community in Oregon. Clearly you are a well educated and highly intelligent individual, and your former service to the medical community is noted. I took the time in reading your background after first reading about HB3200 and wanting to get a bit more background into why you would propose such a fantastic bill. Your insertion of HB3200 has done more to not just raise awareness, but ACTION on the attack of the second amendment (not to mention outright violations of other amendments in your bill) and I applaud your very crafty methods in community organizing in this matter. I have never seen my fellow law abiding, gun owning, and democratic friends so fired up and I cannot thank you enough for that! You have done more to help ensure the defense, financial donations, and community organizing to help ensure our constitutional right to bear arms, than anything OFF, or the NRA has done. Well done sir, well done!

Thanks again!

His prompt response:

It's nice to feel useful.

Mitch


While he has disconnected his phone (A Representative who doesn't really want to hear what you have to say? Really?) He is apparently reading this email address:

[email protected]

While you are contacting the real folks who matter, a little "howdy" to this email might just result in it too, being too much for him to hear, and shutting it down as well.

I've sent numerous personal emails in the last year to Senators, and in almost all cases I've received a personal one back. If you can't send anything else, a form email works, but a personal one will be read in my experience.

Fire away!

Read More

 

[Navman]

Well done and well worded!

He's failed to uphold the oath he took for office by not only throwing out the 2 ammendment but the 4th as well for warrantless searches.

Maybe he should be thrown out as well!

Isn't he the one that wanted people to get a prescription for cigarettes?

Where do we find these people and who voted for him?

 

[TKevlar]

I wrote him and had a small string with him as well. Here is what I originally wrote:

"Hi Mitch,

My name is Kevin and I live in Eugene. I won't go into a diatribe about why I am in opposition to this draconian legislation, I'm sure you have been deluged with all kinds of emails like that. What I would like to do is ask you questions...........Why does it feel like all these gun bills seem to focus on restricting the access of firearms from law-abiding citizens? It seems to me that law-abiding gun owners are not the ones responsible for these horrific acts of violence across our nation so I'm sincerely at a loss as to why we are the focus? Wouldn't all your time/energy/focus be better spent on the criminals who actually perpetrate acts like this? Wouldn't it be beneficial to improve access to mental health service, education, and safety? Seriously, where is the legislation and corresponding enforcement that is targeted toward criminals?

I have lived in Oregon for 14 years now and one of the reasons I moved here is because of the rugged individualism that this great state is known for. Legislation like this, that only focuses on those who have done nothing wrong, is not the kind of common sense this state and country was founded on. It simply stuns me to think that as our elected officials, this is the best you can do. I'm saddened by the political climate not only in our state but across the nation and I feel like you are doing absolutely nothing to change that by sponsoring such a draconian and divisive piece of legislation like HB 3200.

Thank you for your time,

Kevin"

Here's what he wrote back:

"The simple answer is that when an assault weapon is used to murder people it generally came from a law-abiding citizen in one way or another."

Then I said:


I'd love to see some statistics regarding that and whether the weapon was obtained "illegally". And by illegal, I mean against the law which is a crime already......I think?

He shot back:

"It would be illegal to steal one from a home. If it wasn't in that home there would have been nothing to steal."



To that I replied:

"lol so I see that you and I will most likely not agree on this and that's fine. Sure you can do things to try and make the world safer but when you do it at the expense of other's freedom I'd say you really weren't doing much in the end.

Honestly though good luck. I think you have stirred up a serious hornets nest with this and even though I consider myself an independent and voted for a couple of Democratic candidates this last election, I won't be making the same mistake next time. I'm a responsible firearm owner/user and I will not be made to pay for the acts of a mad man. In fact, this issue alone has spurred me to get even more involved in the legislative process. Good luck next election. "

I didn't get a reply after that. He never answered any of my questions and he only used the very basic elements of the liberal position and I bet he doesn't really understand his argument. If these asshats are so clueless as to go this full retard on the bills then maybe it is a blessing in disguise. I have never seen the gun community so fired up and I'm thinking that we can do some great things this time with the kind of hubris the progressives are showing..........or at least I can hope.

 

[Navman]

Awesome Guys!!

 

[Eludnu]

"It would be illegal to steal one from a home."

It's not illegal now to steal one from a home?


"If it wasn't in that home there would have been nothing to steal."


Except for the fact that under this bill you would still have the "right" to own ONE. So there still would be one to steal.

What about a house with 3 or more members over 18 all with one registered "legally"?

Or, a group of say 6 friends sharing a house to save money?

You can't reason with someone who is unreasonable.

 

[TKevlar]

Except for the fact that under this bill you would still have the "right" to own ONE. So there still would be one to steal.

No silly, they come in once a year without a warrant and make sure you are in compliance.......problem solved.