JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
I feel a bit helpless. My State Senator and Representative have both told me they are going to vote for this bill. I've done the calls, e-mails, etc, but I feel helpless.

Then I see the "Moms Demand" group is having their week of action and holding meetings with state officials etc.

I honestly wish there was more I could do -- but what?
Contact all the republicans, they're the only thing that can stand in the way. I'm in the same boat as you, heck my state senator has never returned a call, won't take a call and never returned a single email, upchuck Riley is totally useless and a Soros/Bloomberg flunkie.

Oregon politics needs to be investigated by the FBI for RICO violations...
 
I feel a bit helpless. My State Senator and Representative have both told me they are going to vote for this bill. I've done the calls, e-mails, etc, but I feel helpless.

Then I see the "Moms Demand" group is having their week of action and holding meetings with state officials etc.

I honestly wish there was more I could do -- but what?

I'm in the same place. I'm stuck with Warner and Dembrow. Dembrow is on the "Commitee". I watched the testimony, from people mostly "Against" the measure. I mailed them. No response. But I do get their emails espousing what great work they're doing for Oregonians! :s0170:

Contact all the republicans, they're the only thing that can stand in the way. I'm in the same boat as you, heck my state senator has never returned a call, won't take a call and never returned a single email, upchuck Riley is totally useless and a Soros/Bloomberg flunkie.

Oregon politics needs to be investigated by the FBI for RICO violations...

I contacted the "Sane" of the bunch. I thanked them for staying away from the capitol. I don't think we have to worry about them siding with the "Insane".
 
I feel a bit helpless. My State Senator and Representative have both told me they are going to vote for this bill. I've done the calls, e-mails, etc, but I feel helpless.

Then I see the "Moms Demand" group is having their week of action and holding meetings with state officials etc.

I honestly wish there was more I could do -- but what?
You can't but we can. We have not organized amongst ourselves. I think men are not accustomed to being in groups that ask for something.

All those Bloomberg groups rely mainly on women, from 1st had experience from these hearings, can be emotional, cry, claim fear, etc. When we go and demand our rights be recognized the antis have a well funded out. But look at these helpless grandmother's.

Let me point out, there isn't a large number of Bloomberg bots. But enough to be affected and known to their reps. I'm in for anyone wanting to be in a Washington County group to meet with our reps.
 
My letter to Burdick:


Sen. Burdick,

Recognizing your sponsorship of this bill, I firmly expect my concerns to be dismissed. However, on this topic, as an independent voter in your district I am compelled to share my feelings and why I object to this bill. My objections are based on three core pillars:

Criminalization of law-abiding citizens – the definitions in SB554 are concerningly vague in that a legally carrying person acting in good faith may find themselves in violation of law and subject to extreme punishments. This arises directly from the modified definition of "public building."

A bill aimed at solving a non-existent problem – people who concealed-carry do so in order to remove attention from themselves. This is in stark contract to those who exercise open carry. Concealed carry people wish to avoid being targeted or observed, only maintaining their right of self-defense. In scanning the criminal records over the past five years, I've found ZERO cases of a concealed carry-licensed individual charged with brandishing or threatening. And why? Because people never knew they were there, and as law-abiding citizens they don't act in such a manner.

Increases threat to personal safety – if a concealed-carry person has business on public, taxpayer-funded grounds (of which they are a part of that funding group,) then they are forced to travel unarmed and at risk, or secure their firearms in a vehicle – a vehicle which is mobile and, in Oregon, a higher than average risk for theft. National data has Oregon as one of the highest states for vehicle prowl/vehicle theft.

I'm not establishing the obvious challenge of police response/police coverage in today's world. To deny that police coverage and response is struggling in today's world is disingenuous at best, and would be maliciously deceitful at worst.

This bill doesn't read as a public safety bill – it reads as a partisan anti-gun bill. This is highly disappointing.

I recognize that this is your last term as Senator, so maybe that's the point. I think you've done some genuinely good things for Oregonians in your role. I would be disappointed if you choose to taint your legacy by forcing many Oregonians to be less safe based on party politics.



Cordially,
(I'm in her district)
 
My letter to Burdick:


Sen. Burdick,

Recognizing your sponsorship of this bill, I firmly expect my concerns to be dismissed. However, on this topic, as an independent voter in your district I am compelled to share my feelings and why I object to this bill. My objections are based on three core pillars:

Criminalization of law-abiding citizens – the definitions in SB554 are concerningly vague in that a legally carrying person acting in good faith may find themselves in violation of law and subject to extreme punishments. This arises directly from the modified definition of "public building."

A bill aimed at solving a non-existent problem – people who concealed-carry do so in order to remove attention from themselves. This is in stark contract to those who exercise open carry. Concealed carry people wish to avoid being targeted or observed, only maintaining their right of self-defense. In scanning the criminal records over the past five years, I've found ZERO cases of a concealed carry-licensed individual charged with brandishing or threatening. And why? Because people never knew they were there, and as law-abiding citizens they don't act in such a manner.

Increases threat to personal safety – if a concealed-carry person has business on public, taxpayer-funded grounds (of which they are a part of that funding group,) then they are forced to travel unarmed and at risk, or secure their firearms in a vehicle – a vehicle which is mobile and, in Oregon, a higher than average risk for theft. National data has Oregon as one of the highest states for vehicle prowl/vehicle theft.

I'm not establishing the obvious challenge of police response/police coverage in today's world. To deny that police coverage and response is struggling in today's world is disingenuous at best, and would be maliciously deceitful at worst.

This bill doesn't read as a public safety bill – it reads as a partisan anti-gun bill. This is highly disappointing.

I recognize that this is your last term as Senator, so maybe that's the point. I think you've done some genuinely good things for Oregonians in your role. I would be disappointed if you choose to taint your legacy by forcing many Oregonians to be less safe based on party politics.



Cordially,
(I'm in her district)

Great letter.

I've found that the feeling I get after writing the so-call "Representatives" to be very unpleasant. I KNOW we need to keep writing though. Getting the response from earl blumenauer when he basically told me I don't understand. Read: "I don't give a crap what YOU think. I'm the boss and much smarter than you. Now just go away and let me take care of business" sure leaves an empty feeling inside. Kind of like being put on hold for 5 minutes on a Wed afternoon when you call 911 because a guy is beating on his girl friend in front of your house. I didn't even receive replies from my reps, michael dembrow or barbara smith warner, or ron wyden (in New York). But boy-howdy! I get emails every day from from jeff merkley! No mention of the three emails I sent him though. HIS latest email is that I'm ingesting plastic! And people of color ingest more plastic than me.
representative my bubblegum.
 


Scenario: You have a Concealed Handgun License in Oregon. You have no criminal record. You're an average person going about your day. Let's say one of your parents is having health issues, so you travel across the state to help them out for a few days. You're bringing groceries back to them. Then a cop pulls up behind you and turns his rack lights on. You have a tail light out. While running your plates the cop discovers you have a CHL and he asks if you're carrying. You say yes, because you're a licensed CHL holder and you've never had any trouble with the law. Unbeknownst to you, there is a school the next block over that you never noticed because you don't travel from that direction to get to your parents' home. Also unbeknownst to you, the city government has passed an ordinance that bans CHL holders from being "adjacent" to any school grounds.

All of a sudden you become a felon.
 
Oregon GOP is dead. Now the six that refused to walk out can sit around with their thumbs up their asses thinking they are smart and that maybe the Leftists in control will let them play ball.
 
I wrote my Rep, got a canned Thank You response which indicated that it was a robo-answer and not a composed reply (Not that I expected one).

Most of my reply to THAT message would just get me banned.
 
My letter to Burdick:


Sen. Burdick,

Recognizing your sponsorship of this bill, I firmly expect my concerns to be dismissed. However, on this topic, as an independent voter in your district I am compelled to share my feelings and why I object to this bill. My objections are based on three core pillars:

Criminalization of law-abiding citizens – the definitions in SB554 are concerningly vague in that a legally carrying person acting in good faith may find themselves in violation of law and subject to extreme punishments. This arises directly from the modified definition of "public building."

A bill aimed at solving a non-existent problem – people who concealed-carry do so in order to remove attention from themselves. This is in stark contract to those who exercise open carry. Concealed carry people wish to avoid being targeted or observed, only maintaining their right of self-defense. In scanning the criminal records over the past five years, I've found ZERO cases of a concealed carry-licensed individual charged with brandishing or threatening. And why? Because people never knew they were there, and as law-abiding citizens they don't act in such a manner.

Increases threat to personal safety – if a concealed-carry person has business on public, taxpayer-funded grounds (of which they are a part of that funding group,) then they are forced to travel unarmed and at risk, or secure their firearms in a vehicle – a vehicle which is mobile and, in Oregon, a higher than average risk for theft. National data has Oregon as one of the highest states for vehicle prowl/vehicle theft.

I'm not establishing the obvious challenge of police response/police coverage in today's world. To deny that police coverage and response is struggling in today's world is disingenuous at best, and would be maliciously deceitful at worst.

This bill doesn't read as a public safety bill – it reads as a partisan anti-gun bill. This is highly disappointing.

I recognize that this is your last term as Senator, so maybe that's the point. I think you've done some genuinely good things for Oregonians in your role. I would be disappointed if you choose to taint your legacy by forcing many Oregonians to be less safe based on party politics.



Cordially,
(I'm in her district)

Well done.

I like the Bare Naked Ladies theme, too!
 
I sent a mail to the Gang of Six:



State Senators on the To:

Based on the extreme polarization of Oregon politics, those of us who sit in the middle often find ourselves looking to the Republican party representatives to fight for individual freedoms and rights. Especially in a state where the minority party is shut out of the regressive politics of large urban centers, the purple and red sections look for champions. People to stand up to media narrative and infringements on law-abiding citizens. People who - understanding that sometimes a government that passes no legislation is better than one that passes bad legislation, especially when the majority party does not negotiate in good faith with the minority party to find acceptable compromise. People to walk out and avoid bad legislation.

We have been thoroughly disappointed.

Only you can know if it was harboring ill will to rights of citizens, politically hedging to protect seats, or just simple cowardice. Maybe a slice of all three. If the argument was to stay to ensure a political discussion, then you know that's hollow given Oregon's political landscape. It would at best be naïve, at most a self-serving untruth. Ultimately the person staring back in the mirror every morning can truly come to grips with the answer on that.

Regarding your commitment to protecting your constituents against the poorly defined SB554 and the criminalization of normally-legal action, all six of you failed us as thoroughly as could be.
 
Canned response from Lynn Findley. Thank God the good Senator stayed at the Capitol and protected our interests by voting 'no' which was, in reality, a 'yes' vote.

Thankfully, my Senator had the guts to walk.
-------------------------------------------

Thank you for taking the time to passionately share your position with me today, and it's a privilege to represent you in the legislature.

You and I agree. Our constitutional rights are under significant attack in the legislature where the supermajority's partisan political agenda has been placed above the rights of Oregonians.

Let me make it clear: I am a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment and the rights therein, am a CHL holder, and I am wholeheartedly opposed to SB 554—there is no question about that. This is a terrible bill with atrocious consequences for Oregonians.

I've stood up against this bill in every possible and practical way by speaking against it on the Senate floor, introducing amendments, opposing it on the floor by voting NO on SB554, and I will continue to fight the supermajority's agenda to take away our rights.

I spoke against SB554 in my recent town hall.

Take three minutes to watch and listen to my statements in opposition to SB 554

Republicans proposed common-sense, data-driven approaches that would protect Oregonians' constitutional rights and enhance public safety. It is unbelievable that Democrats weren't interested in the facts and instead, are clearly determined to pursue a political agenda at the expense of our rights. The data we have make it clear that CHL holders are some of the most law-abiding citizens in our state. This bill will simply single them out at no benefit to public safety.

I've never run from a fight before, and I won't run from this one.

As your senator, I took an oath to protect the US and Oregon Constitutions and to represent my constituents to the best of my ability. In addition to protecting our 2nd amendment rights, there are serious priorities that need to be addressed in our state. We need to get our small businesses back open, get Oregonians back to work, make up lost time for our students who's suffered under school closures, stop the millions of dollars in tax increases coming our way, protect agriculture from further attacks, and more.

I cannot neglect the need to fight these fights too. Walking out for the duration of session wouldn't be practical, realistic, or wise. Over 140,000 Oregonians are counting on me to show up for all the issues in Salem and that's what I have sworn to do.

My job is to stand up and be your voice in the Legislature—to introduce and try to pass good legislation, to voice opposition and vote against harmful bills, and to make sure that you have a legislator you can trust to fight for the issues that matter to you. I am doing so and will continue to do so every day that I have the honor of serving Senate District 30.

There are a lot of tough pieces of legislation headed our way and I can only suspect the environment in the Capitol will become even more hostile. That's why it's more important than ever that you continue to engage with me and let me know where you stand because we have to work together, not against each other, if we are going to see light at the end of this difficult time.

Thank you,
Lynn Findley
Senate District 30
 
Anyone who didn't see this coming needs to pull their head out. I am pissed and I am just as pissed at some of my fellow gun owners as I am at the ruling party in Salem. Sometimes it is better to lay low than make a show. Instead what we have had lately is a bunch of over weight and under trained clowns lugging their bubblegumty AR15s to Salem shouting "Molon Labe" because Obama and 'Merica. This did zero good for the cause. If those knuckle heads wanted to do something, perhaps bringing a signand a microphone to a rally instead of waving a black rifle, an email to a representative or a letter to the editor would've been much more effective than prancing around the capitol waving a confederate flag and shouting "muh rights". All these antics did was showcase the fact that Oregon is an open carry state and that carrying on public grounds is, for now, legal. I am willing to wager that most of the bubblegums in Salem knew little of the laws and may have even ignored going after carry laws, if a bunch of gun owners would have acted just a tad more civil. Nope. They had to put on a show, draw attention to themselves, scare the pansy protected class in office and now we are all paying the price.
 
Anyone who didn't see this coming needs to pull their head out. I am pissed and I am just as pissed at some of my fellow gun owners as I am at the ruling party in Salem. Sometimes it is better to lay low than make a show. Instead what we have had lately is a bunch of over weight and under trained clowns lugging their bubblegumty AR15s to Salem shouting "Molon Labe" because Obama and 'Merica. This did zero good for the cause. If those knuckle heads wanted to do something, perhaps bringing a signand a microphone to a rally instead of waving a black rifle, an email to a representative or a letter to the editor would've been much more effective than prancing around the capitol waving a confederate flag and shouting "muh rights". All these antics did was showcase the fact that Oregon is an open carry state and that carrying on public grounds is, for now, legal. I am willing to wager that most of the bubblegums in Salem knew little of the laws and may have even ignored going after carry laws, if a bunch of gun owners would have acted just a tad more civil. Nope. They had to put on a show, draw attention to themselves, scare the pansy protected class in office and now we are all paying the price.
I've also tried to have this conversation with people. All I get is "ITS MY RIGHT!" I just sadly shake my head. I understand it our right but actions have consequences. This is how I see the majority of open carry and all these protests. It's a statement. A statement that hurts the overall cause. We have to partially blame ourselves for the aftermath. I know this will ruffle feathers but it's just my opinion. We will eventually all be criminals. I'd much rather go unnoticed. Especially with the way politics and the view on firearms is currently directed.
 
Because we, as a group, aren't going to get involved with this or any other infringement from progressive liberals, many here vote for them!!!:mad:
they voted for gun control, until their cities were on fire. then they rushed to the gun counters for self protection. but alas, they got home with an empty new gun and a roll of
buttwipe. so they will vote the same.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top