SB 941 Now in House Committee

[tiggers97]

Media outlets! Yes. Well written letters that are readable and targeted at the general public (ie simple, direct, avoid name calling and avoid arguments that diminishes the message) I think are the next steps for activists to take.

 

[Asp]

Sent this to several media outlets and state legislators today:

Except for the bit of Shakespeare taken out of context, I'm good with it.

It occurs around 1:14, but please, for culture watch the whole thing.
It is the best film version of Hamlet you can get.

Unless the author of the text you quoted is implying these people of murdering the constitution of Oregon and under false pretenses marrying its people, then I suppose it is fair. As we are children of Oregon, should we love it so.

Yet if we assume the politicians do not want to love our State, which is the founder of our character or challenger for growth - perchance for some - then we can assume the politicians are akin to Claudius.

But if, but if, that quote is taken out of context, unless you SBR it for the natural human rights purposes of the arms and freedom movement (i.e. we give up or act upon these people*), it seems inappropriate.

*Don't ask me how. I know nothing better than to laugh and smile.

 

[diagoras]

As OFF points out in their alert, the focus now has to be on the Communist oops excuse me DemonRat legislators.

We need 5 or 6 of them, I think, to vote with the Republicans to defeat this.

Yes, it's going to be difficult, but I can equally guarantee you that if they knew for certain that they would be recalled or defeated at the next election, and particularly if the Communist Party itself knew that it would lose control of one or both houses as a result, they'd find a way to derail the bill on some pretext (and there are plenty of real *reasons*, not just pretexts, as we well know).

So the next task is to convince them of that - and right now they are completely smug, arrogant, and certain of themselves, which is why they are just going through the motions, pretending to listen to their constituents when in fact their little commie minds are already made up. We will have to seriously shake their confidence in order to change that.

I don't like making threats that may not be carried out, so I wouldn't just threaten a recall, but what I would suggest is calling any 'Rat legislators who may even possibly be vulnerable in a recall and telling them that if they vote for this abomination, in the event that a recall is in fact organized against them you plan to use every means available to you to support it.

The 'Rats are damn well aware of what happened in Colorado, but we still haven't captured enough seats there to get the legislation overturned, and they know that too - and they're still convinced that the "bitter clingers" will eventually just go back to grousing in their trailer parks. (The contempt that these nattily attired urbanite legislators have for us is just infinite - trust me on that. As far as they're concerned, we're little better than animals.)

It would be helpful if we could come up with a list of Communists whom we think are "vulnerable" (which is exactly what Bloombugger did, on the other side, before he started his buy-off campaign), and publicize it.

But idle threats are worse than none at all, and it is best to strike without warning.

 

[Liberty97045]

I just got a call back from representative Bill Kennimer on SB941. It is going to the house floor next week and is likely to have the emergency clause in it. His guess is Thursday or Friday for a vote. He says it is likely to pass.

He also said that Brent Barton (Oregon City) or Brad Witt (scappose) might vote against.

Keep the pressure up!

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

Vids of "The Show" are starting to get posted on youtube.

 

[WinterBaer45]

I Wrote Brent Barton a letter begging for a NO vote, I live in Oregon City so he better listen!

 

[etrain16]

I Wrote Brent Barton a letter begging for a NO vote, I live in Oregon City so he better listen!

I'm in his district and have been writing him as well.

 

[ob1]

I have received a comment on my post earlier regarding GUNARCHER'S comment about contacting his representative. Let me just say that I totally support his effort and that I was referring to the problem of negotiating with someone who has already made up their mind (reference to certain representatives as Nazi's not withstanding)

As such...I shot one off to my district grupenfuehrer:
To
[email protected]
Today at 6:16 PM
Oregon Representative Rob Nosse, District 42:

I will preface this message by letting you know that I am long time District 42 voter. This marks the first time in over thirty years as such that I have ever contacted an elected official regarding an upcoming vote on a bill.

I wish to express my extreme objection to the passage of SB 941. After reading the draft of this bill, it has become obvious to me that it has little or nothing to do with crime control or public safety. It is indeed a thinly veiled attack on private firearms possession, as provided for in the Constitution. It will not deter crime, but would impose inappropriate burden on law abiding gun owners such as my self from practicing their rights as citizens.
The main rallying standard of this bill, background checks, have been available to anyone free of charge, for over fifteen years. Yet those who have no legal impediments to gun ownership, including those who have voluntarily gone to the expense of obtaining the Oregon State carry permit (including criminal background checks) will now be told to undergo yet another expense for the simple act of buying or selling to a private party. Foul !

I will concede to one positive aspect of this bill:

Before this, I could not even name you or my state Senator. I can assure you that I will remember who you are now. My wife and fellow District 42 voters will all remember, should you choose to support this ill-conceived venture in legislative arrogance. I will register my displeasure of such with the physical and financial assets at my disposal at re-election time.

With increasing vigilance,
(Ob1)

 

[Jim Colvill]

Since sending my last e-mail to EVERY member of both houses I have received only one reply, and not from my district rep, It comes from Mike Nearman, (R) District 23:

Thanks James,
You can be assured that as a CHL holder, a hunter and a supporter of the 2nd amendment, I will not be voting for such a bill.
Keep the pressure on. We're going to need all the help we can get this session.
--Mike

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

This one includes the testimony I gave. By the time I testified I was irritated enough that I tossed out everything I rehearsed on the way down and did this instead. In the end I am glad I did.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Except for the bit of Shakespeare taken out of context, I'm good with it.

It occurs around 1:14, but please, for culture watch the whole thing.
It is the best film version of Hamlet you can get.

Unless the author of the text you quoted is implying these people of murdering the constitution of Oregon and under false pretenses marrying its people, then I suppose it is fair. As we are children of Oregon, should we love it so.

Yet if we assume the politicians do not want to love our State, which is the founder of our character or challenger for growth - perchance for some - then we can assume the politicians are akin to Claudius.

But if, but if, that quote is taken out of context, unless you SBR it for the natural human rights purposes of the arms and freedom movement (i.e. we give up or act upon these people*), it seems inappropriate.

*Don't ask me how. I know nothing better than to laugh and smile.

Not to split hairs, but as Hamlet is contemplating the benefits of suicide in his famous speech, he likens death to sleep, and we all know that sleep includes dreams. What dreams might come? "Aye, there's the rub." They might be eternal nightmares.

The anti-gunners don't want a reasonable plan that identifies prohibited people without identifying the firearms involved. That would be their worst nightmare.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

What Manuel Martinez would have said if he had more than 2 minutes this last time. Chokes me up every time I see it.

 

[Solved]

I'm feeling pretty helpless in rep district 11. Rep. Barnhart has no reason to listen since he has run unopposed for awhile. I've sent him a few letters, but I don't imagine it will have any impact.
I'm studying at the U of O right now and I don't have a lot of money or time, but I'll try to donate to the recalls.

 

[Mikej]

Media outlets! Yes. Well written letters that are readable and targeted at the general public (ie simple, direct, avoid name calling and avoid arguments that diminishes the message) I think are the next steps for activists to take.

Here's what I jut sent. I AM NOT A LETTER WRITER! So if it sucks......

Dear Representatives...

I'm another one on the NO ON SB 941 train. As I'm perusing northwestfirearms.com reading and listening to youtube testimony given at the capitol on Thursday it comes to my mind that you do not really advocate for the people of Oregon.

How you could sit and listen to a county sheriff, with years of experience dealing with bad guys, and not get the idea that the law you plan on passing is not going to help the situation is beyond MY comprehension. The criminals will ignore the new law, as they ignore other laws.

How you could sit and listen to people that were brought in, and possibly paid, from out of state talking about things that have happened in their lives, and give credence to their stories while knowing full well SB 941 would NOT have help their situations, is beyond MY comprehension.

The statement made by Floyd Prozanski on the Lars Larson show last Monday stating that there were 180 denials to buy fire arms in Oregon every month is misleading at the least, and could be considered an outright lie. There are denials AND "Delays". Delays and denials are almost always turned to legal purchases becuse of glitches in the system. A prohibited person KNOWS they're not allowed to purchase. Does commons sense really allow you to believe a prohibited persons try to sneak by to the tune of 100+ every month in Oregon? I can't/won't believe that.

To finish......Having my notes completely ignored by the Democratic representatives tells me the Democrats are going to do what they want, even if it's unfair laws passed that will only affect a minority, "Law Abiding Gun Owners". A complete failure to listen, or discuss any reasonable amendments, tells me that the Democrat representatives will receive no further support from this Oregonian.

 

[Dave Workman]

Are Democrats dangerously delusional about background checks?

A comment the other day by Oregon Rep. Dan Rayfield (D-Corvallis) reported by the Albany Democrat Herald Thursday seems to sum up what many in the Second Amendment community have decided is a dangerously delusional attitude about a proposed "universal background check" bill now headed to the full House in Salem.


<broken link removed>

 

[clash]

The irony is almost every post in the classified section here asks for CHL, CCL, or we go through a background check. So how many here are truly against this? Isn't a CHL more stringent than a background check for a private sale?

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

The irony is almost every post in the classified section here asks for CHL, CCL, or we go through a background check. So how many here are truly against this? Isn't a CHL more stringent than a background check for a private sale?

Throwing in transfers even temporary transfers is the most difficult to swallow portion of this. Also let it be the sellers responsibility to not sell to sketchy people. The means exist now to check things out.
Everyone knows this is a big step towards registration. I am Truly against that.

 

[Jim Colvill]

I received this reply from Duane Stark (again, no word from my own reps):

James,

It appears that Senate Bill 941, the measure to expand background checks through the Oregon State Police for firearms purchases, will be up for a vote on the House Floor next week and sadly, I'm afraid it will probably be approved. Rest assured I will be a strong NO vote.

From all the testimony I've seen I have yet to hear any research showing that this kind of law will reduce gun related crimes. In my estimation, SB 941 might potentially create more victims by making it more difficult for Oregonians to acquire weapons to defend themselves against violent criminals.

I really appreciate all the people who are standing up for our second amendment rights and speaking out against SB 941. My office has received dozens of phone calls and thousands of emails in recent weeks from citizens all over the state opposed to SB 941.

Thank you,

Duane Stark
State Representative
House District 4
900 Court Street NE
Salem, OR 97301

503.986.1404
www.oregonlegislature.gov/stark

[email protected]

 

[B5Ben]

I received this reply from Duane Stark (again, no word from my own reps):

James,

It appears that Senate Bill 941, the measure to expand background checks through the Oregon State Police for firearms purchases, will be up for a vote on the House Floor next week and sadly, I'm afraid it will probably be approved. Rest assured I will be a strong NO vote.

From all the testimony I've seen I have yet to hear any research showing that this kind of law will reduce gun related crimes. In my estimation, SB 941 might potentially create more victims by making it more difficult for Oregonians to acquire weapons to defend themselves against violent criminals.

I really appreciate all the people who are standing up for our second amendment rights and speaking out against SB 941. My office has received dozens of phone calls and thousands of emails in recent weeks from citizens all over the state opposed to SB 941.

Thank you,

Duane Stark
State Representative
House District 4
900 Court Street NE
Salem, OR 97301

503.986.1404
www.oregonlegislature.gov/stark

[email protected]

I just got the exact same letter from Rep. Stark and he isn't my Rep either.