SB 941 Now in House Committee

[tkdguy]

I tried visiting Brent Barton in person a while back. He was not in, or that's what he told the dweeb at the outside desk to say. Anyway, I went thru my presentation with the dweeb, asking that he share my message with the Representative. The dweeb was already on the anti-page, and just plain didn't want to listen to me. Not only will I continue to not vote for Brent Barton, I will actively work against his campaign.

WAYNO.

I do not know if these reps remember the Democrat Gun Crime bill of 1994 which caused Billy and the Dems to loose the House and Senate. Maybe they should be reminded of the damage they did to their own party when 1994 landslide victory came to the republicans.

 

[ob1]

Well...I've had enough for a while. I gotta leave this for a while before dinner comes back up.

Remember guys...it's still not too late for that picket protest in front of the Gov's house in SE PDX...I think it could generate some baaad news coverage for those who are "just trying help".....

But it can't be done alone................

 

[tkdguy]

What were you thinking of? tkdguy

 

[tiggers97]

Not that I anticipated much more more than this canned response from my District representative, Rob Nosse...here it is:

Thanks so much for writing to me. I know this is an important issue with passionate advocates on both sides, and I spent a lot of time on it before making a decision.
.....
In states with background checks on all handgun sales, 48% fewer law enforcement officers are killed with handguns in the line of duty."
.....
Secondly, as I researched the issue it appears that it is growing. In under 2 years, the online market of guns available without a background check grew almost sevenfold. Additionally, a national investigation from 2013 indicated that 1/30 of those using this market had prohibiting criminal records which would prohibit them from owning a gun. Nearby, in Washington state, an investigation showed nearly 1 in 10 people who have want-to-buy ads on the site Armslist have criminal records which would prohibit them from having a firearm.

Let's see if I can help with a couple items here:
In Oregon, there are 49% fewer officers killed by guns than in states with background states. This is per <broken link removed> Look at the "states with background checks" on page 1 (35.4), and then Oregons on the 2nd page (17.9). In fact, there are about 9 states safer without background checks.

In fact, Oregon is ranked (2013, CDC gun-homicide numbers) at 11th safest state in the union. Of the 15 safest states for gun-homicide, 11 are states without expanded background checks. Oh, and Oregon has 62% fewer gun-homicides than "states with background checks (rates of 1.4 vs 3.7).

As for the second reason: I can at least speak to Oregon's own 'study' by Everytown. From the descriptions they gave for their gun adds, it was for low end hand-guns (Hi-Point) at very discounted prices. One thing I noticed was that they also didn't give any images for any of their ads. Probably because in Vermont, where they tried to pull the same stunt, they have been sued for libel. In other words, they target their ads to try and find criminals using firearms NOT representative of the websites. It would be like if I wanted to perform a study of how many red-heads there are in Portland, and choose to conduct my study at the most authentic Irish pub. There I count 1 out of 18 individuals with red-hair. And then extrapolate that to the entire city of Portland. Except in Everytowns study, they basically are making the claim that 1 in 18 gun buyers (like you and me) are meth-heads.

There is also shady things with the "81% of people want background checks", like using polling places that survey 8 democrats to 5 republicans, as was observed in this poll about... repealing the "background check" for handgun purchases in Iowa. (One of the states that makes up Bloombergs "states with background checks for all handgun sales")

Edit: Here's some more from my testimony. Notice the Brady campaign scores. They give letter grades based on the number of gun laws, not on if the gun laws are effective or not. Also notice that the highest ranked states also have the lowest gun-ownership rates. Not that it makes any difference with the overall homicide rates (Hawaii is over 50% more violent then Oregon!)

 

[Buster1]

If they believed the 80% approval BS, it wouldn't be pushed through with an "emergency" clause.

 

[Skier]

I think one way that we might be able to defeat them on all this gun control stuff would be to share these links with them, so they get all hyped up and concerned about DHMO, a much more dangerous problem than guns will ever be... (Keeping in mind that about 99.5% of all homes in the US have direct and easy access to DHMO. This is just crazy!!!)

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html
http://www.dhmo.org/msdsdhmo.html

Scary stuff... Should keep them busy for a while. ;-)

 

[tkdguy]

Let's see if I can help with a couple items here:
In Oregon, there are 49% fewer officers killed by guns than in states with background states. This is per <broken link removed> Look at the "states with background checks" on page 1 (35.4), and then Oregons on the 2nd page (17.9). In fact, there are about 9 states safer without background checks.

In fact, Oregon is ranked (2013, CDC gun-homicide numbers) at 11th safest state in the union. Of the 15 safest states for gun-homicide, 11 are states without expanded background checks. Oh, and Oregon has 62% fewer gun-homicides than "states with background checks (rates of 1.4 vs 3.7).

As for the second reason: I can at least speak to Oregon's own 'study' by Everytown. From the descriptions they gave for their gun adds, it was for low end hand-guns (Hi-Point) at very discounted prices. One thing I noticed was that they also didn't give any images for any of their ads. Probably because in Vermont, where they tried to pull the same stunt, they have been sued for libel. In other words, they target their ads to try and find criminals using firearms NOT representative of the websites. It would be like if I wanted to perform a study of how many red-heads there are in Portland, and choose to conduct my study at the most authentic Irish pub. There I count 1 out of 18 individuals with red-hair. And then extrapolate that to the entire city of Portland. Except in Everytowns study, they basically are making the claim that 1 in 18 gun buyers (like you and me) are meth-heads.

There is also shady things with the "81% of people want background checks", like using polling places that survey 8 democrats to 5 republicans, as was observed in this poll about... repealing the "background check" for handgun purchases in Iowa. (One of the states that makes up Bloombergs "states with background checks for all handgun sales")

Edit: Here's some more from my testimony. Notice the Brady campaign scores. They give letter grades based on the number of gun laws, not on if the gun laws are effective or not. Also notice that the highest ranked states also have the lowest gun-ownership rates. Not that it makes any difference with the overall homicide rates (Hawaii is over 50% more violent then Oregon!)

THIS IS GREAT STUFF BUT CAN YOU GET IT INTO THE NEWSPAPERS; GUEST EDITORIAL OR WHAT EVER? MAYBE OFF HAS AN IDEA? WHAT ABOUT "WALLAMETTE WEEK" ?????

HOW ARE THESE FAT CATS GETTING MONEY OFF OF THIS ?

 

[Pittsmaster]

All you need to know so far....

 

[tiggers97]

Yes, I think that is the next step: stop writing emails and researching, and get more public education thru local papers.

In the mean time, here's a screenshot of something I came up with. I'd attach the Word DOC, but the upload isn't allowing me (images only?)

Edit: Grammatical correction made and re-posted image

 

[Jim Colvill]

I would clean up the spelling, such as "You're" rather than "your" in the heading. After all, there is a big difference between "knowing your $h*t" and "knowing you're $h*t"

 

[Koda]

Please read OFFs latest publication and take action...
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact...5b546&ch=95933f70-7dd8-11e3-8fe3-d4ae5275b546


Basically our email and phone campaign is having an effect. Please double down with another round.

I live in a pro gun district so I cant start a recall or sign any but what we need right now is at least one more recall initiative started....

 

[etrain16]

Please read OFFs latest publication and take action...
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact...5b546&ch=95933f70-7dd8-11e3-8fe3-d4ae5275b546


Basically our email and phone campaign is having an effect. Please double down with another round.

I live in a pro gun district so I cant start a recall or sign any but what we need right now is at least one more recall initiative started....

I believe there is a possibility of one being started in Clackamas County by a member here. I can't speak for him, but he did sound pretty serious, though I don't think it would happen until after the vote.

 

[Koda]

I believe there is a possibility of one being started in Clackamas County by a member here. I can't speak for him, but he did sound pretty serious, though I don't think it would happen until after the vote.

I hope so, lets give anyone who starts a recall support. I dont think it matters if the recall would be effective until after but they are seeing the message.

 

[taylor]

When is the vote?

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

Oregon's Only No Compromise Gun Rights Organization
.
04.29.15

The Capitol rumor mill is in overdrive, and while it's true that Salem is the place where truth goes to take a vacation, one thing is certain, the fight to stop universal gun owner registration is far from over.

As we told you, it looked like SB 941, the gun owner harassment act of 2015, might be on the House Floor as early as today. While things can change at lightning speed when gun grabbers want to bend the rules, as of right this minute the bill is not even scheduled for a "Second Reading" which usually happens the day before it's voted on. What does this mean for us?

It can only mean one thing. They don't yet have the votes to ram it through. As you know, this bill has been fast tracked from the beginning. Bypassing all normal scheduling, the anti-rights zealots have done all they can to race this bill forward. Now it looks like it might be as late as Monday before it is voted on. It could even be later.
This means that your tireless efforts are having an effect and some Democrats are having second thoughts about their career futures should they vote for this deranged attack on your rights.

To be sure, there are plenty who continue to parrot the mindless lies about "dangerous loopholes" and "internet gun trafficking" even when they know what they are saying is false. Michael Bloomberg continues to throw vast amounts of money on a media onslaught against liberty, but... if <broken link removed> had this nailed down, they would have voted on it already.

That's why now is the time to turn up the heat. If you've been working hard at contacting legislators, we are going to ask you to do it again. If you've never made your voice heard, now is the time to do it.

As we told you on Monday, there are a handful of Democrats who we think need to hear from you now.

We've listed them below but want to add one more to our previous list. Please also contact Rep. Paul Evans. His phone number is 503-986-1420, email [email protected]

Evans is no friend of gun owners. His rant in the hard left blog "Blue Oregon" shows just how extreme he is. In it, he calls for registration of "automatic weapons," (which he defines as "hand guns as well as rifles,") with the county sheriffs.

Aside from how much he demonstrates his ignorance of firearms and current law, he also calls for amending the US Constitution to redefine the Second Amendment. However, we have reason to believe Evans would like to portray himself as pro-gun. So he's wavering. Please contact Evans, and the legislators below, with a message that your rights are not negotiable. Sample text follows after the contact info for the other House Reps who need to hear from you.

Rep Brent Barton 503-986-1440 [email protected]

Rep Deborah Boone 503-986-1432 [email protected]

Rep Brian Clem 503-986-1421 [EMAIL][email protected][/EMAIL]
[EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]']Rep Betty Komp 503-986-1422 [EMAIL][email protected][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL]
[EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][EMAIL='[email protected]'][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL][/EMAIL]



View attachment 235859

 

[U201491]

JUST OUT FROM OFF


http://www.oregonfirearms.org/your-rights-are-not-a-loophole

NOW is the time to turn up the heat. If you've been working hard at contacting legislators, we are going to ask you to do it again. If you've never made your voice heard, now is the time to do it.

---------------------------------------------------

04.29.15

The Capitol rumor mill is in overdrive, and while it's true that Salem is the place where truth goes to take a vacation, one thing is certain, the fight to stop universal gun owner registration is far from over.

As we told you, it looked like SB 941, the gun owner harassment act of 2015, might be on the House Floor as early as today. While things can change at lightning speed when gun grabbers want to bend the rules, as of right this minute the bill is not even scheduled for a "Second Reading" which usually happens the day before it's voted on. What does this mean for us?

It can only mean one thing. They don't yet have the votes to ram it through. As you know, this bill has been fast tracked from the beginning. Bypassing all normal scheduling, the anti-rights zealots have done all they can to race this bill forward. Now it looks like it might be as late as Monday before it is voted on. It could even be later.

This means that your tireless efforts are having an effect and some Democrats are having second thoughts about their career futures should they vote for this deranged attack on your rights.

To be sure, there are plenty who continue to parrot the mindless lies about "dangerous loopholes" and "internet gun trafficking" even when they know what they are saying is false. Michael Bloomberg continues to throw vast amounts of money on a media onslaught against liberty, but… if Val Hoyle had this nailed down, they would have voted on it already.

That's why now is the time to turn up the heat. If you've been working hard at contacting legislators, we are going to ask you to do it again. If you've never made your voice heard, now is the time to do it.

As we told you on Monday, there are a handful of Democrats who we think need to hear from you now.

We've listed them below but want to add one more to our previous list. Please also contact Rep. Paul Evans. His phone number is 503-986-1420, email [email protected]

Evans is no friend of gun owners. His rant in the hard left blog "Blue Oregon" shows just how extreme he is. In it, he calls for registration of "automatic weapons," (which he defines as "hand guns as well as rifles,") with the county sheriffs.

Aside from how much he demonstrates his ignorance of firearms and current law, he also calls for amending the US Constitution to redefine the Second Amendment. However, we have reason to believe Evans would like to portray himself as pro-gun. So he's wavering. Please contact Evans, and the legislators below, with a message that your rights are not negotiable. Sample text follows after the contact info for the other House Reps who need to hear from you.

Rep Brent Barton 503-986-1440 [email protected]

Rep Deborah Boone 503-986-1432 [email protected]

Rep Brian Clem 503-986-1421 [email protected]

Rep Betty Komp 503-986-1422 [email protected]

Rep Caddy McKeown 503-986-1409 [email protected]

Rep Brad Witt 503- 986-1431 [email protected]

______________________________________________________

Dear Representative,

The supporters of SB 941 have made it clear that this bill will not stop criminals. In fact, the Oregon State Police report that they virtually never take action against prohibited people who try to buy guns. So who does this bill actually affect? People like me. People who obey the law. People who want to be able to safely store a firearm for a friend or neighbor. People who want to be able to protect someone whose life is in danger. People who vote.

I am outraged that the promoters of this attack on my rights continue to lie about this bill. They continue to parrot the disproven claims about how many people want to have their privacy invaded and their names put in a government data base. They continue to repeat the lies about "unregulated internet gun sales" and they continue to call my rights "a loophole." I am not a criminal and will not be treated like one.

My rights, my privacy and my property are not "loopholes." Vote no on SB 941.

Yours,

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

When is the vote?

Letter from my Rep today. If anyone has the time please send him a line against this Bill. He did say he was only "LIKELY" to vote for it. Press him on the lending aspects of the Bill.

xxxxxx,


Thanks for sharing your concerns and opinions on SB941. The bill is scheduled to be voted on in the House on Monday of next week. I do support universal background checks and will likely be voting in favor of this measure.


John


John Lively

State Representative

District 12

900 Court Street, #488

503-986-1412
Representative John LivelyDemocrat - 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

 

[Hayshaker]

Letter from my Rep today. If anyone has the time please send him a line against this Bill. He did say he was only "LIKELY" to vote for it. Press him on the lending aspects of the Bill.

xxxxxx,


Thanks for sharing your concerns and opinions on SB941. The bill is scheduled to be voted on in the House on Monday of next week. I do support universal background checks and will likely be voting in favor of this measure.


John


John Lively

State Representative

District 12

900 Court Street, #488

503-986-1412
View attachment 235862 Representative John LivelyDemocrat - 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

DONE !!!!

 

[ob1]

quote tigers97:
As for the second reason: I can at least speak to Oregon's own 'study' by Everytown. From the descriptions they gave for their gun adds, it was for low end hand-guns (Hi-Point) at very discounted prices. One thing I noticed was that they also didn't give any images for any of their ads. Probably because in Vermont, where they tried to pull the same stunt, they have been sued for libel. In other words, they target their ads to try and find criminals using firearms NOT representative of the websites. It would be like if I wanted to perform a study of how many red-heads there are in Portland, and choose to conduct my study at the most authentic Irish pub. There I count 1 out of 18 individuals with red-hair. And then extrapolate that to the entire city of Portland. Except in Everytowns study, they basically are making the claim that 1 in 18 gun buyers (like you and me) are meth-heads.

This is often referred to as using "salted" data, a common tactic of the left, ie..."Man made" global warming studies.

 

[tunus]

I called all of the numbers bellow. Rep Barton's minion nearly laughed at my arguments. You know the legislator is a piece of bubblegum when his staff behaves disrespectfully to his constituents. On the other extreme, the lady that picked up Rep Witt's phone was a pleasure to talk to. She was polite, heard my points and actually agreed with them. She also said Rep Witt is pushing for amendments to address some of them, specifically creating an exception for CHL holders. She also said they've been overwhelmed by calls on SB941. I asked her to tell me if they are in support or opposition, and she said roughly split in his district. She seemed to be particularly interested in the fact that I lived in his district and ensured to pass my concerns along.

Make sure to tell them you live in their districts. They seem to be getting a ton of calls from out of state and.

I urge everyone who reads this to call these numbers. It only takes a minute and you don't need to elaborate much. Just say I oppose SB941 and that's it.

Rep Brent Barton 503-986-1440 [email protected]

Rep Deborah Boone 503-986-1432 [email protected]

Rep Brian Clem 503-986-1421 [email protected]

Rep Betty Komp 503-986-1422 [email protected]

Rep Caddy McKeown 503-986-1409 [email protected]

Rep Brad Witt 503- 986-1431 [email protected]