Oregon SB 978 Place Holder Anti-Gun Bill

[BSG 75]

I totally get what you are saying, BUT...if you have a homemade firearm with no serial (you posses it) and you get stopped by law enforcement and they inspect the firearm and see it has no serial...what happens next?

If there is no evidence that a serial number has been altered, removed, or obliterated, nothing as of this moment. That might change in the future.

There is no current federal law requiring a home made firearm have a serial number.

Am I required to apply a serial number to a gun I manufacture?
Short Answer: No

Long Answer: My research indicates there is no federal law or regulation that requires a person to mark his or her personally manufactured firearm with a serial number or other information. I had this confirmed by the Firearms Industry Programs Branch of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE).

Read the original article here: Am I Required to Apply a Serial Number to a Homemade Firearm? .

There is no current Oregon law requiring a home made firearm have a serial number. That might change in the future. But getting back to your original claim, there is no Oregon law that states "an unserialized firearm is assumed to be having the serial removed, altered, or otherwise obstructed". That is flat out WRONG.

You can't be charged with altering, removing, or obliterating something that never existed.

Hypothetically if for some reason a police officer inspects a firearm made from an 80% lower you would explain it is home made and perfectly legal. As long as the firearm doesn't have commercial markings (Colt, Ruger, S&W, etc.) indicating it is not home made and it should have a serial number, there is no reason to suspect it had a serial number that was removed.

If you don't want to worry at all about ever having to explain to a police officer why your home made firearm has no serial number, don't mess around with home made receivers. If you decide to anyway then don't complain if you have some explaining to do.

But before you get farther out in the weeds, please stop telling people

oregon law states that an unserialized firearm is assumed to be having the serial removed, altered, or otherwise obstructed.

because that is flat out wrong.

 

[nammac]

Hopkins from the NRA-ILA seriously and succinctly addressed real issues with the bill, but she did not go after the really egregious pieces of it and concentrated more on general disapproval.

Starret came off as combative, mentioning the foster child deaths under Brown's watch, which we all abhor, but isn't to the point of this bill. Hurling insults and innuendo may raise funds from members and followers, but it doesn't persuade anybody of anything.

The NSSF rep talked about all the burdens being put on dealers and manufacturers by this bill, but that's peripheral to the main argument. It went pretty much down hill from there except for a few individuals who testified about the difficulties of CHL holders complying while carrying and the difficulties of responding to unfolding crime with guns that are locked up.

I expected better from the "invited" panel in opposition.

So I get what your saying about Kevin coming off as combative, but he was calling out the fact Oregon has more urgent and more severe problems to deal with, gun control isn't an issue in Oregon, we don't have the issues some states have. I kinda liked his redirect to the real problems Oregon has. Current leadership is guilty as charged.

But honestly, we need a core of well spoken speakers who can be available to testify, even if someone else is writing the remarks. We need to be polished, articulate and armed with facts. That's where the rubber will really meet the road, in my humble opinion.

The founding fathers gathered in the taverns to prepare for their eventual defense of this great nation, we might be wise to follow in their footsteps...

 

[Knebel]

If there is no evidence that a serial number has been altered, removed, or obliterated, nothing as of this moment. That might change in the future.

There is no current federal law requiring a home made firearm have a serial number.



There is no current Oregon law requiring a home made firearm have a serial number. That might change in the future. But getting back to your original claim, there is no Oregon law that states "an unserialized firearm is assumed to be having the serial removed, altered, or otherwise obstructed". That is flat out WRONG.

You can't be charged with altering, removing, or obliterating something that never existed.

Hypothetically if for some reason a police officer inspects a firearm made from an 80% lower you would explain it is home made and perfectly legal. As long as the firearm doesn't have commercial markings (Colt, Ruger, S&W, etc.) indicating it is not home made and it should have a serial number, there is no reason to suspect it had a serial number that was removed.

If you don't want to worry at all about ever having to explain to a police officer why your home made firearm has no serial number, don't mess around with home made receivers. If you decide to anyway then don't complain if you have some explaining to do.

But before you get farther out in the weeds, please stop telling people



because that flat out wrong.

Well, I stand corrected. I was aware that there was no Federal requirement but apperantly have misinterpreted Oregon law then. No reason to be hostile

 

[BSG 75]

No reason to be hostile

One of the worst things about online gun forums is how easy it is to spread misinformation about important topics like gun laws. We should all make sure we know what we are doing before squeezing the trigger (clicking Post Reply).

 

[tiggers97]

As of 04/02/2019, 9pm today there are:
538 submitted written testimony attachments for SB978.
I'm not counting, but I am guessing from past reviews that a conservative estimate would be that a minimum of 500+ are opposed.


Here is a list of the witness testimony that signed up. 188 opposed. 37 for. Many of those who gave verbal testimony did not submit written testimony.

Now this where it gets interesting. Prozanski ran the meeting in such a way that the majority of those in favor were allowed to speak.

Going back to the video (someone feel free to check my counting), he allowed 25 (27 called. Two didn't show) individuals to speak for the Pro side, and only 24 from the opposing. And then ended the meeting. There was some 1:30-2 hours more before the room was active again for the next hearing (HB2013)

So he allowed at least (27/37) 73% of the pro side speak. But only (24/188) 13% of the opposing side speak.

 

[nammac]

As of 04/02/2019, 9pm today there are:
538 submitted written testimony attachments for SB978.
I'm not counting, but I am guessing from past reviews that a conservative estimate would be that a minimum of 500+ are opposed.


Here is a list of the witness testimony that signed up. 188 opposed. 37 for. Many of those who gave verbal testimony did not submit written testimony.

Now this where it gets interesting. Prozanski ran the meeting in such a way that the majority of those in favor were allowed to speak.

Going back to the video (someone feel free to check my counting), he allowed 25 (27 called. Two didn't show) individuals to speak for the Pro side, and only 24 from the opposing. And then ended the meeting. There was some 1:30-2 hours more before the room was active again for the next hearing (HB2013)

So he allowed at least (27/37) 73% of the pro side speak. But only (24/188) 13% of the opposing side speak.

No surprise there, Prozanski is nothing more than a billionaires puppet...

I'm just hoping enough signatures were gathered at the rally to initiate a recall of Brown... Gotta start cleaning house somewhere...

 

[nwslopoke]

The forum Oregon uses is unfortunate. I would prefer the originators of these Bill had to do more of a Town Hall format and defend their Bills. Call this democracy at work or what ever, but having to basically plead to be heard is hard to argue that the people are in charge. However, since I started attending these things, I would say this is the strongest pro gun rights turnout I have witnesses. There has been a decent showing on local news but they focused on the NRA lady for the opposition response. There was much stronger representation the news could have shown.

 

[tiggers97]

The forum Oregon uses is unfortunate. I would prefer the originators of these Bill had to do more of a Town Hall format and defend their Bills. Call this democracy at work or what ever, but having to basically plead to be heard is hard to argue that the people are in charge. However, since I started attending these things, I would say this is the strongest pro gun rights turnout I have witnesses. There has been a decent showing on local news but they focused on the NRA lady for the opposition response. There was much stronger representation the news could have shown.

I wonder how we can 'drive' the news from our end to get our own message out? (note: Sign twirling is out for me)

 

[nwslopoke]

I wonder how we can 'drive' the news from our end to get our own message out? (note: Sign twirling is out for me)

There isn't a conservative media outlet in Oregon that I know of, maybe outside of Lars. Not saying he isn't conservative but I have never seen him maneuver himself in front of gun issues here, that I am aware of. Apologies if I am wrong. Local Fox news isn't bad but it also isn't any different than the other local news here.

On a national level I have heard a few liberal radio hosts asks questions from their left leaning guests and actually get a fact based answer. One was based on a Colorado sheriff refusal to comply with unconstitutional orders. Another was a push back from Trump/Russia. Just saying this is something new.

 

[Flymph]

There isn't a conservative media outlet in Oregon that I know of, maybe outside of Lars. Not saying he isn't conservative but I have never seen him maneuver himself in front of gun issues here, that I am aware of. Apologies if I am wrong. Local Fox news isn't bad but it also isn't any different than the other local news here.

On a national level I have heard a few liberal radio hosts asks questions from their left leaning guests and actually get a fact based answer. One was based on a Colorado sheriff refusal to comply with unconstitutional orders. Another was a push back from Trump/Russia. Just saying this is something new.

Somebody posted an interview Lars did with the chief petitioner for SB501, in which he made the guy look like a fool all while calling him an old friend.

Hopefully we can burn down this trojan horse at the gates!

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Senator Prozanski extended the time to submit written testimony to Thursday, April 4th at 5 p.m. Your email will be date stamped as it arrives but staff has told us you will only see the "date of the hearing" when you look at what has been posted.

Senate Judiciary email: [email protected]

 

[tiggers97]

Senator Prozanski extended the time to submit written testimony to Thursday, April 4th at 5 p.m. Your email will be date stamped as it arrives but staff has told us you will only see the "date of the hearing" when you look at what has been posted.

Senate Judiciary email: [email protected]

When submitting testimony, don't forget to make the email subject line something like "SB978, Senate Judiciary Committee Testimony"

 

[ZigZagZeke]

So I get what your saying about Kevin coming off as combative, but he was calling out the fact Oregon has more urgent and more severe problems to deal with, gun control isn't an issue in Oregon, we don't have the issues some states have. I kinda liked his redirect to the real problems Oregon has. Current leadership is guilty as charged.

But honestly, we need a core of well spoken speakers who can be available to testify, even if someone else is writing the remarks. We need to be polished, articulate and armed with facts. That's where the rubber will really meet the road, in my humble opinion.

The founding fathers gathered in the bubblegums to prepare for their eventual defense of this great nation, we might be wise to follow in their footsteps...

I wish we had something better than a "Like" button to apply to your post. You hit the nail on the head. I was counting on our people who are polished and articulate experienced public speakers to deliver a detailed critical message about the bill. None of them did. The point of this testimony was to provide material for a possible work session where this bill would be modified before moving on. We provided almost nothing useful in that process. That's what is so disappointing.

You are exactly right that we need polished and articulate public speakers in our camp. They don't have to write the message they deliver. The main anti-gun spokespeople were all professional speakers hammering away at pre-written talking points, most of which were patently untrue. Without someone delivering an honest counter message they get away with it. I'm not the best public speaker, but I've done it and I would do it again. This time I was laid up post-surgery. I have some legal training and I've written successful political speeches for candidates and ballot issues in the past. I'd do it again any time regarding 2A issues. Just ask.

One of our biggest impediments in this fight is the defeatist snipers on the sidelines in our own community who echo the kind of thing Starrett was saying. They provide a smoke screen through which any real message from our community has to fight its way in order to be heard. They seriously hurt the fight for SB801, the child firearms education bill. We don't need to encourage them.

 

[jayR]

Can someone help me locate the video of the hearing yesterday ? I can only find what's live right now, or archived from the 2018 regular session.
Citizen Engagement Legislative Video

 

[tiggers97]

Can someone help me locate the video of the hearing yesterday ? I can only find what's live right now, or archived from the 2018 regular session.
Citizen Engagement Legislative Video

I am on my phone, but try this link
Senate Committee On Judiciary 2019-04-02 8:00 AM - Apr 2nd, 2019

In the future, you should just have to go to the comittee page and click on the date to find the video. Usually posted a couple hours after the end.

Judiciary Senate 2019 Regular Session - Oregon Legislative Information System

 

[nwslopoke]

I wish we had something better than a "Like" button to apply to your post. You hit the nail on the head. I was counting on our people who are polished and articulate experienced public speakers to deliver a detailed critical message about the bill. None of them did. The point of this testimony was to provide material for a possible work session where this bill would be modified before moving on.

The problem is condensing 44 pages of lunacy into 1.5 min response after introductions and trying to sound reasonable. Its hard to respond to specifics with facts such a condensed time.

There were several great responses on the pro gun rights side that spoke truth and the crowd applauded. When you hear, "that real", it's like church. Can't help yourself. Being polished is wonderful but conveying your message, even awkwardly is awesome.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

The problem is condensing 44 pages of lunacy into 1.5 min response after introductions and trying to sound reasonable. Its hard to respond to specifics with facts such a condensed time.

There were several great responses on the pro gun rights side that spoke truth and the crowd applauded. When you hear, "that real", it's like church. Can't help yourself. Being polished is wonderful but conveying your message, even awkwardly is awesome.

Most did their level best. Some didn't. At least we didn't just roll over.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Oh For F Sake!

Prozanski added Dash 2 and Dash 3 amendments AFTER the hearing

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/ProposedAmendment/15002

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/ProposedAmendment/15003

[email protected]

 

[bunnybunny]

Oh For F Sake!

Prozanski added Dash 2 and Dash 3 amendments AFTER the hearing

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/ProposedAmendment/15002

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/ProposedAmendment/15003

[email protected]

Well we know how he's going to vote. Which other democrats are the most persuadable?

 

[nammac]

Continue to encourage others to submit written testimony, we have until 17:00 tomorrow to get them in. Encourage friends and relatives to get involved, a clear message of "No More Laws, Not One More Law" must be made clear to these legislators.

It's bad enough they just stole $108M from next years kicker, the democrats in the marble nuthouse are out of control...