1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!
  2. We're giving away over $1,000 in prizes this month in the Northwest Firearms Winter Giveaway!
    Dismiss Notice

Subject line suggestions for daily emails

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by PiratePast40, Apr 8, 2015.

  1. PiratePast40

    PiratePast40 Willamette Valley Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    As many others are doing, I am also sending daily emails to members of both houses and on both sides of the aisle. There is some difference in wording to make them more applicable to the particular audience.

    Was wondering what others are using in the subject lines. I try not to use "No to SB 941" more than twice a week. Here are some of the other subject lines I have used:

    Removing the emergency clause for SB941
    No on any new gun control laws
    Possible amendment to SB941
    No to the proposed felon protection law
    Someone must pay and it doesn't matter who it is! (this mornings batch of emails)​

    Some of these may be duplicates of the OFF auto-mailers but I have spread those out over several days.

    So what are the rest of you using?
  2. PiratePast40

    PiratePast40 Willamette Valley Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    The email below was sent to the Republican side of the House. A similar letter was sent to the Senate. The email to the other side of the aisle had some different wording. It asked they really wanted this to be part of their legacy and also omitted the sentence about thanking them for their support. Feel free to cut and paste or take some concepts from this one.

    And yes, I am asked to keep up the pressure and have also been invited to personally visit the office of several Senators and Representatives.

    Subject: Why do some Oregon legislators hate law enforcement?

    Dear Congressmen,

    It seems as though some of our Oregon Democrat Senators don’t trust the FBI, Oregon State Police, or County Sheriffs. I come to this conclusion after reading SB 941. It would seem that background checks performed by the FBI, Oregon State Police, and County Sheriffs for issue of a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) in Oregon, are not good enough for the supporters and proponents of SB941. If they were, then CHL holders as well as licensed antique handgun collectors would be exempted from the requirements of a background check for private transfers. They have already passed those background checks, so why must they pay to have it performed again and again?

    Do these proponents of 941 somehow believe that the FBI will somehow be more trustworthy after passage of the bill? Do they think that the Oregon State Police aren’t doing their jobs the right way today, but they will do it correctly after passage of the bill? Do they feel that all Oregon Sheriffs are incompetent but will be somehow be bestowed with wisdom after passage?

    Congressman, are you aware that amendments that exclude current police officers from the background checks on private sales were REJECTED by the Democrat members of the judiciary? Think about that for a minute. Those Senators don’t even trust current police officers.

    To purposely ignore the current laws as well as checks that have already been performed is a certain kind of arrogance.

    Thank you for your continued support of the second amendment and of the people of Oregon.

    bnsaibum and Slobray like this.
  3. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    On thing we haven't done is look at where the money goes!! 290 thousand to 300 thousand
    at $10.00 each ad's up to big bucks. And OSP has already tried it to $26.00, and they will try again.