This Saturday March 2nd 10am Meet HB 3200 sponsor Michael Dembrow

[oknow]

It is your first amendment right to record a public event. Never let them convince you to turn off the camera again. If they do not want to speak on camera tell them it is their right not to speak but it is your right to record and report as you are representing the right to free press and in the age of the internet anyone can be a news source. If the reps do not want to speak on camera remind them that this is a town hall a public forum where they are addressing their constituents and they should be reporting to all of them even those not present. Notes are usually taken and you are doing nothing different then the note takers in the room.

Even better tell them you will be reporting this news story on a public forum for the people to see and point them here should they care to read the story and be involved in conversation around it. I would love to see some of the reps come on this forum and talk to us.

not sure about Or. but in Wa. I believe that you can video someone in public but no sound can be recorded.

 

[pyromancer]

not sure about Or. but in Wa. I believe that you can video someone in public but no sound can be recorded.

165.540 Obtaining contents of communications. (1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 133.724 or 133.726 or subsections (2) to (7) of this section, a person may not:

(c) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained.

It is only illegal in Oregon if they do not know they are being recorded. So again you can record as is your legal right and they can chose not to speak as is there legal right, but if you are in a public space they can not force you to leave they can just chose not to speak.

For example I could not force a news crew to leave somewhere because I did not want to be recorded. I could leave, I could ask them to not record me directly but I could not in anyway make them not report the events in a public space. I know they are their and if I chose to stay I am giving up my right to not be recorded. Just as an officer during an arrest can give you your right to remain silent however if you wave that right and continue talking anything you say can be used against you.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

. He also stated that he had received approx 2000 emails regarding gun control and that the majority of it supported his current position.

.

Somebody here isn't Emailing or he lied! Great report, maybe better than a video!

 

[tunus]

Overall: 30-40 were present. Room was small and cramped.

Dembrow was soft spoken and polite. He served as more of a moderator than an actual participant. He let the opposing folks in the room argue against one another. No one specifically targeted Dembrow's support for the legislation. Very smart on his part. Teflon smart. It may be the case that some of the vocal anti-gunners in the room were placed to protect him.
...

I asked him specifically how he would justify the cost of insurance to low income Oregonians who live in high-crime areas and are statistically most likely to use a firearm in self defense. The old lady, who objected to the recording and was very vocally anti-gun, interjected and did not let him answer my question. My question was specifically directed at him and his opinion. I think Felt Lizard may be onto something. It was pretty clear that Dembrow did not read the bills he is sponsoring with the exception of the bill restricting carry on college campuses. If Ceasefire is writing most anti-gun bills, they are most likely placing people like that lady to take the heat and distract the conversation away from the point. I noticed she did that several times during that conversation.

Thanks for the detailed notes. You covered everything but missed one important point which was Dembrow admitting that they want registration. I was pretty shocked he was so open about it.

I was sitting next to one of Dembrow's staffers. He was tweeting (I assume from Dembrow's account or on his behalf) about what was happening. One pro-gun gentleman refused to say his name during the introductions and Dembrow's staffer immediately twitted that (paraphrasing) "Many people showed up to talk about HB3200. One attendant refused to give his name." and then he quoted what the gentleman said verbatim. I think that was not the most interesting part of the introductions and felt the staffer was trying to paint the pro-gunners in a negative light.

I stayed and talked to Rep. Dembrow afterwards. I thanked him for taking the time to talk to his constituents and asked him to please do his due diligence before voting on these bills (It was obvious he was clueless what he had sponsored). I then tried to share some personal experiences living in countries with strict gun laws and how they did not improve public safety. He got visibly uncomfortable with my politely shared experiences, so I wrapped it up and left.

Overall, the gun rights supporters need to become better organized and not be afraid to stand for their convictions. If they don't, then they deserved what's being pushed on them.

 

[pyromancer]

not sure about Or. but in Wa. I believe that you can video someone in public but no sound can be recorded.

Also apparently legal in washington as long as they know they are being recorded. Washington Recording Law | Digital Media Law Project

Added to say: It seems like it would be a great way to get this woman and others who dont want to be on record to just shut up!

 

[tunus]

The key there was they can ask you not to record all they want!
That is a request not and order. I appreciate the report, but we need to teach other it is ok to stand up for your rights. Authority in this nation is taught that a request is like and order except without and teeth. And learn quickly 99% panic and comply not realizing they could not be forced to do so.

By the way, can we have a talk with gun owners to not make bubblegum worse at these events ? Yelling people down especially in opposition will never, repeat never make them ever consider your input. Many people need to chill the heck out at these thing.

Passion good, raving lunatic bad.

I know it was not an order and a request. I complied because both anti and pro gunners were objecting, I had already stated I am there to support gun rights and did not want be discounted as "another lunatic" even though my objections were polite and there was no yelling. In fact, the entire conversation was in good tone from all involved.

 

[pyromancer]

I know it was not an order and a request. I complied because both anti and pro gunners were objecting, I had already stated I am there to support gun rights and did not want be discounted as "another lunatic" even though my objections were polite and there was no yelling. In fact, the entire conversation was in good tone from all involved.

I personally wish you had chosen to not comply as is your legal right. I would like to see all of these public debates recorded. It should be public record for any concerned citizen on either side to see exactly what was said. I appreciate all of you reporting on this but it is not the same as a recording, to some degree perception will enter into the report however with a recording we can see and hear exactly what was said and how it was said.

It is fully your choice if you decide to do that or not however I feel like someone should be recording. It really works both ways if a pro person gets up and acts a fool they have a record just as if an anti acts a fool we have a record. I feel like anyone who is objecting will be doing so only because they feel they will be saying something stupid and will be accountable for it. In a public meeting we should ALL be accountable!

 

[Felt Lizard]

You missed one important point which was Dembrow admitting that they want registration.

Yes. Thank you for remembering that. With no hesitation, Dembrow clearly stated that one of his goals is registration.

And next time I'll provide a first name when asked. I naively thought it wouldn't be an issue. It was an error I won't repeat.

And yes, we should all be united and vocally advocate filming at these events.

 

[Migo]

Regrettably, it divided the pro gunners in the room, and at one point pro-gunners were speaking against one another about it. This should never happen again. The pros should have been unified.

I didn't get the impression that pro-gunners in that room were divided. I think the problem was that there were so many anti-gun bills and not enough time to address them all so there seemed to be a lot of jumping around from one topic to the next.

As for the video recording of the event, I understand that it was a public event, and that public events can be recorded, but it doesn't serve our cause well if we alienate or frustrate those we want to educate. Look what happened with OC in California after OC gun owners frightened anti-gun patrons at restaurants with their OC meetings. They had that right and now they don't.

I was impressed to see so many pro-gun supporters in that hot, cramped room especially several who didn't stumble over their words like I did. I overheard someone outside the door saying that he's been to most of Dembrow's coffee meetings, but that this one was the largest he's ever seen. I'm sure the anti-gun bills had something to do with that.

Based on his voting record, Dembrow is anti-legal gun owner, and I doubt his position can be changed even though I'll keep trying. He views owning guns as a privilege, like driving a car, and when I reminded him that gun ownership was a constitutional right, unlike driving, he emphatically didn't want to hear it.