The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 25, 2013, 12:12 AM   #26
Tickling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2011
Posts: 181
Thanks for the heads up Ralgha.

Emails sent. I wish Betsy Johnson was my senator! The more I talk to her the more impressed I am, definitely contributing to her campaign.
Tickling is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 11:53 AM   #27
Ralgha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 107
Re: Oregon Antis One-Up the Rest

An email reply (not to me though) from Representative Jeff Barker, who is a Democrat and also happens to be the chair of the judicial committee. I'm feeling better now, but we can't let up the pressure.

Quote:
Thank you for your email.

I am opposed to any new restrictions on law abiding gun owners, including HB 3200. As both a retired cop w/ 31 years in law enforcement and a Democrat, I frequently remind my legislative colleagues that law abiding gun owners pose no threat to public safety. I have opposed, and will continue to oppose, efforts to ban CHL holders from K-12 schools and higher educational campus, so called "assault weapon" bans, and any other unecessary restrictions on Oregonians' 2nd Amendment rights.

Thanks again for your email and please feel free to contact me again on this or any other issue.

Jeff Barker
Ralgha is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 12:50 PM   #28
adamc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2013
Location: Stalingrad Connecticut
Posts: 216
keep on it guys............

Read what is going on here in Connectciut
__________________
**** NRA Life Member *****

Connecticut was the Cradle of the Gun Industry, NOW it is just a Pine Box,
Courtesy of our Governor "Chairman MAO Malloy"
adamc is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 05:42 PM   #29
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Another reply...

... this one from a staffer, as opposed to the Senator, but still it's a response in our favor:

Quote:
Please sign up for Senator Whitsett’s newsletter: http://www.leg.state.or.us/whitsett/home.htm

Thank you for your comments and thoughts regarding HB 3200. Senator Whitsett opposes any further restrictions on possession of firearms and actually opposes many of those already in place, both at the State and Federal levels.

We encourage you to call the sponsors and co-sponsors of HB 3200.

Rep. Greenlick – 503-986-1433
Rep. Bailey – 503-986-1442
Rep. Buckley – 503-986-1405
Rep. Dembro – 503-986-1445
Rep. Frederick – 503-986-1443
Rep. Keny-Guyer – 503-986-1446
Rep. Read – 503-986-1427
Rep. Reardon – 503-986-1428
Rep. Tomei – 503-986-1441
Sen. Burdick – 503-986-1718
Sen. Dingfelder – 503-986-1723
Sen. Hass – 503-986-1714
Sen. Monnes Anderson – 503-986-1725
Sen. Monroe – 503-986-1724
Sen. Shields – 503-986-1722
Sen. Steiner Hayward – 503-986-1717

Again, thank you for your thoughts regarding this matter.

Warm regards,
Sandy Sumner

Legislative Assistant
Office of Doug Whitsett
Senator, District 28
P: (503) 986-1728
F: (503) 986-1971


If you would like to sign up to receive news updates from Senator Whitsett, go to http://www.leg.state.or.us/learnmore/ to begin receiving e-newsletters, press releases, legislative reports and other important information.

Last edited by tyme; March 5, 2013 at 08:05 PM. Reason: removed empty lines
MLeake is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 05:48 PM   #30
Tickling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2011
Posts: 181
Quote:
Sponsors and co-sponsors of HB 3200:

Rep. Greenlick – 503-986-1433
Rep. Bailey – 503-986-1442
Rep. Buckley – 503-986-1405
Rep. Dembro – 503-986-1445
Rep. Frederick – 503-986-1443
Rep. Keny-Guyer – 503-986-1446
Rep. Read – 503-986-1427
Rep. Reardon – 503-986-1428
Rep. Tomei – 503-986-1441 S
Sen. Burdick – 503-986-1718
Sen. Dingfelder – 503-986-1723
Sen. Hass – 503-986-1714
Sen. Monnes Anderson – 503-986-1725
Sen. Monroe – 503-986-1724
Sen. Shields – 503-986-1722
Sen. Steiner Hayward – 503-986-1717
These are the sponsors and co-sponsors of HB 3200. Call them, I know it's annoying, but it's harder to ignore phone calls

We also need to remember these names when they're up for reelection...

EDIT: MLeake beat me to it

Last edited by tyme; March 5, 2013 at 08:05 PM. Reason: removed empty lines
Tickling is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 06:12 PM   #31
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Rep. Sal Esquivel has now replied...

... and while this is more of a mass mailer, it's extremely supportive of our side.

Quote:
As others have as well, I have received well over one thousand emails regarding HB 3200 which was introduced last week.

This type of legislation makes me very sad and disheartened. Our Constitution with the Amendments has stood for hundreds of years and to have individuals who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution decide to do their best to rewrite it is despicable.

I have attached to this email a list of The Fifteen with all their contact information. Take just a moment to send them an email or give them a call and express your concerns regarding their willingness to “infringe” upon your Second Amendment Rights. Please be polite – no threatening – but firm with your convictions.

Many of you have already received the following but for those of you who have not, I have included my recent statement on Gun Rights.

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Please know that as far as I am concerned there is no wavering on the Second Amendment. In my opinion the Second Amendment gives us as US Citizens the right to protect ourselves, our families and our property. It states that we have the right to form a militia if this country were to be invaded and specifically gives us the right to bear arms to keep our own government in check if necessary.

Limiting us, as Americans, access to guns in general or to specific guns and ammunition is a blatant affront to the Constitution of the United States and specifically – the Second Amendment.

Now, is there work to be done – most certainly – but we need to focus on what needs to be done and what will make a difference. Our national and state mental health programs need to be examined closely and changes made where appropriate. We need to reexamine the reasons we declare different areas “gun free” zones. Does it make sense to announce that our schools and our theaters are “gun free” zones and then NOT expect those areas to be targeted?

Recently I had an individual verbally reprimand me for using the statement “common sense” – but I believe that we need to apply common sense to these situations. If you are a criminal or suffering from mental health issues and you determine you want to hurt someone are you going to go to the local police station where you know there are people who protect themselves with firearms? I think not – Common Sense tells you to find an area where there are no guns allowed.

I believe there is much work to be done in order to deter individuals from harming themselves and others with any weapons – guns being the main topic of discussion at this time. It horrifies me to think of what happened in Connecticut at the school and in theater in Colorado – but limiting law abiding American Citizens access to firearms is not the answer.

Thank you so much for corresponding with me on these issues – I look forward to hearing from you again. I am here to assist you in any way possible and I appreciate you staying in touch.

Please take just a moment and go to my new website www.salesquivel.us, contact - and sign up to stay in touch. It just takes a moment to fill out the request form and I can add you to my email list to keep you updated on gun control and other important issues you are specifically interested in.

Thank you
Sal

Rep. Sal Esquivel
District 6
509-986-1406

www.rep.salesquivel.com

Last edited by tyme; March 5, 2013 at 08:07 PM. Reason: removed empty lines
MLeake is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 06:24 PM   #32
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
And yet another in support

Another Oregon rep responds in support:

Quote:
Morgan Leake,

Thank you for your comments about HB 3200. Sadly, we are seeing more and more attempts by lawmakers to curtail the 2nd Amendment rights of citizens who are following the law while not attacking the real problem which is cracking down on violent felons breaking the law with illegal access to firearms.

I will encourage my colleagues at the State Capitol to oppose this legislation and work on more productive ways to enforce the laws we already have on the books to reduce crime. I remain committed to protecting gun owner’s rights in Oregon.

Sincerely,
Kim Thatcher

Representative, House District #25
900 Court St. NE
Salem, OR 97301
503-986-1425

Last edited by tyme; March 5, 2013 at 08:08 PM. Reason: removed empty lines
MLeake is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 09:21 PM   #33
Jayster
Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2013
Posts: 74
Someone should ask them to consider going to convicted criminals homes unannounced to search for guns instead of responsible law abiding gun owners.

Yeah it violates their rights but that would actually "get guns out of the hands of criminals" a lot quicker than violating the rights of law abiding citizens.

I mean to automatically target the law abiding citizen that is no threat to anyone without considering that they are NOW letting convicted criminals that can not legally own a gun "own" unreported guns flies in the face of sound reasoning.
Jayster is offline  
Old February 26, 2013, 07:16 AM   #34
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Support voiced from Dennis Richardson

Seems to have come from him, too, as opposed to coming from a staffer:

Quote:
Morgan,

Unfortunately, there are several bills being introduced during this legislation session which would further erode the rights of responsible adults. And this proposed new law, like so many others already on the books, may not be effective in stopping violent criminals from getting their hands on firearms and hurting innocent people. I encourage you to make calls to the Co-Sponsors of House Bill 3200 and let them know how you feel. See list of Co-Sponsors below.

Rather than punish law abiding citizens, I would rather focus on measures we can take to prevent violent offenders from harming others in our community. I really appreciate your support of our 2nd Amendment rights and will do my best to oppose HB 3200.

Thank you for your comments.

Dennis Richardson
State Representative
House District 4
900 Court Street H-373
Salem, OR 97301

www.leg.state.or.us/richardson
503.986.1404
I hope our Oregon members are taking note of who their friends are at the Legislature.

M

Last edited by tyme; March 5, 2013 at 08:08 PM. Reason: rem empty lines
MLeake is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 08:37 AM   #35
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
From the office of Senator Larry George...

From a staffer, but on point:

Quote:
Sen George L <sen.larrygeorge@state.or.us>
9:16 AM (8 hours ago)
to me

Thank you for taking the time to contact Sen. George regarding current efforts to restrict the Second Amendment. Sen. George is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and is not supporting any of the efforts to infringe upon gun rights.

He believes it is important to focus efforts on supporting mental health programs in order to help curb violence rather than attempting to treat the symptoms that reflect our lack of commitment to this important area.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact Sen. George.

Jesse

Jesse Alexander
Chief of Staff
Sen. Larry George
(503) 986-1713
sen.larrygeorge@state.or.us

Last edited by tyme; March 5, 2013 at 08:09 PM. Reason: rem empty lines
MLeake is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 08:38 AM   #36
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
And from Representative Brad Witt:

Just received this one:

Quote:
Rep Witt <rep.bradwitt@state.or.us>
1:10 AM (16 hours ago)
to me

Thank you for sharing your opposition to HB 3200 with me.

I consider this bill one of the most radical anti-gun proposals before the Oregon Legislature. Any proposal to criminalize telescoping stocks (trap guns), thumbhole stocks (target rifles), conversion kits, or their possession is a direct threat to our Constitutional rights.

This bill is sponsored by the following legislators:

Representative Mitch Greenlick
Representative Lew Frederick
Representative Jules Bailey
Representative Tobias Read
Representative Peter Buckley
Representative Jeff Reardon
Representative Michael Dembrow
Representative Carolyn Tomei
Senator Ginny Burdick
Senator Rod Monroe
Senator Jackie Dingfelder
Senator Chip Shields
Senator Mark Haas
Senator Elizabeth Steiner Hayward
Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson

Since this is their bill and not my own, you may want to share your opinions of HB 3200 with them.

Rest assured that I have every intention of opposing this bill. I will not allow otherwise law abiding Oregonians to be prosecuted as criminals, nor will I stand idly by and allow their otherwise legal firearms to be confiscated in violation of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Thank you for standing up against the outlandish proposal that is HB 3200.

Sincerely,
Brad Witt

State Representative
District 31

Last edited by tyme; March 5, 2013 at 08:12 PM. Reason: spacing cleanup
MLeake is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 09:54 AM   #37
Ralgha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 107
Re: Oregon Antis One-Up the Rest

It's beginning to seem like the sponsors of this bill are the only antis in the legislature.
Ralgha is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 02:28 PM   #38
Ralgha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 5, 2011
Location: Oregon
Posts: 107
MORE Anti Gun Bills in Oregon

While not nearly as bad as HB3200 (which seeks to ban pretty much everything), this collection of bills needs to be shot down in a big way. HB3200 was probably introduced to make these bills look ok.

SB 760: Requires a victim to run away (or attempt to) from an attacker before using lethal force.

SB 758: Requires gun owners to purchase liability insurance for every firearm they own. Such a thing doesn't even exist.

SB 699: Makes the state capitol building a gun-free zone (also known as a shooting gallery for criminals).

SB 796: Introduces a requirement to pass a firing range test to get a concealed handgun license. There's currently no requirement to show proficiency.

These bills are sponsored by the usual bald-faced liars: Ginny Burdick , Floyd Prozanski, Jackie Dingfelder and Michael Dembrow

I've already sent my first email regarding these bills to the judiciary committee, along with a bill for wasting my time with all these calls and emails.

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/avalan...lls-introduced
Ralgha is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 03:13 PM   #39
Tickling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2011
Posts: 181
One of the staffers here mentioned that since they can't do anything meaningful, they're just trying to annoy and/or make gun ownership a burden.. He was obviously right.

SB 760, from my understanding of Oregon law would modify our Castle Doctrine and require us to retreat from our homes.

Since it modifies ORS 161.225

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/161.225
Tickling is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 03:39 PM   #40
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 976
I wonder if these people would feel any different about firearms if someone posted their names and street addresses. As an Oregonian, I'm fed up.
dajowi is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 03:41 PM   #41
HarrySchell
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 30, 2007
Location: South CA
Posts: 548
Even the Model Penal Code put limits on the duty to retreat, particularly in the home and if retreat exposes self or others to more danger than confrontation.

Good discussions here:
http://www.volokh.com/2012/04/03/the...y-and-liberty/

http://www.volokh.com/2012/03/24/let...sor-exception/

The progressives are incredibly regressive and obviously not interested in basic human rights.
__________________
Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world — and never will.
— Mark Twain
HarrySchell is offline  
Old February 27, 2013, 04:16 PM   #42
Tickling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2011
Posts: 181
I wrote out a quick letter in response to this, feel free to use/modify if you wish. Also, let me know if I need to edit anything, I'll send it after my shift.

Quote:
Dear Senator,

I am writing to you to let you know that I strongly oppose any further restrictions on Oregonians' Second Amendment Rights.

As one of your constituents, I am asking you to vote against the following legislation:

- SB 699:
This bill makes the state capitol building a gun-free zone. Gun-free zones did not work in the Aurora, Sandy-Hook, or Clackamas Mall shootings, and will only punish law-abiding citizens. As well as creating a place full of unarmed targets for further tragedy.

- SB 758:
Requires gun owners to purchase liability insurance. Again, this only punishes the truly law-abiding as criminals will definitely NOT buy said insurance. It also creates a class right, meaning the poor will not be able to exercise the same right to self defense as a wealthier person.

- SB 760:
Modifies ORS 161.225 requiring that a homeowner attempts to retreat when confronted with a life-threatening situation. On the surface, this seems like a good idea, after all human life is extremely precious. And I wholeheartedly agree that if a person can avoid taking another person's life, without risking their own, they should do so. HOWEVER, forcing someone to retreat from their HOME is both extremely dangerous and impossible in many situations. When an intruder is in the home, Police and experts recommend that the homeowner stay put or "fortify" a room while calling the police. Forcing a homeowner and his/her family to retreat into an unknown situation (i.e. dark house/yard full unknown number assailants) is expressly NOT recommended by any and every expert on the subject. This law will place the lives the criminals over those of the victims.

- SB 796:
Requires a firing range test in order to get a concealed handgun license. This is redundant as an applicant is already required to demonstrate "competence with a handgun" under ORS 166.291. After reading the bill in question (SB 796), I can see no purpose for it except to create more hurdles and make the system fiscally onerous.

I strongly oppose these bills and will do all in my power to support those who vote against them. Oregon gun owners have an outstanding track record for being law-abiding citizens and do not deserve to be punished for the actions of criminals.

Regards,



Tickling is offline  
Old February 28, 2013, 12:31 AM   #43
Tickling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2011
Posts: 181
Good job Oregonians! Your letters and phone calls are having an effect, several of the signers of HB 3200 are backing off.

This is a letter from the Democratic Whip and sponsor of the bill:

Quote:
Thank you for writing me with your thoughts on House Bill 3200. I understand your passion for the issue and appreciate your perspective. I signed on to the bill because I'm hearing considerable interest from my constituents in reducing gun violence. Since then, you and others have pointed out valid concerns with a number of specific provisions of the bill. I cannot see myself supporting the bill in its current form, but I am glad that its introduction has stimulated discussion. My hope is that we will be able to come together on smart policies that keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them, while respecting the second amendment rights of law abiding Oregonians. Increased background checks and an increased commitment to mental health care are among the things I think we should consider. I welcome your thoughts, and will keep them in mind as the session progresses. Please keep in touch.

Best, Tobias Read

P.S. I have taken the liberty of adding you to our electronic newsletter. We send out updates on our district and our work from time to time. Please let us know if you'd like to be removed.

Representative Tobias Read, HD 27 Democratic Whip 900 Court Street NE, H 286 Salem, OR 97301 Capitol: 503.986.1427 District: 503.641.6800 Rep.tobiasread@state.or.us http://www.leg.state.or.us/read/
Tickling is offline  
Old February 28, 2013, 10:37 AM   #44
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 976
This is what I just sent the 20 sponsors/co-sponsors, (i.e. morons) of H.B. 3200.

Good Morning,

Can you explain to me how House Bill 3200 doesn't violate Article IV of the Bill of Rights? Let me refresh your memory.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Would you freely allow access to your home for inspections by law enforcement or others for any reason?
Would you freely allow the confiscation of your private property?

If your answer is yes you are violating your oath of office to uphold the Constitution.

"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter so help me god."

I find this bill not only extraordinary in it's scope but it sets a dangerous precedent. No sane man can proclaim that this and other current legislation isn't about making firearms possession as onerous and restrictive as possible. That the inherent intent of these laws is to register and confiscate private property is without question. This legislation is outrageous in the extreme.

"As the patriots of 1776 did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and laws let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor. Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the charter of his own and his children's liberty..." --- Abraham Lincoln

I await your response.


Cordially,
dajowi is offline  
Old March 2, 2013, 04:47 AM   #45
JimmyR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 4, 2012
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Dear Senator,

I am writing to you to let you know that I strongly oppose any further restrictions on Oregonians' Second Amendment Rights.

As one of your constituents, I am asking you to vote against the following legislation:

- SB 699:
This bill makes the state capitol building a gun-free zone. Gun-free zones did not work in the Aurora, Sandy-Hook, or Clackamas Mall shootings, and will only punish law-abiding citizens. In addition, this creates a location full of unarmed targets for further tragedy.

- SB 758:
This bill requires gun owners to purchase liability insurance. Again, this only punishes the truly law-abiding as criminals will definitely NOT buy said insurance. It also creates a class right, meaning the middle and lower classes will not be able to exercise the same right to self defense as a wealthier person.

- SB 760:
This bill modifies ORS 161.225 requiring that a homeowner attempts to retreat when confronted with a life-threatening situation. On the surface, this seems like a good idea because, after all, human life is extremely precious. I wholeheartedly agree that if a person can avoid taking another person's life, without risking their own, they should do so; HOWEVER, forcing someone to retreat from their HOME is both extremely dangerous and impossible in many situations. When an intruder is in the home, Police and experts recommend that the homeowner stay put or "fortify" a room while calling the police. Forcing a homeowner and his/her family to retreat into an unknown situation (i.e. dark house/yard full unknown number assailants) is expressly NOT recommended by any and every expert on the subject. This law will place the lives the criminals over those of the victims.

- SB 796:
Requires a firing range test in order to get a concealed handgun license. This is redundant as an applicant is already required to demonstrate "competence with a handgun" under ORS 166.291. After reading the bill in question (SB 796), I can see no purpose for it except to create more hurdles and make the system fiscally onerous.

I strongly oppose these bills and will do all in my power to support those who vote against them. Oregon gun owners have an outstanding track record for being law-abiding citizens and do not deserve to be punished for the actions of criminals.

Regards,
See my suggested changes in red to improve grammar, syntax, and flow.

Just my opinions, others may feel free to edit as needed.
JimmyR is offline  
Old March 3, 2013, 04:13 PM   #46
oneoclock
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 4, 2011
Location: SE PA
Posts: 11
Over reaching laws

Maybe I'm missing something, but I just can't see why any police forces are seemingly OK with all these over-reaching laws which I hear are being proposed in various anti gun states, and even the Federal gov't.
From bans on sale of hi capacity magazines and semi automatic weapons to outright confiscation of guns, it seems to me that passage of these extreme restrictions would suddenly make the currently law-abiding gun owners into enemies of the state, by changing the rules mid-game.

All the gun owners I know are currently on the same side as the police, and we're opposed to the same 'bad guys', namely those who break the current set of laws we have in place.

But passage of these new restrictions would suddenly create thousands more 'criminals' needing to be brought to the new level of 'justice'.

I just can't see why police departments are OK with this.
oneoclock is offline  
Old March 4, 2013, 03:12 AM   #47
Tickling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 17, 2011
Posts: 181
^A lot of Oregon Sheriffs aren't OK with it.

In case anybody missed the latest, there are three new bills to look at:

Quote:
House Bill 3114 gives colleges and universities the right to ban CHL holders from their property. In order to see the actual ban language you must scroll all the way to page 65 of this 66 page bill. This bill is a response to our successful lawsuit against the Oregon University System. On the other hand, House Bill 3009 does the exact opposite, specifically granting CHL holders the right to be there.

House Bill 3412 “Establishes Task Force on Reducing Gun Violence.” What a waste of time and money. As though the “task force” is going to learn anything new.

House Bill 3413 creates mandatory lock up laws for your firearms. If you’re not home and your 17 year old daughter uses one of your guns to defend herself against a home invader you can spend a year in jail and pay a fine of $6250.00.
The article can be found here: http://www.oregonfirearms.org/even-more-anti-gun-bills

Things are looking good otherwise, with our two gun-friendly Democrats, we will have the majority in the Senate. Please email/call Senator Roblan (http://www.leg.state.or.us/roblan/) to encourage him as he is waffling under the pressure.


You can contact your legislators on these new bills here: http://www.leg.state.or.us/writelegsltr/
Tickling is offline  
Old March 5, 2013, 12:02 PM   #48
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
^A lot of Oregon Sheriffs aren't OK with it.
Well, that doesn't always matter.
On the front page of today's paper is a local Sheriff and his deputies testifying in committee against silly gun laws in Colorado. Guess what happened next in the committee vote? Next we go to a senate vote.

Keep fighting for sense, Oregon.
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time.
doofus47 is offline  
Old March 5, 2013, 05:45 PM   #49
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Response from Floyd Prozanski, chair of the Oregon Senate Judiciary Committee

A bit late in coming, but interesting; he seems to be riding the fence on the validity of an AWB, but prefers to leave that up to Congress.

Quote:
Thank you for your e-mail pertaining to HB 3200. I would like to set the record straight. HB 3200 was proposed in the House by Rep. Mitch Greenlick and I do not support it. As I have previously stated, if an assault weapons ban or high capacity magazine ban is to move forward this year, I believe it should be addressed in Congress. Accordingly, I do not plan on taking up any such legislation this session. I also understand that Chair Jeff Barker does not plan on hearing HB 3200 in the House Judiciary Committee. So it should be dead!

I am a supporter of both the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 27 of the Oregon Constitution. As a gun owner for over 40 years (I bought my first gun when I was 15 years old), I believe an individual has the right to use a firearm to for self-defense and the defense of others. At the same time, I believe Congress and the states have the authority to establish reasonable regulations on firearms.

Thank you for your views on this issue. I look forward to an open discussion on your concerns and greatly value your input when making these kinds of decisions.

Floyd Prozanski
Senate Judiciary Chair
MLeake is offline  
Old March 6, 2013, 12:05 PM   #50
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,612
Folks, I merged the two Oregon threads.

Good luck! Lived in OR for a third of my life and don't want to see gun rights go down the drain there.

Glenn
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.15382 seconds with 9 queries