Oregon bill to require background checks on private sales

[george burns]

Sometime in the not so distant future, we will take a stand, just like the one taken against the British way back when. It must come to that, in order for us to get back our country. Let us see if it occurs in our lifetime, or that of our grandkids, but it must come.
It draws near, the opportunity to clean house, and dump these idiots into the nearest body of water, with a months worth of food, and non polluting engine. Just as long as they aren't allowed to come back here, they are able to go anyware they please, that will have them.

 

[JSH1]

Sometime in the not so distant future, we will take a stand, just like the one taken against the British way back when. It must come to that, in order for us to get back our country. Let us see if it occurs in our lifetime, or that of our grandkids, but it must come.
It draws near, the opportunity to clean house, and dump these idiots into the nearest body of water, with a months worth of food, and non polluting engine. Just as long as they aren't allowed to come back here, they are able to go anyware they please, that will have them.

Advocating for armed insurrection because you lose a vote isn't "The High Road".

 

[jamesjames]

The democratic party has been on the wrong side of the gun issue for a long time and for a lot of reasons. Growing up among liberal Democrats, I was carefully taught to fear guns, to believe that they were evil and caused evil. Most of these Democrats were pacifists that protested the Vietnam War, nuclear weapons, defense budgets, etc. They lumped all violence and force of arms together into an umbrella category of uncivilized otherness.

I am convinced that if the Democrats could find their way to the other side of the gun issue, they could win back the blue collar and white rural and suburban voters that they lost during the Reagan years. The "Reagan Democrats" were lost as the party seemed to focus on urban and minority issues and concerns. Demonizing guns was a way to build a coalition of urban liberals, minority voters and special interests.

I'm a Democrat and I'm pro gun. I will be a voice to lead the way in crafting a new position on guns and the first amendment among Democrats. I'm not a one-issue voter. I see an opportunity to revitalize democratic politics if they can just find a way to do a 180 on the gun issue.

The scorched-earth politics of the last 30 years has been very destructive of the American Way. When I see replies to my article where the writer says "this is why I left the democratic party", I know that I'm on the right track.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

The biggest problem with this law and the ones passed here in Colorado is that the progressives seem to believe that we are all sheeple and will quietly acquiesce to their laws. Fortunately, most logical minded Constitutional respecting citizens understand that although the legislative bodies can pass laws, the members neither usually obey them nor do they really have the power or authority to enforce them so the sales of weapons between citizens usually continues without regard to legislative fiat.

 

[JSH1]

The biggest problem with this law and the ones passed here in Colorado is that the progressives seem to believe that we are all sheeple and will quietly acquiesce to their laws. Fortunately, most logical minded Constitutional respecting citizens understand that although the legislative bodies can pass laws, the members neither usually obey them nor do they really have the power or authority to enforce them so the sales of weapons between citizens usually continues without regard to legislative fiat.

You are free to engage in civil disobedience if you wish. Just don't complain if you have to live with the consequences.

 

[hso]

It doesn't look like active civil disobedience is needed since the LEOs in WA and CO aren't moved to enforce the new laws.

 

[JSH1]

It doesn't look like active civil disobedience is needed since the LEOs in WA and CO aren't moved to enforce the new laws.

SB 941 requires the local Sheriff Department and City Police Department to be notified if someone fails a background check. Some Sheriffs have stated that they will not act on this information either because they are against SB 941 or because they don't have the resources.

(Interestingly this is the same reason the ATF and Justice Department give for not prosecuting people that fail Federal background checks. The NRA derides the Feds for not enforcing existing law, so it will be interesting to see their take on Sheriffs that do the same thing)

So there is very little risk that a person will be prosecuted for failing a background check. However, they won't be able to buy the gun either which is the point. Selling a gun without a background check that finds its way to a crime scene will be a different story I expect. Again the risk is small but it is still real.

I personally expect to see few prosecutions from SB 941. However, that isn't the purpose of the law. The purpose is to close the legal private gun market to prohibited persons just as federal background checks have closed the FFL market. Law abiding citizens will do background checks for private sales and the majority of gun owners are law abiding.