Awesome, if it passes, please give us your address so we can send you the bill.
Personally, I'd rather have our leaky drinking water pipes replaced with that state money. You know, the ones that give us bi-weekly brown water. Oh, you live in PDX, you dont hve that problem- my apologies. Heres a thought instead :fund rural FD's so we can get out of class 9 fire ratings, and obtain affordable homeowners insurance outside of portland, salem, and eugene. Our loyal and unwavering police could use new armor, more rounds for training, and the legacy fund for fallen officers could certainly use a bump.
But hey, this seems like a much more useful outpouring of MILLIONS of dollars per month.
Someone is going to have to pay it, as the $10 for the NICS check certainly isn't going to cover it, and as a state, we're pretty strapped.
Moving along....
The last "denial" we had at the shop entailed 2 cruisers, and four officers, and about an hour and a quarter for each.
The patron returned two days later and completed the purchase of his firearm.
edit : it could have been four, i had a day off in there, and we had TWO very similar circumstance denials- both of which were in error.
Little to add regarding that awesome system....
the owner of our shop got delayed purchasing a 10/22 for his spouse two weeks ago ( as was mentioned in our brief testimony before the house).
Edit : No, that wasn't me, but another partner in the firm testifying. The amount of time given to supporters of the bill in comparison to those opposed was laughable- and was laughed at openly even by some of the members of the other side. Prozanski was very firm on his sandtimer for us....not so for his side.
Yep, the owner of the shop.
The multiple FFL holder, NRA certified trainer, honorably discharged high security clearance holder, federally licensed weapons dealer. That one.
They can't explain to him why.
Its not the system you make it out to be. Without complete registration, it'll never work the way you want it to. They're well aware of that, too. You've already attested, JSH1, that you favor such a scheme- so this fact must not be lost on you either.
Also of interesting note that there have been some very workable options floated by senator Thatcher that
werent registration schemes, and would have obtained exactly the results desired. They were completely ignored, and the bill was instead rushed through referendum.
Lastly, I'm still waiting for that "one example" of someone who has committed a crime using a firearm, who would have been blocked from obtaining one using this flawed system.
Certainly wouldn't have blocked any of the most recent high-profile crimes involving firearms, and none of our local sheriffs or chiefs of police, or rank and file LE that
I have actually spoken with, and there are MANY. can recall one either.
But hey, even if that " one person protected" is actually a phantasm, far be it from me to rain on your registration parade.
That is exactly what I'm saying. Again, Sheriffs are politicians. They are elected by voters. Yes, that is representative government.
Yes, thats the will of the people speaking- and it works exactly as intended, thank you. If perhaps you prefer a system where say, a small portion of moneyed citizens get to have their voices outweigh the others...perhaps now would be a good time to disclose that, too. I mention this only because you seem to believe that that somehow our system is operating incorrectly- and I'd like for you to expound on that belief for the benefit of us , to better understand your position and line of thinking.
