Oregon SB 941 - universal registration on transfers

[blarby]

Bill passed the Senate today, on to the house.

Prozanski did some interesting lying today.

We need help folks, please contact your reps again.

 

[blarby]

Recall petition has been submitted and received for Hoyle.

That's positive, at least.

Those in hoyles' district, expect a doorknock, and signature clipboards about the area.

Those in prozanskis district, we still need your help ! Please contact Kevin at OFF, or Jason at gunrunner arms .

 

[Swing]

Doesn't Oregon also have the option of a veto referendum? If so, couldn't this monstrosity be overturned via that method should it past through the legislature and be signed by the governor? If so, maybe the NRA should line up the big bucks for that if it gets to that point.

 

[blarby]

We do.

However, the timeframe to prevent enforcement of this bill, if a veto referendum were required, is very short.

The other issue is population density. We face an issue much like Colorado. In many states where signature collecting is required, it is more easily obtained. Anti-hotspots like PDX, EUG, and Salem are quite dense....the remainder of the state far less so. One of the many reasons Oregon has mail-in balloting. This is how ANTI politicians have been able to secure the state senate with ease. I will confess however that some of their rivals have been....well, plain jane nuts, and that doesn't help, either. With the influx to Oregon, it has become a much more purple state. By failing to field candidates with enough moderate appeal, local assemblies are awash in legislative majority blue. Libertarians have a nice foothold here in the rural areas ( which I support !) but at this point, all they've done is drain away crucial votes in hotly contested races. Its no wonder that the legislature "fully supports a diverse democracy" even allowing a public vote on allowing more candidates to access the ballot- which passed with ease.

What we NEED at this point, is all GUN OWNING OREGONIANS who don't want the framework for gun registry put in place in the coming weeks, TO CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES IMMEDIATELY. Protest. Go door to door, talking to your friends and neighbors about the truth of this bill. Elected representatives are outright lying on the floor, and being deceptively vague about the major shortcomings inherent within the bill when asked about them publicly by folks who've actually read it. The media blitz is intense, and incorrectly portraying this bill. We need to have concerned citizens read it, and inform everyone they know about the truth.

If you need or want a paper copy of the bill, I will be happy to provide them. Simply PM me your address, or retrieve one of the free printed copies available at Gun Runner Arms in Junction city.

Please, PLEASE, help us. We're the last holdout on the west coast, and we DESPERATELY NEED YOUR HELP.

 

[papaairbear]

Bill passed the Senate today, on to the house.

Prozanski did some interesting lying today.

We need help folks, please contact your reps again.

And a snide comment to a serious question: "When asked what would happen if a person wanted to store his guns in a friend's safe (since this would be illegal under the bill) Prozanski said that maybe the local DA would just "choose not to prosecute."

Here's a link:

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/gun-grab-bill-passes-senate

 

[papaairbear]

Even while cities and counties are refusing to enforce this bill if it becomes law. the Oregon Senate is pushing a new bill that would make anyone who doesn't lock uo their firearms guilty of "endangerment of a minor." Anybody keep a gun in their night stand that isn't locked up? Here's a summary and a link to the bill. Interesting that the sponsor of this bill- Hayward - is under medication for depression and is a gun owner.

78th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2015 Regular Session
Senate Bill 945
Sponsored by Senator STEINER HAYWARD, Representative SMITH
WARNER; Senator BURDICK, Representatives
EVANS, FREDERICK, GREENLICK, HELM, KENY-GUYER
SUMMARY
The following summary
is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject
to consideration by
the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor’s brief statement of the essential features of the
measure
as introduced.
Creates crime of endangering a minor by allowing access to a firearm.
Punishes by maximum
of one year’s imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both.
Prohibits possession of firearm by person convicted of endangering a minor
by allowing access
to a firearm
for five-year period after conviction. Creates process for obtaining relief from prohibi-
tion. Provides that minor may lawfully possess firearm only with parent or guardian’s permission.
Prohibits transfer of firearm to person convicted of endangering a
minor by allowing access to
a firearm for five-year period after conviction. Requires permission of
minor’s parent or guardian for
temporary transfer of firearm to minor.
Requires gun dealer
to post notice concerning obligation to prevent minors from accessing
firearm without consent of firearm owner or minor’s parent or guardian.
Declares emergency, effective on passage.

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2015R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB945/Introduced

Anybody who actually believes that any of this legislation being presented, or about to be introduced, is anything other than an attempt at total registration and an invalidation of the 2A needs to start thinking about the "unintended" ramifications of these bills. As an example, it would be illegal if this new bill is enacted into law to use a weapon to protect your home and family without having to first take the time to unlock it in that tense, albeit hypothetical, situation!

 

[Swing]

I just read through 945; what a steaming pile of ... eh, I need to keep this high road.

Out of morbid curiosity, what does the last provision declaring an emergency do with respect to the function of the state government? The language is:

SECTION 10. This 2015 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public
peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2015 Act takes effect
on its passage.

 

[blarby]

Makes it take effect immediately.

 

[JSH1]

I just read through 945; what a steaming pile of ... eh, I need to keep this high road.

Out of morbid curiosity, what does the last provision declaring an emergency do with respect to the function of the state government? The language is:

Lots of bills have an emergency declaration tacked on. As blarby said, all it does is make the bill go into effect immediately.

 

[blarby]

http://registerguard.com/rg/news/lo...-files-recall-petition-against-rep.-hoyle.csp

Jason in the news...



Now we have to worry about 945, too. Never-ending, this craps.

 

[JSH1]

I saw pro SB941 ads on TV for the first time this morning. Funded by Everytown.org.

Ads are here: http://everytown.org/background-che...ce=pr_n_&utm_medium=_o&utm_campaign=or-tv-ads

 

[blarby]

So, what's your take on 945, JSH1 ?

 

[blarby]

Jason Can be reached at : 541.515.3661 for anyone wanting to assist in the direct recall efforts/

 

[JSH1]

So, what's your take on 945, JSH1 ?

I haven't read it yet and it really isn't on topic for this thread. If you want to start a new thread I'll be happy to let you know my opinion.


It looks like I might have a recall election in my future since Riley is my State Senator. I'm curious to see how the process works. I don't see the point in Oregon. Per Oregon law: if Riley is successfully recalled the County Commissioners must appoint a replacement from the same party to serve until the next general election.

 

[blarby]

Oh, I certainly hope you will have a recall election soon. Riley directly took the bloomberg money, and deserves to go moreso than the others, if thats possible.

That makes three recall petitions began this week alone. I guess we'll see, eh ?

I don't see the point in Oregon.

Once the recall petition signatures have been submitted, and verified, the elected officials procedural votes during that special election period can be challenged. This opens the door for the pass/fail of entire bills to be challenged.

So, they can either forego their seat, or fight the recall election process... During which their vote on things like....Registration schemes thinly veiled as UBC's, for example, can be challenged on that basis alone. Its another tactic. I'm not sure if its an effective one, but its one of them. Trust me, when you try and take peoples rights away, both sides are going to use every spectre of the law to their advantage- right or not. At the very least, the lawyers get paid, right ?

As one of the concerned parties noted : "I'm pretty confident that if a legislator(s) subject to recall voted in groundbreaking legislation while actively campaigning to survive recall ( which has yet to occur in Oregon, again, unprecendented), that we'd have a firm legal footing to challenge that legislation. Thats very untested water here in Oregon, but not in other states. There is precedent. Untested waters in our state invite legal challenge, and we'd be obligated to initiate that challenge in court"

More importanly, it gets liars and those that take out of state funds ( $600,000, in Rileys case ) to further in state agendas the attention they deserve.

We're gonna have a majorly borked election cycle thanks to the resignation of the special-interest lobbiest in chief and his wife anyway. This is gonna be a very interesting year or two, might as well chuck in some solid recall efforts on good grounds to flex that democratic muscle, eh ?

If you want to start a new thread I'll be happy to let you know my opinion.

Done !

I eagerly await your opinion.

 

[JSH1]

Oh, I certainly hope you will have a recall election soon. Riley directly took the bloomberg money, and deserves to go moreso than the others, if thats possible.

Riley took the Bloomberg money, in full light of day, said he supported universal background checks, and was elected on election day. He has now done what he said he would do during his campaign. Where is the issue?

The ironic thing is I didn't vote for Riley last November but now I'll have to vote for him if there is a recall. Why? I reject the recent use of recalls by sore losers on both sides of the aisle.

Once the recall petition signatures have been submitted, and verified, the elected officials procedural votes during that special election period can be challenged. This opens the door for the pass/fail of entire bills to be challenged.

Is there precedent for this or is this just wishful thinking? I can't find anything that says votes made by a recalled politician are invalid. As I read it, the recalled politician is removed and a replacement is appointed withing 30 days. End of story. I don't see anything about old votes being invalid.

Even if votes made during the special election could be challenged, Riley has already voted on SB 941 and it has passed the full Senate. The recall petitioners have 90 days to collect the signatures needed force a recall election. The legislature is only in session until July 11th. In all likelihood the session will be over before the necessary signatures are collected and verified.

 

[blarby]

From Kevin at OFF, in the memo/email today :

04.23.15

Yesterday the House Rules Committee held a marathon hearing on SB 941, the universal gun owner registration bill.

While the anti-rights side provided the usual collection of lies and misrepresentations, we were very gratified and proud to have had powerful testimony for the rights of Oregonians by panels of informed, thoughtful advocates.

Joining OFF and the NRA on the first panel were Sheriffs Tim Svenson of Yamhill County and John Hanlin of Douglas County.

They both provided compelling testimony against this bill. We are deeply grateful that they took a stand. Residents of those counties are lucky to have them as Sheriff.

County Commissioners also came from as far away as Wallowa and Wheeler Counties to oppose this dangerous and outrageous attack on liberty and safety.

Commissioner Paul Castilleja came from Wallowa County, and Judge Chris Perry came from Wheeler County. Commissioner Tootie Smith came from Clackamas, Kevin Cameron came from Marion. Commissioner Stan Primozich came from Yamhill County.

Commissioners Chris Boyce and Tim Freeman came from Douglas County.

Each and every one of them made very powerful statements against this bill. We are indebted to them for standing up against the tyranny of the Democrats in the legislature.

We also want to thank Lee Richeson of Rich's Guns in Donald and Karl Durkheimer of NW Armory in Portland for representing gun dealers. Keep them in mind when you are shopping. These folks went to bat for gun owners based solely on their principles and commitment to our rights. Also providing excellent testimony was Joe Dula representing the Canby Rod and Gun Club. If more clubs and ranges took the stand that CRGC did, this battle would be far easier to win.

Ironically, at the same time the committee was hearing this bill that will prevent you from lending a firearm to someone in danger, or storing a firearm for a friend, one more city, Mollalla, passed a resolution opposing the bill!

Today, the Rules Committee voted on the bill after refusing to consider a number of proposals that would provide greater penalties for criminals, protect victims of crime, and fund mental health services. The Democrats on the committee voted down every one of these proposals. Democrat Dan Rayfield responded to each proposal with a parrot like mantra of "dangerous loophole." We lost count of how many times he used the phrase.

Along party lines, the Democrats on the committee also voted down a proposal to remove the "emergency clause" from the bill.

The "emergency clause" is a tool used by legislators to make sure that citizens cannot block a bill by referendum. The Democrats are so determined to ram this through they are doing everything they can to prevent you from stopping it.

This is the most dangerous anti-gun bill to have ever gotten this far in the legislature. Your rights, your privacy and your guns are truly in the crosshairs. The liars who are pushing this bill will stop at nothing and their pockets are filled with Bloomberg money. They bussed in school children to use as props and flew up a "gun dealer" from California (Joe Deaser) who claimed (falsely) that he just came on his own because "he heard about the bill." This was provably false. He was on panel of invited testimony, something he lied about when questioned. He bragged about how he could cash in on mandatory background checks. He had appeared as "invited testimony" when the bill was heard on the Senate side.

The bill now moves to the full House for a vote. That will be our last chance to stop it. The other side has unlimited funds, all we have is you.

Please keep up the pressure. At this point we believe no Republicans will vote for this bill, so please concentrate on the House Democrats when you contact them.

If you want to send a personal note to your House Rep, especially if they are a Democrat, you can find them using this link.

On the right side of that page use the "Find My Legislators" link to find your Oregon House Rep. Call and email them.

Should this bill pass, you will become a criminal if you lend a firearm to a hunting buddy, provide a gun for a woman facing a predator or store a gun for a friend.

You will be forbidden from transferring a gun to another person without going through a dealer, paying high fees and facing the notoriously failed Oregon background check system.

Because of the behavior of legislators who are determined to undermine your rights and ignore the wise counsel of law enforcement, several recall campaigns have begun.

There is one against House Rep Val Hoyle, who hid her anti-gun agenda well enough to get an endorsement from the NRA and became the chief mover of this bill in the House, and another against Bloomberg lacky Chuck Riley in the Senate and a House Rep within his district, Susan McLain.

We believe these efforts are important and urge you to support them in any way you can, especially if you live in those districts.

Thats pretty much where we're at.

It appears the vote is tomorrow.

 

[blarby]

Vote delayed till next week, allegedly.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

So much blatantly false and mis-information being batted around by Democratic representatives, the media and FUDDs about all the great things this bill is going to do.

 

[hso]

Is there any way at this point to get the emergency clause removed before or when it gets to the House? Obviously there's no emergency and using such a hyperbolic tactic to fast track legislation through the legislative process is unethical.

 

[blarby]

It does not appear so, HSO

The "other" thing the emergency tag does is prevent public referendum on the subject. No votey votey on stripping the rights away, unlike in Washington.

It's very sketchy, we're aware

Prozanski has been batting at this one for long before I was an Oregon resident, but until the last election, didn't have the majority he needed. He finally took stabs at it in 2013 and 2014.... Failed.

Bloomberg helped with that, too !

 

[blarby]

If you are in her district :

valhoylerecall.com

Please esign immediately !

 

[hso]

prevent public referendum on the subject. No votey votey on stripping the rights away, unlike in Washington.

Can that be used against them? Would the people of Oregon understand this authoritarian scheme to deny them a voice?

 

[blarby]

Most of the ones I've spoken with do understand this.

Unfortunately, it's past...passed ?.... The Senate, and is on to the House. Unless there is some sort of groundswell of outcry in the next few days, we'll have this as a law by Friday, looks like.

 

[hso]

Are the papers and TV stations all supporting this and won't let anyone voice an opposing view (and are they only letting the angry and threatening folks that represent us badly on the air if they do)?

Isn't there any new outlet showing this for what it is?