papaairbear
Member
I don't know what it's going to take before they pull their heads out of the sand. Don't think I want to be here when that realization comes.
Oregon UBC passes - what to do now
- Thread starter hso
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Very common across the country.
bikemutt
Member
It's easy to assume all "pro-gun" voters would've voted against I-594 but that's unlikely to be the case. If you buy maybe 2 or 3 guns in your lifetime, and know that anyone you'd leave them to upon your passing, or to whom you'd sell them prior to that event can pass a BG check, why would you care about a UBC constraint?
I-594 passed with a 60% majority voting yes, you'd have to hope for some amazing odds from the "pro-gun" vote to turn that around. And, if something, or someone, had come along to fire up the many voters who stayed home, well, it doubtlessly would've excited as many "anti-gun" voters to come out too.
I-594 passed overwhelmingly because no one presented a credible, easily digestible case against it. The opposition was pathetic, albeit not for lack of effort. UBCs in WA and OR are the new normal, may as well get used to it.
For the record my family universally voted NO on 594.
Nick Burkhardt
Member
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s gun control group, Everytown for Gun Safety, donated $75,000 directly to Friends of Chuck Riley and $50,000 to the Senate Democratic Leadership Fund.
Riley’s committee also pulled in $10,000 from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
The Senate Democratic Leadership Fund then turned around and contributed $174,585.50 to Riley plus the Democratic Party of Oregon gave another $107,577.56.
So, yeah that narrow 287 vote margin that he won by was paid for by Bloomberg.
Riley’s committee also pulled in $10,000 from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
The Senate Democratic Leadership Fund then turned around and contributed $174,585.50 to Riley plus the Democratic Party of Oregon gave another $107,577.56.
So, yeah that narrow 287 vote margin that he won by was paid for by Bloomberg.
blarby
Member
Pretty much. ^^^^^
If you are interested in the results of the recall efforts for Hoyle, contact [email protected]
Prozanskis recall effort is finally getting underway, and should be published/public within 14 days. According to prophecy... This one is irritating, for many reasons. Not my district, but I wish those folks the best of luck.
No clue on price. Given all the bloomdollars, I think that ones as likely as prozanski.
Of awesome note, Val's NRA rating has officially been downgraded... So, she won't get the support from the folks she lied to next time around.
If they don't redistrict again, that is.
And assuming we can get a pro-gun candidate who isn't a regressive sociopathic troll....*crosses fingers*
However, given that she's also stonewalling on her buddy Floyd's pot Bill implementation, she's Blatantly peed in the ointment on both sides of the fence.... Her future looks thankfully pretty dim.
If you are interested in the results of the recall efforts for Hoyle, contact [email protected]
Prozanskis recall effort is finally getting underway, and should be published/public within 14 days. According to prophecy... This one is irritating, for many reasons. Not my district, but I wish those folks the best of luck.
No clue on price. Given all the bloomdollars, I think that ones as likely as prozanski.
Of awesome note, Val's NRA rating has officially been downgraded... So, she won't get the support from the folks she lied to next time around.
If they don't redistrict again, that is.
And assuming we can get a pro-gun candidate who isn't a regressive sociopathic troll....*crosses fingers*
However, given that she's also stonewalling on her buddy Floyd's pot Bill implementation, she's Blatantly peed in the ointment on both sides of the fence.... Her future looks thankfully pretty dim.
Last edited:
papaairbear
Member
Bikemutt wrote: "may as well get used to it." No. This is just the start of the anti's attempt at gutting and "reforming" the 2A. A right that is granted under restriction is a privilege, not a right, And privileges are granted by people holding power over those to whom the privilege (so long as the criteria is met by those granting this permission) is met. The 2A is a right not a privilege. This is simply a power struggle and not any "common sense" reasoning, Common sense clearly screams out that criminals could care less about what laws are enacted to "reduce gun violence". This is purely a power struggle to subordinate a population, and UBC's are a great start. "may as well get used to it." Sorry Bikemutt, I have to disagree with you here.
Last edited:
bikemutt
Member
papaairbear, I understand where you are coming from. The best time to have fought these two devils is before they became law. I'm not saying it's impossible to fight the good fight and prevail after the fact, I just believe it's going to be even harder now. At least in Oregon you can hold some elected officials accountable, and maybe the recall efforts will bear fruit. There are no elected heads to roll here in WA so I don't see the law going away anytime soon.
Good points bikemutt.
The opposition to I-594 was "preaching to the choir". It was targeted to motivate the base and get them to the polls. However, it also turned off the moderate voters that didn't feel strongly one way or the other. The average person doesn't buy: "background checks = registration = confiscation." That message got a pretty flawed ballot initiative passed 60% to 40%.
For those of you who are against UBC's you need to come up with a solid case against them. This case must be presented to win over urban voters who may or may not own firearms. Specifically you need an answer to the question: "Why are background checks OK for guns purchased from dealers but not guns sold privately?"
papaairbear
Member
The law does go into effect Sunday, but the recalls have NOT YET failed.
http://ballotpedia.org/Floyd_Prozanski_recall,_Oregon_State_Senate_(2015)
Got about another month yet so don't count your chickens before they hatch.
http://ballotpedia.org/Floyd_Prozanski_recall,_Oregon_State_Senate_(2015)
Got about another month yet so don't count your chickens before they hatch.
I'm not "counting chickens" I'm relaying what the local news reported. They reported that the organization behind the recalls has abandoned the effort. Yes, there is still plenty of time on the clock.
They also said that the bill did not include any funds for enforcement so local sheriff departments will not actively enforce the law. Instead they will prosecute people after the fact if a gun come into their possession and is found to have been transferred illegally.
papaairbear
Member
Typical response for the Portland News crews. The recalls against Chuck Riley and Val Hoyle have been dropped, http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/07/chuck_riley_susan_mclain_recal.html but the recall against Floyd Prozanski is still very much active and gaining signatures. http://www.oregonfirearms.org/we-must-be-doing-something-right
And when they said "not any funds for enforcement" the Sheriffs actually said they were refusing to allocate any funds to enforce this new law.
http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/0...ouse-we-wont-enforce-your-gun-grabbing-law-2/
And when they said "not any funds for enforcement" the Sheriffs actually said they were refusing to allocate any funds to enforce this new law.
http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/0...ouse-we-wont-enforce-your-gun-grabbing-law-2/
Last edited:
papaairbear
Member
The recall petition to recall Oregon Senate Leader Floyd Prozanski, who authored the Universal Background Check Law, needed about 8,600 signatures to force a vote on his removal. Today, over 10,000 signatures were delivered to The Oregon Secretary of State. http://www.oregonfirearms.org/category/off-alerts So now the SOS will need to validate the signatures.
blarby
Member
We'll see how that goes.
Not holding my breath.
Hopefully, they can't invalidate all of them, and it forces ol Floyd to make some tough choices.
Not holding my breath.
Hopefully, they can't invalidate all of them, and it forces ol Floyd to make some tough choices.
papaairbear
Member
Certainly some tough choices for Floyd for sure. But he has fully earned this. I don't expect anything honest out of the Secretary of State's office either, but we have some avenues to pursue if that happens.
blarby
Member
That he has.
One of the important takeaways from this effort was that about midway through the effort, those pulling the levers realized @a wasn't the polarizing issue that would get them 10k signatures. A concerted move was made to address all of Floyds other shortcomings- soft on hard crime, limited "real" prosecutorial experience, and a host of other issues.
For those who are mounting similar efforts elsewhere- cast a wide net for the disenfranchised. Laser-beaming on one issue, especially one as divise as 2A in the current environment, might not be all you need !
blarby
Member
Given his record, highly unlikely. But, thems the dice we roll.
OP
OP
Let's focus on how to affect a change and not wander off that goal.
Last edited:
Sheepdog1968
Member
Between what was done by recall in Colorado and what is shaping up in Oregon I think will help us in the long haul as other politicians will take notice.
Why? The positions in Colorado flipped back to Democrats in the next regular election and the laws were not overturned. If the recall effort is successful in Oregon Floyd will be replaced with a Democrat.
The recall efforts show that you can get a small number of people fired up about an issue but that doesn't change the long term trends.
blarby
Member
blarby
Member
And here ya go :
http://www.nrtoday.com/news/18188386-113/sen-prozanski-recall-fails
Although I'd like to add that it was a "sampling" count, a manual tabulation has not, and to sources that say, will not, occur.
http://www.nrtoday.com/news/18188386-113/sen-prozanski-recall-fails
Although I'd like to add that it was a "sampling" count, a manual tabulation has not, and to sources that say, will not, occur.
Recalling the guy isn't going to go anywhere. It never would have. Not going to change anything The only real chance will be to get it on as a ballot measure after a few years of this whole thing being too much of a PITA for the public. FFL's don't want and aren't forced to accept the extra traffic and the current state of affairs where the state has to get involved in the NCICS's check for no apparent reason will drag the whole thing down to a crawl. It will all collapse under its own weight soon enough.
- Status
