Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: We will know soon if we lose more rights

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Scappoose, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    394

    We will know soon if we lose more rights

    http://www.oregonfirearms.org/anti-g...t-of-committee

    Four anti-rights bills moved out of the Senate Judiciary Committee today.

    Senator Arnie Roblan who had told us he saw little need for three of these bills voted for all four. Roblan was the swing vote and he caved to the pressure of the Senate Democrats and agreed to attack your liberties.

    The bills that passed, with 3 Democrats voting yes and both Republicans (Jeff Kruse and Betsy Close ) voting no, were SB 347, 699,700 and 796.

    SB 347 as amended will make you a criminal if you are a CHL holder and you take your daughter to a soccer game at a school.

    SB 699 as amended would make you a criminal if a firearm you were carrying in a “public building” could be seen. As bad as that is, what’s worse is that this bill redefines what a “public building” is. While currently that term is pretty limited, this bill would expand it to “any other building owned or occupied by a public body as defined in ORS 174.109″. As NRA lobbyist Roger Beyer pointed out, in some small towns this could be a private home! For example, a small water district might have its office in the private residence of a member of that board. If you pulled into his driveway with a rifle in your pickup, you would become a felon! Apparently Arnie Roblan was informed of this and voted for it anyway.

    SB 700 as amended will make it illegal to give a gun to your nephew or your best friend without permission from the failed State Police ID Unit . It will require that you acquire and use state issued forms and keep records of your transfer for 5 years. It allows the State Police to delay a transfer… forever.
    It provides no relief if the delay is unwarranted.

    SB 796 as amended will make it illegal for you to to use 21st century technology to get firearms instruction for a CHL.

    This bills now all move to the full Senate for a vote. They can still be defeated if all Senate Republicans vote no and one Senate Democrat votes no.

    Since it is now clear that Roblan is going to roll over and vote for these attacks, that means the only Senate Democrat who could vote no is Betsy Johnson.

    She has repeatedly written that she will vote no and her staff assured us today she is solidly against all four bills. But it never hurts to encourage her.

    If your Senator is a Republican or is Betsy Johnson, a short note of opposition to these bills is in order.

    You can use this link to send an email to your Senator even if you do not know who he is. Be sure to only check the “State Senate” box.

    Here is an automailer setup by OFF to email our representatives:
    Automailer
    http://automailer.oregonfirearms.org/
    Last edited by Puddin99; 04-18-2013 at 09:57 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Cremator75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    393
    Message sent!

  3. #3
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    If the "must conceal in public buildings" one passes, I'll be concealling and going into a lot more public buildings.....while wearing a T shirt that proclaims something along the lines of "there, my gun is hidden, FEEL BETTER"
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    If the "must conceal in public buildings" one passes, I'll be concealling and going into a lot more public buildings.....while wearing a T shirt that proclaims something along the lines of "there, my gun is hidden, FEEL BETTER"
    1-800-get-a-lawyer just in case you need it

  5. #5
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    1-800-get-a-lawyer just in case you need it
    I have two, one on retainer, one in the wings.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Out by Pendleton
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    I have two, one on retainer, one in the wings.
    Criminal defense? Local or out-of-town?

    Can you share names?

  7. #7
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunhobbit View Post
    Criminal defense? Local or out-of-town?

    Can you share names?
    One general firm and one criminal defense with a libertarian bent. Has to sharing names, current "events" are not yet resolved so not yet.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691
    The time is long past for law abiding citizens to start ignoring UNCONSTITUTIONAL "laws".

    I would argue that "needing" to get a CHL is Unconstitutional, no where in the 2nd did it state Government Permission was required to bear arms. Quite the opposite actually.
    Last edited by Jeff. State; 04-23-2013 at 08:50 AM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Out by Pendleton
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    One general firm and one criminal defense with a libertarian bent. Has to sharing names, current "events" are not yet resolved so not yet.
    Fair enough - would *love* to know more about the "libertarian bent" one!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •