Info provided by "OFF" (Oregon Firearms Federation)
http://oregonfirearms.org/alertsarchive.html
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]HB 2792, "Gut and Stuffed"[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]House Bill 2792 started life as a simple measure to recognize the concealed carry permits of other states. The bill passed through the House Judiciary Committee over the objections of several anti-gun House members who claimed we should not accept licenses from other states that fail to meet our lofty requirements. The full House voted to pass the bill with 40 “yes” votes. Voting “no” were House Reps Barnhart, Beyer, Buckley, Cannon, Dembrow, Doherty, Frederick, Greenlick, Harker, Holvey, Hunt, Kotek, Nathanson, Nolan, Read, Smith J. and Tomei.
The bill was then sent to Floyd Prozanski’s Senate Judiciary Committee. There, Prozanski removed 100% of the language dealing with other states’licenses and replaced it with language that did two unrelated things. First, he inserted language that we had created clarifying how a person can lawfully carry a handgun on a motorcycle, ATV or snowmobile. That was the good news, but many are still confused by what changes actually take place under this law, should it be signed by the Governor.
Currently no one, not even a police officer, can carry a “loaded” firearm on a snowmobile or ATV. The problem is the current law does not define what “loaded” or “unloaded” means. Under the new language in HB 2792 the term “unloaded” now means the following:
If the firearm is a revolver, that there is no live cartridge in the chamber that is aligned with the hammer of the revolver;
If the firearm is a muzzle-loading firearm, that the firearm is not capped or primed;
or if the firearm is other than a revolver or a muzzle-loading firearm, that there is no live cartridge in the chamber.
Under the new law, even these restrictions will not apply to CHL holders, who will be allowed to carry handguns on ATV’s and snowmobiles fully loaded and concealed.
For motorcycle riders without CHLs they now have a definition of how they can transport a handgun on a motorcycle. Since concealed handguns may not be “readily accessible” for those without CHL’s, the bill, for the first time, defines the term “not readily accessible” as it applies to motorcycles (on or off the road) and ATV’s and snowmobiles. The definition of “ not readily accessible” under this bill is:
If the vehicle is a motorcycle, an all-terrain vehicle or a snowmobile, a handgun is not readily accessible within the meaning of this section if:
The handgun is in a locked container within or affixed to the vehicle; or
The handgun is equipped with a trigger lock or other locking mechanism that prevents the discharge of the firearm.
So the short version is, if you have a CHL you can now carry fully loaded handguns on snowmobiles or ATV’s. If you do not have a CHL you may carry on your motorcycle if the gun is locked, or on a snowmobile or ATV if there is no round in the chamber or the handgun is in a locked container or has a trigger lock.
This clarification is the good news. The bad news is that the bill greatly complicated and confused the process for having rights restored if you had a felony conviction. In 2009, Floyd Prozanski drafted a bill (at our request) to clarify how a person with a felony conviction could seek gun rights restoration. That bill, SB 603, passed both Houses without a single “no” vote. It was a simple, straightforward process. You petitioned the court for rights restoration and, if you could demonstrate that you deserved to have your rights restored, the court could do it.
But Prozanski, who apparently cannot even understand the bills he drafts himself, changed his mind after the Governor signed the bill. Now, he became convinced, we would not only be arming “murderers and rapists” but we would be
forced to give guns to people who were still in jail.
It does not take a legal scholar to determine that this accusation is absurd but it may be no more absurd than the false and defamatory accusations Prozanski made that the Oregon Firearms Federation was sending out “Photoshopped” pictures of him to “berate” him, a charge that is not only untrue, but borderline paranoid and delusional.
In the 2010 “special session” Prozanski tried and failed to repeal his own bill. Now in 2011, his false charges about “arming murderers and rapists” found a more receptive audience. The very legislators (meaning all of them) who voted for SB 603 in 2009 now started fearing that it would become a “campaign issue.” This is odd, since not only was it never a campaign issue but the Oregon House voted in 2010 to prevent its repeal.
After Prozanski “gut and stuffed” HB 2792, it passed the Judiciary Committee with the support of the only two Republicans on the committee, Jeff Kruse and Doug Whitsett. It then passed on the full Senate floor (with only Senator Larry George stepping up to vote “no,”) and was sent back to the House where the House could choose to concur with the changes or refuse to. The House voted not to concur, a seemingly positive sign. Because the House refused to concur, a “conference committee” was formed. There in the conference committee, the House members of the committee voted to accept virtually the same bill they had voted not to concur with on the floor. The only difference was a totally meaningless and minor change that had no effect on what the bill would do. It was a pointless sideshow.
When the bill came back to the House floor, the bill’s own sponsor, Kim Thatcher, refused to support this now mangled bill. She was joined in her “no” vote by House Republicans Bentz, Conger, Huffman, Sprenger, Thompson, Weidner and Whisnant. The final bill passed the House with 45 votes and the Senate with 24 votes. [/FONT]
