Originally Posted By DocBull:
WHOA 2796 could be a class 3 dream if the parts are made and retained in oregon..

Hey who is making DIAS?

Originally Posted By mEnTL32:
OFF is the group I would really like to support, but every time I'm about to join I poke around their website and see anti-NRA crap everywhere.

It's hard to be friends with a guy who is constantly running down your other friends.

02.01.11 IT'S SHOWTIME

The first of what may be many hearings on gun related bills has been scheduled.

The following bills have been scheduled to be heard in the House Judiciary Committee on February 9th at 1PM.

These are PUBLIC hearings. If you feel strongly about any of these bills, please come and testify. The bills will be heard in room 343. (Committee schedules are subject to change. You can get the latest schedules here.)


HB 2080 FIRST PUBLIC HEARING - Requires that certain court orders indicate that person subject to order is barred from possessing, receiving, shipping or transporting firearm or firearm ammunition.

Frankly we don't know just where they are going with this bill, but we will certainly be there watching it.


HB 2415 FIRST PUBLIC HEARING - Directs Department of State Police to adopt rules identifying states that allow holder of Oregon concealed handgun license to carry concealed handgun and have substantially similar eligibility requirements.

This bill allows the state police to recognize other states' licenses if they, the State Police, consider the other states' license "worthy." While we can always hope, this is an idea that has failed spectacularly in the past. Let's just recognize everyone. (As in HB 2792 below.)


HB 2787 FIRST PUBLIC HEARING - Prohibits public body from releasing information that identifies holder of or applicant for concealed handgun license.

Simple, straightforward and long overdue, this bill, shot down by extremist Democrats in 2009, would protect license holders from the snooping eyes of anti-gun organizations and agenda-driven media outlets like the Medford Mail Tribune. The Sheriff's Association actually requested that this bill be listed as "at their request." Clearly we are making progress.


HB 2792 FIRST PUBLIC HEARING - Provides nonresidents who are authorized to carry concealed handgun in another state with protections provided to persons with Oregon concealed handgun license.

Commonsense legislation that was torpedoed in 2009 by Democrat Judy Steigler. She has now been returned to private practice thanks to gun owners in Bend. This is a great bill, we encourage your support.

Whether or not you can attend the hearing, we ask that you contact the House Judiciary Committee expressing your support for HB 2787 and 2792.

Contact info and a sample cut and paste message follow. Please feel free to modify it.
_____________________________________________________________________________




Dear Representative,

Your Judiciary Committee is scheduled to hear two important bills on February 9th. I am writing to urge your support for House Bills 2787 and 2792.

HB 2787 is long overdue legislation to protect the privacy of concealed handgun license holders. There is no reason this information should be public. These are not records of government activity. This is private information of people who were compelled by law to disclose it in order to exercise a "right." This information should no more be public than income tax returns.

OFF ALERT 02.18.11 NEW ANTI-GUN BILLS AND DRAFTS
As expected, if a bit later than expected, the Oregon legislature (well some Oregon legislators who don't want their names used) have introduced or drafted new anti-rights bills.

If you in 2009 we passed SB 603 which not only defined the term "readily accessible" for the purposes of having a handgun in your car, but also corrected the weird anomaly in Oregon law that allowed a person with a felony conviction to petition to have his rights restored to BUY a gun but was still forbidden from OWNING it.

That bill passed both houses without a single "no" vote (actually passing the Senate twice) and was signed into law by the Governor. During the 2010 "special" session, the person responsible for SB 603, Senator Floyd Prozanski decided he'd made a terrible mistake and tried to reverse it. Your activism prevented that from happening. But he promised to be back, and now he is with SB 762.

762 will forbid anyone from seeking firearms rights restoration for 10 years after conviction or completion of sentence, whichever is later. Since 603 passed, some persons with felony convictions have successfully gotten their rights restored, and some have not. Proving the new law was working. We have heard of no cases where a person got his rights restored and then committed a crime with a gun. And when you think about it, why would someone with criminal intent go to a court and ask to legally be able to own guns? We will keep you posted on this bills progress.


There are two other new pieces of anti-gun legislation that only exist as drafts at this point. They will, no doubt, be in bill form shortly.

The are LC 1668 and LC 3368.

1668 is one more attempt at a "lock up your self defense" law.

3368 outlaws the "transfer for consideration" of "large capacity" magazines. Presumably you can still give them away. And of course, the ban would not apply to police. While neither of these drafts have anyone's name attached to them, we're willing to go way out on a limb and guess who's behind them.

We are still working to get hearings on several bills we consider important this session including HB 2789, HB 2791, HB 2793 and HB 2797.

Your continued efforts to get hearings on these bills is greatly appreciated.

FINALLY GETS IT.
CBS News has produced a segment on the outrageous and deadly actions of the BATFE who have been expediting the transfer of thousands of firearms to Mexican drug cartels.

Those weapons are now being used against US Agents on the border.

While we welcome any attention from the establishment media, we think it's essential that gun owners know who did the work that led to this story finally seeing the light of day.

It's been a long time coming, but the tireless and courageous efforts of Mike Vanderboegh of Sipsey Street Irregulars and our friend David Codrea of Gun Rights Examiner are behind this story finally getting some mainstream airtime.

Needless to say, the ATF will use whatever means and methods available to them to cover up the truth and intimidate the whistle blowers. But thanks to David and Mike, the truth is out there.
WATCH THE VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EUR5Dh0zBw&feature=player_embedded

03.26.11 HOW WE MOVE AHEAD.
As you know, three pro-gun bills requested by OFF have passed the Oregon House by wide margins.

HB 2797, our motorcycle/ATV bill, passed without a single "no" vote on Thursday. This bill is so simple and uncontroversial that it is hard to imagine anyone except Ginny Burdick opposing it .

The two other bills, however, HB 2787 and HB 2792, face major hurdles in the Senate. Both of these bills have been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

HB 2787 is the bill that would protect the privacy of CHL holders. While it's difficult to imagine why anyone would want to force public disclosure of this information, a few Senate Democrats are demanding just that. In an email Senator Ginny Burdick offered this bizarre justification for her efforts to kill this legislation:

"Throughout my time as a State Senator I have fought to strengthen our
public records and transparency statutes. I support protecting our
existing public records legislation.
If HB 2787 is passed, victims of domestic violence will be unable to
check if their attackers carry a concealed weapon. In addition, there
will be no way to monitor whether Sheriffs are administering the
concealed handgun license requirements correctly.
Thank you for contacting my office. Please feel free to call or email
with any further questions or concerns."

This is patently and obviously absurd. Victims of domestic violence are unable to tell if their attackers are carrying concealed weapons now. Persons guilty of domestic violence are not allowed to own guns, let alone get CHLs. Furthermore, the real danger to domestic violence victims is when THEIR personal information is revealed by exposing these records. The fact is that Burdick is a bigot who simply hates gun owners, even those who have jumped through significant government hoops to exercise a "right." But at the moment, Burdick is pulling the strings.

(It might be interesting to see how many legislators who voted against CHL privacy are willing to post their home addresses, telephone numbers and drug use history.)

The Chairman of the Senate Committee, to which HB 2787 has been assigned, has informed us that "his caucus" is opposed to the bill. However, he himself was a co-sponsor of very similar legislation in 2009 and other Democrats have publicly stated they support the bill.Ther is every indication that it is simply the hysterical ravings of Ginny Burdick that have cowed Chairman Prozanski into backing off this bill.

A Senate Bill with the same language has already been heard in his committee and Prozanski scheduled a work session to adopt a few short amendments that would have made the Senate Bill identical to the passed House Bill. It was this Senate Bill that Prozanski told us he had to pull from the schedule because of opposition from his "caucus."

Now the House Bill has been assigned to his committee and it is going to be up to us to get it heard and passed. It is simply outrageous that one zealot in the Senate is holding up this important legislation for no other reason than her hatred for gun owners and her anger about being unable to pass any anti-gun legislation for all the years she has been in the legislature.

We can still do this. We just have to turn up the heat.

As those of you who take action may have learned, some legislators have taken to writing back to activists saying things like "we have forwarded your concerns to your own legislator." This is their way of informing you that they know you are not from their district. (Although more and more they are forwarding your concerns to the wrong legislator.) Should you care? No.

First of all, whether a legislator is "yours" or not, they still cast votes that affect your freedom. They are still responsible for what they do. Second, while it's true that you may not be able to cast a vote against them at election time, you still can very much contribute to their defeat. You can make a contribution to whoever runs against them, or contribute to PACs like ours, which can work to defeat them.

Not everyone who supports OFF and OFFPAC lives in Judy Stiegler's old district, but many of you contributed to her defeat. So never be put off by a legislator who claims to be indifferent to your concerns because you don't live in his district.

Right now, the House is split exactly in half. The Senate is 16/14 in favor of Democrats. While we have plenty of Democrats voting correctly, it is still mostly Democrats voting against gun rights. (And one Republican, Vicki Berger.) That means that a single seat change in either House could vastly change the outlook for gun rights. Democrats know this and know that you can contribute to ANY race. So disregard any implication that your concerns don't matter.

That being said, it's time to redouble our efforts to protect the privacy of CHL holders. The man standing in the way of a hearing on HB 2787 is still Floyd Prozanski. As a co-sponsor of similar legislation in the past, and someone who has already held hearings on CHL privacy, we think it's safe to say that Prozanski supports the concept of privacy for Oregon's most law-abiding gun owners. But he's being pushed around by a handful of bigoted militants. It's time, once again, to let Prozanski know how important this bill is to people who believe in liberty and privacy. Please make your voice heard.

Contact info and a sample message follow.

Senator Floyd Prozanski
Party: D District: 4
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1704
District Phone: 541-342-2447
Capitol Address: 900 Court St NE, S-417, Salem, OR, 97301
District Office Address: PO Box 11511, Eugene, OR, 97440
Email: sen.floydprozanski@state.or.us
Website: http://www.leg.state.or.us/prozanski



__________________________________________________


Dear Senator Prozanski,

I am aware that you have chosen to kill Senate Bill 582. Now, its companion bill, HB 2787, has been assigned to your committee.

As you know, HB 2787 passed overwhelmingly in the House with support from both parties and all Oregon Sheriffs. As you also know, CHL holders come from both parties and one thing they all agree on is that their personal, private information should not be made available to anyone looking for a mailing list, or any media outlet with an ax to grind against gun owners. This is a nonpartisan issue in a closely divided legislature. No matter what district a voter is in, this is the kind of issue that makes people contribute to the opponents of those who seek to invade their privacy.

I strongly urge you to look past the few militants who oppose anything they view as "pro-gun" and stand up for the rights and privacy of gun owners as you did when you co-sponsored similar legislation in 2009.

Yours,

Originally Posted By Roguelawyer:
[quote]Originally Posted By Genin:
I note that so far, there have not been ANY cases cited (which court, case number, legal references) where either the NRA or OFF actually started a lawsuit, or civil action. It would appear that my initial guess was correct...both groups just hop on board once they believe something has already been initiated by someone else. That is sort of sad.

This is one arena where I would really like to be wrong.

ONE BILL MOVES, ONE BILL HELD OVER.


Today, both the Senate and House Judiciary Committees were scheduled to vote on bills that would save gun owners enormous hassles and Oregonians millions of dollars.

The Senate Committee was, once again, due to vote on SB 934, a bill which would remove the responsibility for running firearms background checks from the Oregon State Police and turn those checks over to the feds, who do not charge and have a far better track record of getting the checks done efficiently.

For the record, OFF does not support or endorse any background checks for a number of reasons. FIrst, we believe it is a prior restraint on your rights. Second we do not believe it prevents bad actors from getting guns. However, as long as we are saddled with a federal mandate to subject ourselves to background checks, we believe we should have the least time consuming and least expensive system we can. RIght now, that would be the federal NICS system.

Although SB 934 has been scheduled for action for several days, it was once again postponed. We have been told that amendments to the bill have been drafted, but as of now, we have not been permitted to see them. It is very likely that the amendments will completely change the contents of the bill. Until we see the amendments we simply do not know. However, when we see them, you will see them.

In the House, a work session was held on a similar bill, HB 2791.

As with SB 934, this bill would end the fees and delays on background checks by removing the State Police as the point of contact. While more and more states who rely on local authorities have been experiencing problems with background checks, states that use the national NICS system have been having no problems.

The House Judiciary Committee took testimony from the Oregon State Police at today's work session even though OSP chose not to comment at the public hearing where testimony is normally taken. At that hearing, the only testimony taken against the bill was from the public employee's union.

The OSP said that the delays dealers have been experiencing while trying to contact them on the phone, and the surge in delays in approvals was due to a big increase in background check requests. Oddly, they also said that in spite of the almost three million dollars in federal grants already received to forward mental health records to the feds, they have not yet done so.

While we, of course, wonder what they have been doing with the money, we are more perplexed by the statement that they have not shared any mental health records as required by federal law.

To be clear, we oppose sharing that data and fought hard to prevent Oregon from enacting a law that forced us into compliance with the NRA-and-Brady-Campaign-backed legislation demanding this sensitive information. But the fact is, we are now stuck with this law and the OSP has gotten lots of money to comply. What is particularly inexplicable is their statement that they have shared no information with the feds, when we already know of one person who has been denied firearms purchases because of mental health records that the feds recently got.

What's even more troubling is that this person had already had his rights restored by the courts! So why his private data was shared with the feds is a mystery. Clearly, someone is not getting his story straight.

A side note to this issue is that Psychiatric Safety Review Board has received almost $300,000.00 to conduct gun rights restoration hearings and so far has conducted ...none. They have also created a resolution process so onerous, expensive and invasive that few rational people would attempt it. When you get a boatload of money to run a process that no one wants to engage in, you get to keep a boatload of money.

The vote on HB 2791 had a few surprises.

(One thing that was not a surprise was when Representative Carolyn Tomei expressed opposition to the bill because she wanted to "keep Oregon jobs." In other words, gun owners should pay twice in order to insure that the people who work in the ID unit at OSP have jobs. The millions in savings to Oregon did not impress Tomei.)

The first surprise was when Representative Andy Olson vote no. Usually a reliable supporter of gun rights, Olson's "no" vote was unexpected. Mary Nolan, who can always be counted on to vote against gun rights, regardless of the millions in potential savings for Oregon, stated that it was Olson's vote that convinced her to vote "no." Representative Gene Whisnant was excused at the time of the vote. As a supporter, his vote was crucial. (Whisnant was attending other business and not avoiding this vote.)

In the end Representaitves Krieger, Barker, Wand, Hicks and Schaufler vote yes.

A "yes" vote was a vote for gun rights and common sense.

Tomei, Nolan and Olson voted no.

The deciding vote, which passed the bill, came from Representative Chris Garrett, who said that while he expected to vote "no" on the floor, he was casting a courtesy vote for the excused Whisnant and voted "yes."

Ironically, a regular supporter of gun rights, Andy Olson, almost sank this important bill, and a Democrat who often votes against gun rights saved it.

We hope they will both reconsider their positions and vote "yes" on the floor of the House, but there can be no denying that it was Garrett's vote that kept this bill alive.

The bill is now scheduled to go to the full House floor, although procedural moves could send it to another committee. But right now we have to assume the next step is the House floor.

Please take a moment to write your own House rep and urge a "yes" vote on HB 2791.

Your rep can be reached using this link.

A sample message follows:

___________________________________________________________

Dear Representative,

HB 2791 has been voted out of the House Judiciary Committee and should be coming to you on the House floor soon.

This common sense bill can save Oregon millions in duplicated services and eliminate costly delays for Oregon's law-abiding gun owners. I strongly urge you vote yes on a bill that will accomplish so much at no cost.


Yours,