A Response To Floyd Prozanski’s Email. If You Are Taking Flak, You Must Be Over The Target.
As you can see here, Senator Floyd Prozanski has sent a mass email defending his record on gun rights and attacking OFF and me, Kevin Starrett, OFF’s director. Here is my response.
Floyd starts by defending the gut and stuff he did to HB 2797, a bill intended to clarify lawful carry of firearms on motorcycles, ATVs and snowmobiles.
We should point out that early in the session we were warned that Prozanski planned to insert poison pills in any pro-gun legislation that came to his committee. In this case, he took a bill that was intended to do no more than fix a previous mistake (the dropping of the motorcycle language in SB 603 from 2009) and added Ginny Burdick’s favorite fantasy, disarming law-abiding Oregonians in schools, including on college campuses.
Now it’s interesting to note that while Prozanski claimed I used “scare tactics” to oppose this bill and that I am more interested in “drumming up utions” he neglected to provide a single example of why disarming the innocent while doing nothing to stop criminals makes the slightest sense. Nor did he provide an explanation for why he thinks CHL holders suddenly become irresponsible or crazy when they step onto school property.
As for “drumming up utions”, as far as I can tell, not one alert dealing with Prozanski’s gutting of bills asked for a dime.
It’s not uncommon for those who hate gun owners and liberty to claim that OFF’s motive is to get rich. But many of you know me, and for those who see what I drive to the Capitol to interface with people like Floyd, it should be obvious that getting rich is not my motivation.
Prozanski states that I have “testified that I believe all felons including murderers and rapists should be able to petition the court to restore their gun rights.” Actually Floyd, the truth is, I think murderers and rapists should never be released from prison. Maybe people should take a close look at yourpositions on how we treat criminals.
It was a nice try, much like when he angrily asked Representative Kim Thatcher if she wanted to arm murderers, but it was so blatantly a “have you stopped beating your wife” type question that it hardly deserved a response.
And by the way, do you wonder why Floyd is so outraged that a person with a felony conviction (something you can get in Oregon for a driving infraction, no expungement allowed) can ask (just ask, not get) to get his rights restored, when it was Floyd who crafted the legislation that allows this? Floyd is a lawyer and a prosecutor, he is a veteran legislator. The bill passed out of his committee with his support and no opposition. It passed the full Senate, with no opposition, passed the full House with no opposition, and was returned to the Senate after minor changes were made in the House where Floyd again voted for it.
It is deeply troubling to think that a person with Floyd’s experience has so little understanding of a bill he himself was responsible for, that he only “noticed” something was terribly “wrong” with the bill after it had gone through that much of the process.
Prozanski told me in a meeting, where other stake holders were present, that he knew something was “wrong” with the bill before the Governor signed it. Yet he did nothing.
In fact, there was nothing wrong with the bill. It did no more than allow a person who had made a mistake to seek redemption. Nothing in the bill gave rights back to felons, and if Prozanski thinks our courts will give gun rights back to murderers, he should ask himself why those people are out of prison to begin with, and why he trusts those crazy courts in the first place.
Prozanski goes on to say “Kevin also believes that a CHL holder should be able to carry a firearm into any public building including schools.”
Yes, I do. I am sure that the thousands upon thousands of law-abiding gun owners with children in the government schools agree. As I said, Prozanski has provided not one single syllable to justify his desire to disarm the good people, except for the paranoid and delusional ravings of a handful of dishonest anti-gun zealots.
Prozanski says in his email “I have spoken to numerous OFF and NRA members who agree with me that certain felons should be prohibited from restoring their gun rights.” I have no idea which NRA members Prozanski has spoken to, but not a single OFF member, not one, has ever contacted us to say that they opposed what we did when we changed the law to simply make sense. Prozanski has made this comment in the past, but I have yet to see any evidence that there is any truth to it. I think it would be difficult for OFF to continue our endless efforts to soak our supporters for donations if we took positions that they disagreed with.
I believe it is a horrible tragedy that Prozanski’s sister was killed. But Prozanski’s focus on the weapon used, while ignoring the fact that a person was responsible, is simply more evidence of how out of touch those who would disarm you are. The gun that was used in the killing of Prozanzki’s sister was not self-animated. Those who have lost loved ones in vehicular homicides have not demanded that parents not drive on school grounds.
Prozanzki tries to make that case that he is not “anti-gun” by making note of the fact that the bill he mangled includes language to keep CHL info private. This is interesting since he refused to even hear a Senate Bill that would do the same thing, because in his own words, “my caucus does not support it.” But given the opportunity to strip good people of their rights to protect themselves, Prozanski was willing to insert that language in order to create a facade while viciously attacking the most law-abiding. It’s unlikely that he will convince too many people, but it certainly proves that our information on his “poison pill” plans was accurate.
Prozanski also takes a swipe at Senator Jeff Kruse saying: “Some of you may have also received an e-newsletter from Senator Jeff Kruse making inaccurate claims about the bill, the committee process, and my intentions and position on these gun bills. It is unfortunate, because misinformation does a service to no one. Even though Jeff claims that I am “anti-gun” (I am not) he in fact voted with me and the three other committee members to amend another firearms bill, HB 2792, to pass it to the Senate floor with a “do pass” recommendation.”
In fact, Kruse’s newsletter was not at all inaccurate. Prozanski is clearly and undeniably anti-gun and no amount of protestation otherwise can change his record. But he is right about one thing. Kruse did go along with Prozanski when he gut and stuffed HB 2792, for reasons that still escape me. Kruse has always been a solid pro-gun vote, so this capitulation is inexplicable, but Prozanski’s attack should serve as a reminder that trying to get along with the anti-gun extremists is a losing proposition.
Obviously we have touched a nerve with Senator Prozanski, but I stand by each and every word that has been sent to OFF supporters about his actions and his record.
Prozanski accuses me of spreading “misinformation” but, as always, provides not one word of evidence for his false accusation.
Some of these bills are still “in play” so we still need to be vigilant and monitor the process. This session is not over by a long shot. If you received Prozanski’s email it is because you stepped up to confront the tactics of the freedom haters. For that I thank you. Your perseverance and activism continue to make a difference that cannot be measured.
Best regards,
Kevin Starrett
ADDED JUNE 8. Despite what Prozanski said in his email, we have not posted “photo shopped” pictures, or any pictures of him in any of our alerts this year. We do not even own Photo Shop. Please keep that in mind as you assess the accuracy of his other claims.
ADDED JUNE 18. Correction. We did in fact use a photo of Prozanski on a page discussing the bills that were sent to his committee. We forgot about that one. However, it was taken directly from the legislative website and was not “photo shopped.” The only change to the photo was that it was reproduced in black and white.