The Senate Judiciary Committee is refusing to hear numerous firearm related bills.
This would not be unusual, except several of these bills can hardly be interpreted as “pro-gun.”
The Chairman of the committee, Floyd Prozanski is refusing to hold hearings on a number of bills that do nothing more than clarify existing law, or correct errors that exist in the current law.
Why would Prozanski, himself an attorney, not want to correct clear mistakes in existing statute?
Take Senate Bill 573 for example. No one could reasonably say this bill is a “pro-gun” bill. All it does is address a peculiar error that exists in state law.
Currently, a person with a felony conviction may petition the courts to have her rights restored to buy a firearm. (Keep in mind, this only allows people to ASK, it’s not a guarantee their request will be granted.) Sounds simple enough right? It’s not.
While such a person can ask to have their rights restored to buy a gun, they CANNOT ask to have their rights restored to own that gun! It’s absurd. Surely Prozanski cannot believe the legislature intended to write the law that way. Yet Prozanski has shown no interest in this simple technical fix that would make Oregon’s law make sense.
Another bill Prozanski has refused to hear is Senate Bill 603. Is this a “pro-gun” bill being pushed by the “gun lobby?” No, all it does is define the term “readily accessible.”
Why is that important? Oregon law forbids people who don’t have Oregon concealed handgun licenses from having handguns in their cars if they are concealed and “readily accessible.” But nowhere does the law define what “readily accessible” means.
If you’re traveling in a Miata or a Mini Cooper, what part of the car is not “readily accessible?” What about a pickup truck? Well, the bed maybe, but most of us would probably not want to transport firearms in the open bed of a pickup. What if you’re traveling on a motorcycle?
All SB 603 does is define what “readily accessible” means so that visitors and persons without CHL’s, can travel without running afoul of the law. Hardly a “pro-gun” bill, unless you believe that innocent people, being entrapped by their own reasonable interpretations of the law, somehow serves the common good. But Prozanski has refused to hear that bill as well.
There are other bills that Prozanski is refusing to deal with, but we can understand that, because they would benefit law abiding gun owners. However, we are baffled by Prozanski’s refusal to address areas of law that obviously need clarification or correction.
These are not complicated or controversial bills. They simply acknowledge that the laws as written are incomplete or incorrect. Please take a minute to ask Chairman Prozanski to hear, and act on, these commonsense measures. Contact info and a sample message follow.
Floyd Prozanski
900 Court St. NE, S-417
Salem, OR 97301
Capitol Phone:
503-986-1704
sen.floydprozanski@state.or.us
_________________________________________________________________________
Dear Senator Prozanski,
Of all the bills you have in your committee, there are two that are neither complicated nor controversial, but they are necessary.
SB 573 does nothing more than correct a glaring error in existing law. SB 603 simply creates a definition of “readily accessible” in the context of transporting a handgun in a vehicle, thereby removing the current ambiguity and making travel safer for motorists and police officers.
I strongly urge you to hear and pass these much-needed bills as soon as possible. They just make sense.
Sincerely,
________________
_________________________________________________________________________