Author: OFF

MEDFORD SCHOOL DISTRICT PUSHES GUN BAN

The Medford School District passed a resolution Tuesday calling on the legislature to pass legislation banning licensed, concealed carry on school property.

Displaying an ignorance of the law that has come to be the hallmark of the government school establishment, School Board Member Eric Dziura said “It’s possible we already have the legal authority to pass a policy on banning all guns on school property, but there is a doubt about that.”

Actually, there is NO doubt about it. School districts have NO such authority.In fact,it is the very confusing patchwork of contradictory gun laws that would be created by such a bill that got the Oregon legislature to pass preemption in the first place.

Neil Goldschmidt protégée, Senator Ginny Burdick (along with Senator Alan Bates) has announced her intention to introduce a bill to ban guns at schools in either the upcoming “emergency” session in February, or in the 2009 regular session.

Similar bills were introduced in 1999, 2001,2003 and 2005. Each time, they were defeated by the vocal opposition of not only gun owners, but people with common sense across the state.

If the bill is introduced in the 2008 “Special Session” it should be interesting to see how it is handled by Senate President Peter Courtney, who has made it very clear that he intends to avoid contentious, partisan issues.

In 2005, the Democratic Caucus tried to get Burdick to shelve plans to introduce a school gun ban, but after a nasty and belligerent caucus, minutes before the hearing, she introduced it anyway only to have it voted down by anti-gun Floyd Prozanski who realized what a loser the bill was.

But, because of Burdick’s obsession with anti-gun bills, she may very well attempt it.

Whenever the bill is introduced, we need to be prepared to fight it. If the Democrat majority grows after the next election, they may feel emboldened to push an anti-gun agenda that has failed in the past. Or, if they hear from us loud and clear, they may concentrate on other priorities. Either way, the outcome will depend on our willingness to stay informed, active and engaged.

Right now, one way you can help us stay in the fight is to visit the new OFF STORE and make a purchase of any of our apparel items. Not only does your purchase give you an opportunity to tell the world where you stand on freedom issues, but the proceeds from the sales go to our efforts to protect gun rights in Oregon.

All of us at OFF wish you and yours a blessed and peaceful Thanksgiving, and want you to know that we regularly give thanks for the amazing support you have provided over the years.

Stay safe.

MEDFORD NEWSPAPER SUES TO GET NAMES OF GUN OWNERS

As you may have heard, the Medford Mail Tribune has sued to get the names of concealed handgun license holders.

This action was taken as a result of the lawsuit brought by a Medford teacher against the Medford school district. As you know, teacher Shirley Katz was suing to be allowed to carry her defensive firearm to work at Medford High School.

The Mail Tribune, which has repeatedly editorialized that licensed, trained adults should NOT be allowed to carry firearms on school property, believes that one of the ways to promote its anti-gun agenda is to intimidate gun owners by demanding that the Sheriff turn over the names of license holders.

What possible purpose this would serve, beyond invading the privacy of the most law abiding residents of Oregon, remains a mystery. But the Tribune’s Editor, Bob Hunter is determined to proceed.

Jackson County Sheriff Mike WInters has so far refused, correctly pointing out the dangers this would present. “We were reluctant to hand over the names because we don’t want to make it easier for anybody who would use the information for harm in terms of credit card fraud or identity theft.” Winters said.

Editor Bob Hunter believes that he has the right to those names for whatever purpose he chooses to use them. “This is information bought and paid for by the public, and the public has a right to it.” But of course, that’s not true. The public did not buy and pay for this information. The information was paid for by the fees license holders are forced to pay to exercise a “right.” But Bob goes on “It’s important for news media to take a stand on something like this because if public information is withheld in this way it will diminish the amount of public information the public is allowed to see,”

The truth is, whether it is legal for the press to obtain these names or not, (and attorneys have recently informed us it may NOT be legal) the only purpose being served is to chill the rights of gun owners. It would be no different if we published the home addresses and phone numbers of Tribune staff and hid behind the First Amendment. (Which we will do if they continue this senseless exercise.)

While the Sheriff should be applauded for his efforts to protect license holders,Bob Hunter and the Mail Tribune and its advertisers should know that it’s wrong to promote their anti self-defense crusade by threatening the privacy of gun owners.

You can contact Hunter by e-mail here bhunter@mailtribune.com or by regular mail and phone here:

Mail Tribune
P.O. Box 1108
111 N. Fir St.
Medford, OR 97501
541-776-4411

Court Finds Against Self Defense For Government Workers.

In a long awaited decision, Jackson County Circuit Court Judge Philip Arnold, decided that teachers and other employees of the state have no right to protect themselves and others.

In his decision, Judge Arnold stated that school districts may make rules prohibiting teachers from having firearms on school property.

While we believe that this decision sends a clear message that our schools are a target rich environment, at a time when we can least afford it, we are not particularly surprised by the judge’s opinion.

We are still evaluating the Judge’s ruling, but Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation is committed to continuing this battle as long as our resources permit.

The teacher,Shirley Katz, and OFEF, are very grateful for the amazing outpouring of support we have received, not only from our members, but from others from coast to coast who recognize the importance of this case. We need your help now more than ever. This fight is not over, but the battle for the fundamental right of all people to stay safe will be long and expensive.

Your tax deductible ution to OFEF will help ensure that we have the means to take this fight to the next level.

Recently,Oregon’s most militant gun hater, Senator Ginny Burdick, announced her intentions to introduce new restrictions on gun owners, as she has year after year. The battle lines are clearly drawn. Your support for our legal efforts can make all the difference in the future for gun rights.

We thank you for all you have done, assure you that we will continue to fight for your freedoms, and ask that you do whatever you can to assist us in this battle for liberty.

Legal Case Updates.

As you are very well aware, the media has taken an intense interest in Shirley Katz’s decision to demand that her rights not be violated.

The Medford English teacher has been reported on internationally, most recently on the BBC’s “World Have Your Say.” (One listener e-mailed in from Africa stating that “If it’s legal for her to have a gun in school, it’s legal for her to gun down her students.”)

Shirley also appeared recently on Tom Gresham’s “Gun Talk.”

In spite of the incredible pressure, Shirley has been a great spokesperson for gun owners everywhere. She has been very thankful for the overwhelming support she has received from you, without whom this case could never have moved forward.

As of today, the Judge has still not issued a ruling, but we feel strongly that no matter what the outcome, Shirley has been able, because of your very generous support, to force the entire nation to face the fact that our schools are unprotected, soft targets and that people willing to step up to protect them should be taken seriously.

It’s ironic that the Oregon Teachers Union has taken no interest in supporting Shirley, a responsible, courageous individual whose aim is to protect her students, while at the same time, the regular incidence of sexual abuse by teachers is swept under the rug.

We are all eagerly awaiting the judge’s decision, but while we wait, we want to remind you of another case to which OFF members have generously uted.

You will recall the case of David Bacon, a young man who volunteered for the Oregon Firearms Federation and was entrapped by the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco and Firearms. David was convicted of crimes that evidence proved he could not have committed.

David is currently incarcerated and seeking an appeal. Many of you very generously uted to David’s defense, and for those of you who have followed the case, we wanted to bring you up to speed on David’s situation.

Our attorney has received the government’s latest briefs and responded to them. All the documents are available on the website of our Attorney, Jim Leuenberger. If you would like to make a tax deductible donation to David’s defense, you can do so here. Please be sure to pick the Foundation from the “Donation Type” drop down menu, and make a note that your ution is for David. 100% of all donations go directly to his defense fund.

Thank you for your continued support for gun owners’ rights. None of our efforts would be possible without your generosity.

The Medford school district filed a motion to dismiss our lawsuit protecting teachers’ rights to carry a concealed handgunon school property. Yesterday,Jackson County Circuit Judge G. Philip Arnold dismissed the district’s motion and allowed the case to move forward.

While not a final victory, it was still an important and positive development. (To see local coverage and respond, click here.)

Our attorney argued that the law was clear and the school district cannot create restrictions on gun possession by license holders. The school district argued that if trained, licensed adults were allowed to carry on school property “school districts … could be reduced to armed camps,”

Oddly, he never explained why they are not “armed camps” now, when even the school district admits it is perfectly legal for non employees to carry on school property. Nor did he explain why the entire state is not an “armed camp” since thousands legally carry firearms from Portland to Elgin.
No one from the district commented on the insanity in Cleveland where two teachers and two students were just shot because all the good people were disarmed.

Based on the comments from callers to talk radio, misinformation about Oregon law, and fantasies about widespread mayhem, should we prevail, are fairly widespread, however every poll we have seen have the supporters of the Medford teacher way out in front.

The Judge has not issued a ruling on the case itself yet, he as only stated that the case is legitimate and should not be dismissed out of hand, as the district has requested. We still have a long way to go. Interestingly, we have been told by a community college administrator that other school districts and organizations within the public school establishment are uting toward the Medford school district’s legal bills. That makes this even more of a David vs Goliath battle.

We could not have taken on this important fight without your very generous support. To all of you have uted, we are deeply grateful. But we must assume that we have a long way to go.

This decision could still go either way, and in the event of a victory for freedom, we are sure the Medford School District will appeal. After all, it would appear that funding will not be an issue for them .

Thanks for your support, and we will keep you posted.

NRA GUN CONTROL BILL STALLED BUT NOT DEAD.

The NRA backed, Brady Bill expansion act, HR 2640 has been stalled as a result of your efforts, but it’s not dead yet

Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma is working to keep the bill from being fast-tracked, but Charles Schumer and the NRA are continuing to try to pass it over the objections of gun owners across the country.

While the NRA continues to insist this is not gun control, their allies, New York’s Charles Schumer and Carolyn McCarthy have hailed it as just that.

Gun Owners of America, which is opposing the bill, has reported that the American Legion has joined The Military Order of the Purple Heart in opposing the legislation.

The NRA has dubbed the bill “The Brady Improvement Act” but have never really explained why gun owners would want to “improve” an unconstitutional bill that gun owners opposed from the beginning. Nor have they explained why the Federal Government, which routinley delays and denies qualified gun buyers in Oregon should be trusted with even more of people’s personal records.

You can read an in-depth analysis of what is wrong with this bill here.You may also want to contact the NRA and tell them to STOP supporting Schumer and McCarthy’s latest gun grab.

You can use GOA’s legislative action center to send an e-mail to Senators Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith. If you are an NRA member you may want to contact them and tell them you do not support their alliances with the likes of Schumer.

TEACHER LAWSUIT UPDATE

Our lawsuit against the Medford school district has attracted an amazing amount of attention and an amazingly generous response by supporters of the Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation. We have received help from people all across the country and we are humbled and grateful for your kindness and willingness to ute.

We have had assistance from many long time supporters, and many new friends as well. It would be impossible to overestimate how much you all have done. And all your help came without OFEF once sending out a press release or seeking any publicity on this case. Although we have responded to countless media inquiries, we never sought to exploit the media circus this case has become.

But a few press releases can go a long way. We have heard from many who were asking about a press release sent out by Second Amendment Foundation announcing their support for the teacher’s lawsuit. Invariably we have been asked why your efforts as the supporters of OFEF were ignored in the release. We have no answer to that question. OFEF has already paid several thousand dollars in legal fees and is committed to covering all the expenses, and that would be impossible without the generosity of people like you. Your early commitment should not be ignored. But that one press release got SAF tremendous publicity and apparently, that was the point. Their total ution to the case was $500.

Currently, the school district has filed a motion to dismiss our case and has demanded that the teacher’s name be made public. Numerous reporters have also threatened to publicize her name. She has informed us that if she is exposed, she will continue to fight. We are grateful for her courage.

To hear an interview and update on the case, which is due to be heard in court on Oct 11th, please go to the archives of Gun Talk to hear Sunday’s show, with OFEF’s Kevin Starrett as guest.

As you probably know, our lawsuit against the Medford school district has received international attention. We have received media inquiries from as far away as Canada and the story has been reported in publications as far away as India. Clearly we have hit a nerve.

For all who have uted to our legal fund, we to thank you. We have heard from people across the country who believe strongly in what we are doing and recognize that this issue has national ramifications.

The case boils down to one very simple question. Does a person lose the right to protect herself and the people for whom she is responsible because she accepts a job at public school? Obviously we don’t think so, and by your support, you have made it clear you don’t either.

The papers have been filed. The arguments are due to be heard Oct 11th. The future of the rights of government employees is now (at least temporarily) in the hands of the courts.

If you are an OFF supporter, you will soon receive a letter from our Foundation.

OFEF does not do the kind of constant fundraising you have come to expect from activist organizations. We only ask for your financial support when we have a issue that requires us to take action. Clearly we believe this is a critical issue and we hope we can count on your help.

Frankly, there is no one else stepping up. Despite what you may have heard, despite the misreporting and the self serving press releases, only OFEF is involved in financing this critical legal action. For more misleading or false reporting see here.

Some in the press have incorrectly reported that the NRA has been involved. This is not true. In fact, it is the NRA’s official position that trained and licensed adults should never* be allowed to carry self defense firearms in schools.“That means no guns in America’s schools, period … with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.”
(*This speech has been pulled from the NRA website. You can see an archived copy here.)

Obviously, we disagree. We believe that responsible people have a right to protect themselves anywhere. We also believe that it’s nothing short of insanity to continue a policy of disarming people in schools where lunatics and terrorists have been told that they have plenty of potential victims and no one to fight back.

Predictably, the talking heads and media sockpuppets are horrified that anyone would choose to defend themselves. and predictably, Senator Ginny Burdick has announced plans to introduce legislation to ban license holders from school property.

In an editorial in the Oregonian, she branded you “extremist” and painted nightmare scenarios of classroom shootouts, never considering the alternative, where only the killers have weapons.

It’s absurd, but nothing new. Burdick has spent years introducing bills to restrict your gun rights, and she’s introduced this bill over and over, only to be defeated by your activism. We are counting on that commitment now to guarantee that we have the resources to defend this one brave teacher, and by extension, all government employees who have been disarmed by rules that contradict state law.

You can help by making a tax deductible ution here.

Win or lose, we believe this is a fight we must have. Too many people are at the mercy of bureaucrats who would prefer to see them as dead victims than as armed survivors. Too many politicians are determined to allow women to continue to be victims of violence rather than allowing them to have the tools to protect themselves.

In her editorial, Burdick got one thing right. She said “The gun lobby is relentless in pushing its agenda.” That’s true. and as long as there are people like her committed to making women defenseless, with your help, we’ll be standing in her way.

 

OFEF TO CHALLENGE IlLEGAL SCHOOL POLICY

Oregon law is clear. Only the legislature has the power to regulate licensed concealed carry of firearms. But across the state, bureaucrats continue to make up their own rules in direct violation of state law.

Some months ago we were contacted by a teacher in Medford who was abusively threatened by her employers when it was discovered that she had a concealed handgun license.

(The teacher has a young daughter and has had a restraining order against her ex-husband. She fears for her safety and the safety of her child. )

She was taken into an office, where her boss dramatically lowered the shades. A police officer stood near by. She was told if she had a gun she would be fired and arrested. Later she was told if they even thought she may have brought a gun to school, her car would be searched. As you know, none of this is lawful.

Our attorney contacted the school district and pointed out that state law gives them no authority for any of these actions. Predictably, they chose to ignore the clear language of the law and continue their policies.

It is interesting that the public school establishment, which continually insists that public school teachers are the best and the brightest, are the most determined opponents of allowing trained teachers to be armed.

They insist that only police officers can properly handle firearms, ignoring the reality that police are like everyone else, and your competency and abilities are determined by factors other than whether you wear a badge.

The Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation has agreed to support the Medford teacher in her legal attempts to get a judicial resolution to this ongoing issue.Our attorney is seeking a declaratory judgment against the school district.

This is an extremely important case, and not only for this one teacher. Government agencies across the state have implemented policies forbidding their employees from possessing defensive firearms. In many cases, they have created rules to restrict the public as well.

We believe that state law forbids government agencies from creating rules of this kind, but we need a court decision to put the issue to rest once and for all.

A decision in this case will effect anyone who works for any state agency. It may effect people who don’t work for the state but find themselves in state owned buildings.

Oregon Firearms, and the Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation have been looking for a case to, once and for all, determine how much power government agencies have to restrict their employees. We are hopeful that this case will do that. We hear from state employees often who want to know if they must give up their rights when they accept a state job. This case may well tell us.

There is no way of knowing how protracted or expensive this case will be, so we are asking for whatever help you can give us to defray the cost. OFEF is committed to seeing this through for all our sakes, but your support is critical.

Donations to OFEF are tax deductible. You can help us fight the bureaucrats and get a tax break. Please consider whatever you can afford as we continue to fight for all gun owners’ rights

You can make a secure on-line donation here.

Be sure to note that the ution is for the Foundation.

You can also send your ution to OFEF, PO Box 556, Canby OR. 97013

NRA/BRADY ANTI-GUN BILL MOVES AHEAD

After a hearing in the US Senate’s Judiciary Committee, with yet another unrecorded vote, the NRA-backed expansion of the Brady Bill is now heading for the floor of the US Senate.

As you know from previous alerts, HR 2640 already passed the US House, also on an unrecorded voice vote.

We now need to do all we can stop the bill in the US Senate.

This bill vastly expands the record keeping done by the government to deny firearms purchases.

The bill would make hundreds of thousands of people who committed no crime ineligible to buy a firearm based on vague, poorly defined standards of mental health. What few options would be available to prove you qualify to own a firearm would be expensive, difficult and unlikely to succeed.

This bill was dead until revived by the National Rifle Association in the wake of the Virginia Tech murders. The author of the bill, Carolyn McCarthy, an anti-gun militant from New York said: “The National Rife Association still wields tremendous influence in the halls of Congress and their blessing is required for any bill that enforces or creates gun laws.”   And the bill does have the full support of NRA who insist it’s not a gun control bill, in spite of the fact that the bill was the creation of anti gunners and is supported by anti-gun organizations.

It is now up to us to kill this dangerous bill on the Senate floor. For some time Oregonians have been experiencing lengthy (and illegal) delays when trying to purchase firearms. If this bill passes the problem will get far, far worse. Please contact Gordon Smith and Ron Wyden and urge them to defeat this outrageous attack on gun owners.

You can use the following text or your own in your contacts with the Senators:
__________________________________________________

Dear Senator,
I am very disappointed that the Senate Judiciary Committee passed out HR 2640 on and unrecorded vote, just as the House did.
This bill will solve nothing but will expose hundreds of thousands of private medical records to organizations that have already proven they cannot be trusted to accurately deal with personal information. Furthermore, the liability that people face when accused of being mentally incompetent to own a firearm will discourage people with personal issues from seeking medical help.  I strongly urge you to reject the Senate version of HR 2640.
Very truly yours,

__________________

_________________________________________________________

A VICTORY FOR GUN OWNERS AND FOSTER PARENTS.

In January of 2007, as the last legislative session was getting underway, the Oregon Firearms Federation heard from several foster parents who had been informed that their right to own and use firearms was incompatible with their desire to help children in need.

Talia Heath wrote:

“Dear OFF,
Just wanted to say thanks for your efforts to protect our rights. I specifically want to thank you for taking action in regard to DHS’s restrictions for foster parents.
My husband and I are foster parents but our home is currently on hold because of this issue. We are both CHL holders and have had to choose between fighting for our rights and taking care of needy children. This is a horrible position to be in. Thank you for what you are doing on our behalf. Please let us know if there is any way we can be of help in this area.”

The Department of Human Services, which oversees the foster parent program, had informed them that new rules were in place that drastically reduced their ability to possess firearms. Concealed handgun license holders were not exempt.

The DHS rules essentially rendered all firearms in a foster home inaccessible and useless.

OFF agreed that it was absurd to trust adults with CHILDREN, but not firearms. We asked the State Representative Jerry Krummel to investigate.

Krummel is blessed with one of the hardest working staffers in Salem, Dawn Phillips. Phillips contacted DHS and demanded an explanation for a rule they have no authority to make.

In the ensuring months, Phillips kept OFF informed of all the efforts she was making to get DHS to comply with the law, and every effort DHS was making to avoid complying.

Legislative Counsel (the lawyers for the legislature) wrote an opinion reaffirming what gun owners, and others who read the law knew. DHS has NO authority to regulate firearms without the express permission of the legislature. Oregon’s Attorney General concurred.

DHS has now agreed that their rule was unlawful and has rescinded it.

This is a victory for gun owners, foster parents, foster children and the rule of law.

It is still essential that foster parents and gun owners continue to provide input. No doubt there will be efforts made in the future to restore these restrictions.

The agency is seeking public comment on new rules for certification standards through August 23rd. You can learn more about the rules on their web site: http://www.dhs.state.or.us/policy/childwelfare/drafts/2007/ii-b1.pdf or call 503-945-6897 or 503-945-5651.

We thank the foster parents who had the courage to come forward and speak out against an agency that clearly held their rights in contempt. We thank Representative Krummel for his willingness to stand up to a bureaucracy that violated the law and the rights of the most investigated and responsible people in the state, and we thank Dawn Phillips for her tireless efforts on behalf of foster parents in Oregon.

CONFISCATION PROHIBITION BILL PASSES

Yesterday, in late Senate Floor session, the Oregon Senate passed HB 2370. This bill transfers emergency powers in times of catastrophe from the State Police to the Oregon Military Department.

Included in the language of the bill is a prohibition on the confiscation of firearms in times of declared emergency. It also allows a person whose firearm is seized illegally by a government agency to recover all costs associated with the return of that firearm.

In the wake of the Hurricane Katrina debacle, more Americans are realizing that they are very much at risk from their own government. This prohibition is a great victory for gun owners, especially now when the Oregon Legislature is dominated by anti-gunners. The House agreed with the Senate vote at 9pm tonight and now the bill goes to the Governor who is expected to sign it.

But even as we are gaining ground on a state level, we are facing new threats on a national level.

The NRA supported HR 2640 . a massive expansion of the “Brady background check and unjustified denial bill” is still very much alive.

This bill, which was rammed through the US House of Representatives on a voice vote, with no hearings, is now in the Senate, and only you can stop it.

Please see the extensive analysis Gun Owners Of America did on this dangerous legislation.

As you probably know, the incidents of unjustified delays and denials has skyrocketed in Oregon, and should this bill become law, you can rest assured things will get much, much worse.

The bill gives the Federal government access to massive new amounts of personal information on American citizens. Since this bill is the brainchild of some of the most anti-gun politicians in the country, you know that this new invasion of privacy will be used for one thing only. To prevent firearms’ purchases.

As we have said before, it is essential that you contact your US Senators, Gordon Smith and Ron Wyden and tell them “NO MORE GUN CONTROL ON AMERICAN CITIZENS.NO ON HR 2640.”

Ron Wyden  E-Mail And Office Contact Info

STOPPING THE NRA’S GUN CONTROL BILL

As you know, the NRA revived a gun control bill that was all but dead and rammed it through the US House of Representatives.

HR 2640 was the brain child of Carolyn McCarthy of New York, who went to Congress for one reason, to pass more gun control. But she was failing until the NRA teamed up with her to pass another dangerous intrusion into your privacy and another vicious attack on your gun rights. Sarah Brady is calling the bill “a victory for gun control.”

Using the shootings at Virginia Tech as a pretext, the NRA joined with some of the most anti-gun members of Congress to pass this bill without so much as a committee hearing. Charles Schumer, the Senate’s most vocal gun hater had high praise for the bill. ““When the N.R.A. and I agree on legislation, you know that it’s going to get through, become law and do some good,” Mr. Schumer said.

So now the NRA is in the business of pushing for bills that Charlie Schumer likes. The irony that Virginia Tech is being used as an excuse for this is profound. The people who died there were all denied the right to protect themselves and instead of addressing that, the NRA joined forces with the worst of the gun control zealots.  Worse still, it is the official policy of the NRA that virtually ALL law abiding people should be disarmed on school property. Wayne LaPierre has stated unequivocally  ” First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America’s schools, period … with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.”

So not only does the NRA want to vastly expand the failed Brady background check system, it wants to deny law-abiding gun owners the ability to protect themselves and others while at a school . This policy is madness.

HR 2640’s supporters claim it is simply a way to identify people with mental problems. But a review of George Bush’s positions would make you conclude that Bush believes EVERYBODY has mental problems.

A story in the British Medical Journal in 2004 stated that a Bush presidential commission “recommended comprehensive mental health screening for “consumers of all ages,” including preschool children.” The headline of this story was “Bush plans to screen whole US population for mental illness.” The article also notes some disturbing ties Bush has to the pharmaceutical companies that would profit greatly if more people were determined to be “mentally ill.” The article noted ” Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, has multiple ties to the Bush administration. George Bush Sr was a member of Lilly’s board of directors and Bush Jr appointed Lilly’s chief executive officer, Sidney Taurel, to a seat on the Homeland Security Council. Lilly made $1.6m in political utions in 2000—82% of which went to Bush and the Republican Party.

Of course, the entire process of declaring people “mentally ill” is largely subjective and open to abuse and personal interpretation. That’s what makes this bill so dangerous.

Time is NOT on our side. If this dangerous bill moves as swiftly in the Senate as it did in the House it could pass any day.  It is critical that you contact your US Senators and tell them the NRA does NOT speak for you when they promote disarming Americans and forcing new gun control bills.

Please call or e-mail Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith. You can use the suggested text below to cut and paste into their web-mail windows, or you can call their offices.

____________________________________________________

Dear Senator,

HR 2640 is a bad idea. The last thing Americans need is vast new amounts of their personal information being turned over to the Federal Government.
The Brady “instant” check system has turned out to be the “Brady Unjustified Denial System.” This bill will make things far worse for law abiding gun owners. The NRA does NOT speak for me. Vote no on HR 2640.

________________________________________________________

Gordon Smith E-mail

Gordon Smith’s State and DC Offices

Gordon Smith contact info for illegal aliens.

Ron Wyden  E-Mail And Office Contact Info

We warned you on June 10th, the NRA was working with anti-gun forces to pass new gun control.

Today, far sooner than we would have imagined, the bill passed in the US House, with almost no notice and no recorded vote.

HR 2640 passed on a voice vote, with so little notice provided to the public that when we contacted Congresswoman Hooley’s office, her staff was unaware that the bill had passed.
(You can use this link to search for the bill or use this link to download the bill as a .pdf.)

The bill gives the Federal Government vast new access to people’s mental health records and opens the door for expanded abuse of power, delays and denials of firearms purchases.

The bill purports to given people a chance to have their names removed from the no-buy list, but only at great personal expense with no guarantee of success.

If the past is any indication, purchasing a firearm is about to become a lot more complicated.

Keep in mind, for years the ATF has been forbidden from doing any investigations to expunge records and return people’s gun rights.Now, with the help of the NRA, even more restrictions are being created.

Of course, unlike a “crime,”  “mental illness” is a very subjective evaluation.

As Corey Graff from Wisconsin Gun Owners writes;

“Since 1952, the American Psychiatry Association (APA) has utilized the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as its standard for defining, diagnosing and treating mental health disorders.

Since its first printing, the manual has undergone five revisions, the most recent being the DSM-IV, which was finalized in 1994. Currently a fifth version is being prepared and is due out by 2012.

Each new version contradicts the previous version; new authors with new perspectives and agendas write each new release. The standard keeps changing, shifting, sometimes radically so — the result is that mental illness is never clearly or objectively defined. It is a moving target shaped by political and social pressures.

Following controversy and protests from gay activists at APA annual conferences from 1970 to 1973, the seventh printing of the DSM-II, in 1974, no longer listed homosexuality as a category of disorder. After talks led by the psychiatrist Robert Spitzer, who had been involved in the DSM-II development committee, a vote by the APA trustees in 1973, confirmed by the wider APA membership in 1974, replaced the diagnosis with a milder category of “sexual orientation disturbance.”

In today’s politically correct climate, the most recent version of the DSM-IV contains “no reference to homosexuality.”

Which DSM was correct or were both wrong? One can easily see the danger this contradiction raises if these diagnoses were synced up with a gun owner database that acts as an automated judge, jury and executioner for the gun buyer.

Such variance also calls into question the credibility of those who define mental illness.

Psychiatrists can’t even agree amongst themselves over a relatively short period of time on how to precisely define mental illness on any given issue. Thirty years ago no one heard the term “attention deficit disorder” or “post-traumatic stress disorder” — today diagnoses for these new mental illnesses are commonplace.

If NICS is expanded, expect entire groups to be denied their right to purchase a firearm.

Legislation like this paints with a broad brush and will disarm many good people who should be able to buy handguns. One such group is veterans.

“[NICS Expansion] could have a significant impact on American servicemen,” wrote Gun Owners of America recently, “especially those returning from combat situations and who seek some type of psychiatric care.

Often, veterans who have suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder have been deemed as mentally ‘incompetent’ and are prohibited from owning guns under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(4). Records of those instances certainly exist, and, in 1999, the Department of Veterans Administration turned over 90,000 names of veterans to the FBI for inclusion into the NICS background check system.”

Once again, the NRA has colluded with anti-gunners to pass new gun control and tell gun owners it’s good for them. (Click here to read the NRA’s BRAGGING about passing this bill with a “no accountability” voice vote.)

According to CQ.com  “Advocates of House-passed legislation say it likely would have prevented the gunman, Seung-Hui Cho, from buying a firearm because of his history of mental illness” But this is, of course, nonsense.  The Brady law has not kept criminals from getting guns and won’t stop madmen from getting them either. But it might very well stop you.

To stop this in the Senate will mean fighting not only the anti-gunners in the Legislature, but America’s biggest “gun lobby.”  We’ll need all the help we can get. Please consider making whatever ution you can to OFF.