Author: OFF

By Kevin Starrett

When Gordon Smith ran for US Senate the first time we already had suspicions that he could not be trusted.

Working for Gun Owners of America at the time, (prior to the formation of OFF) I asked Smith to respond to a simple survey so gun owners could have an idea of what his views on gun ownership were.

Smith refused.

At the time, we warned gun owners to be wary of Smith, and quite frankly a lot of gun owners were angry at us, claiming that Smith was a friend to gun owners and we should not alienate him.

Smith lost his first race for US Senate, but won on his second attempt and we have been saddled with him ever since.

As it turns out, all our suspicions were correct. Smith has become something of a poster child for gun control in the Senate, in spite of large campaign utions from NRA.

Smith has been in favor of numerous anti-gun plans including the reauthorization of Bill Clinton’s illegal and unconstitutional ban on modern firearms and ammunition feeding devices. You can hear Smith explain his support for this attack in your rights here.

But Smith’s nothing if not the consummate politician. Which means he only rarely has a passing acquaintance with the truth.

When the Senate was debating S 397, Smith voted in favor of amendments that attacked gun owners’ rights.(Such as a requirement to purchase a trigger lock with every new handgun.) But when it came time to vote on the bill itself, which contained protections for gun makers and dealers, Smith was not available. Out to lunch. Moved, left no forwarding address.

So it was rather startling to receive this unsolicited letter from Smith taking credit for the passage of the bill and claiming he opposed the anti-gun amendments.

Note, he doesn’t actually say he “voted for” the bill, but the implication there is clear. However, he does say he “worked to defeat all anti-gun amendments.” We bumpkins have a word for that. We call it a lie.

By Kevin Starrett

Now that the dust is settling from the passage of S 397, “the gun makers immunity bill,” it might be a good time to assess what happened.

As you probably know, when the NRA attempted to push this bill through last time it was laden with anti-gun provisions which were giving gun owners fits. But as the battle continued, NRA and others in the establishment gun lobby insisted that the bill should be passed, and promised it would be “cleaned up in the House.”

The late Neal Knox called those of us who opposed the bill “nervous nellies.” We were accused of paranoia and ignorance of the process. We were told “not to worry, it’s how it’s done around here.”

The guarantees that the bill would be fixed, if only it passed the Senate, continued until the last minute, when the unwavering efforts of activist gun owners like you convinced the NRA that they were on a sinking ship and they too, called for the bill to be killed.

On the second go-round NRA seemed to have learned its lesson. In a series of e-mails from NRA they repeated this hard-core message : “Be sure to tell your Senators that you consider any votes for any anti-gun amendments as a vote against S. 397 itself.” That quote appeared over and over.

Until it came time for a vote on the bill. A clean bill was no longer what the NRA demanded.
When vote time came and the bill passed with anti-gun amendments (that the militant anti-gun crowd have praised,) the NRA had changed its tune.

No longer was a vote for an anti-gun amendment a vote against the bill itself.
Suddenly, it was all no big deal.

Gone were the promises to “fix it in the House.” In place of those promises we had a stern warning from NRA ,”… immediately call your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121 and urge him/her to pass S. 397 (as passed by the Senate)! ”

The NRA was no longer even considering removing the anti-gun language. Now they insisted that the bill pass the House “as passed in the Senate.”

Why this sudden reversal? Why this insistence that NRA members accept any piece of garbage that was shoveled their way?

And why was this needed if NRA is in fact the lobbying powerhouse that they claim to be? Why were other “pro-gun” organizations jumping on the NRA bandwagon by telling their members that “politics is the art of compromise” and the “art of the possible?”

Compromise is what you do when you have no choice. When your back is to the wall and there is nothing left to do. It’s NOT what you do when you are in control.

Remember the famous comment by Kayne Robinson, NRA president? “If we win, we’ll have a president where we work out of their office.”

Well, the NRA “won.” George Bush was elected. The House and the Senate are under the control of our “friends.” So why are we snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?

Why are we making concessions to people who are out of power, who for years refused to give an inch for our gun rights?

Why are people like Gordon Smith sending out letters taking credit for opposing anti-gun amendments when he voted FOR them and saying how proud he was of this bill when he didn’t even vote for it?

Because he can. Because of the constant cover that these people get from groups like NRA who have given phonies like Smith thousands of dollars.

After Bush signed the bill, Wayne LaPierre said “This is an historic day for freedom. I would like to thank President Bush for signing the most significant piece of pro-gun legislation in twenty years into law.”

Historic day for freedom? When you’re forced by government to buy something you don’t want, don’t need and which if used renders your self defense firearm useless to you, but still easy to steal?

When new “studies” have been authorized that the fringe anti-gun group “Violence Policy Center” says “may ultimately lead to a strengthening and expansion of the federal ban on armor-piercing ammunition.”

This is an “historic day for freedom?”

What’s the NRA (and their parrots in large dollar “gun groups”) going to say if some politician introduces a law that requires a gun safe? They’ve already signed off on the concept. And what about the people who don’t use a trigger lock? Can they count on being prosecuted because they are NOT covered by the immunity this bill claims to offer?

I wish we could share the jubilation of the NRA on this “great victory”. It certainly is a step forward for gun makers, but it comes at tremendous cost to gun owners. And there is not a single excuse for it.

Clinton’s out of the White House and the people who got lots of NRA bucks are in charge. So why are gun owners being told they MUST “compromise?” When did we have a better chance of making a real improvement?

This is why the battle is far from won. And why it’s so critical that we do what we can to elect people who will not throw gun owners overboard after getting their checks and endorsements from NRA.

We can’t let the NRA’s seal of approval continue to serve as camouflage for people who vote against gun rights.

When anti-gun Kevin Mannix ran for governor, he bragged that he had won the NRA’s “defender of freedom” award. A great selling point for a guy who worked overtime to attack our freedoms.

At Oregon Firearms Federation, we have high standards for people who are asking for the job of making rules about your life. They don’t get “A” ratings because they invited us to a cocktail party and we won’t tell you to “trust us.” We will continue to give you the unvarnished truth to the absolute best of our ability. If only we could expect the same from the NRA.

By Kevin Starrett
Executive Director

The 73rd Oregon legislative session is behind us.

In spite of a torrent of anti-gun bills, and a Senate and Governor both opposed to gun rights, not a single piece of anti-gun legislation passed.

Your hard work derailed every attempt to further chisel away our liberties, and I cannot express how thankful I am for all you have done.

Heading into the session we knew we were facing an uphill battle. The Governor has a long history of supporting gun restrictions. The Senate was under the control of some of the most outspoken opponents of gun rights the state has ever known. The Senate Committee that hears most gun bills was chaired by Ginny Burdick who has made attacking gun rights her life’s work.

We faced bills to outlaw most modern firearms. Bills that would require you to keep your self-defense firearm locked up and useless. Bills to ban licensed concealed carry anywhere school children showed up. There were bills to raise fees for background checks by 250% and bills to gut Oregon’s pre-emption law. There was a bill to outlaw many ammunition magazines.

But there were other equally insidious measures in play.

The Port of Portland requested a bill to greatly expand the powers of the Port’s police.

We had alerted the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee that the Port of Portland is currently in violation of the law because of its policy of forbidding persons with concealed handgun licenses from being on airport property.

Although we received assurances that this issue would be addressed should the bill get a hearing, not a word was mentioned when the hearing took place. Similar assurances from one of the sponsors of the bill never materialized when the bill went to “work session.” There, the bill was approved and passed to the House floor. That’s when we went to work.

Copies of documents demonstrating that the Port of Portland was in violation were delivered to every Republican House Representative.”https://oregonfirearms.org/portofportland/”>(All of these documents are available on our website.)

Each was contacted to make sure they had seen the information. As a result of our exposing the illegal actions of the Port, and despite having been sent to the House Floor with a “Do Pass” recommendation, the bill was pulled back into committee and killed.

It was a scene soon to be repeated.

OFF was a party to lengthy negotiations with the Oregon Sheriffs Association. They wanted to make numerous changes to Oregon’s concealed handgun law. But none of the proposed changes benefited gun owners. In fact, they were just a wish list of ways to make CHL’s harder to get, and easier to revoke.

We found ourselves saying “no” over and over. In an effort to win our approval for a new round of attacks on your rights, they offered to include
language we felt very strongly about. A “renew
by mail” for CHL holders who were active duty military and could not renew in person.

As you know, this was a key issue for us and we had been working hard to get it passed. But your rights are not something that we can negotiate away. We went on record saying the language of their bill was not acceptable, with or without renew by mail.

At this point we were promised by Committee Chair Wayne Krieger, that the bill would not move forward unless we approved and that amendments would be added to address our objections. The very next day, the bill, with no improvements, was voted out of Committee!

That was a Friday morning. By Monday morning, Krieger had hundreds of e-mails on his desk from OFF supporters outraged at what had taken place. Krieger responded that he had been mislead by a committee staffer who told him that we “approved” the bill.

We have no idea how this could have taken place. We had testified that we opposed the bill. Nothing of substance changed between the time we went on record opposing the bill and the following day when the bill passed out of committee. But plenty changed after that.

Because of OFF supporters, Krieger, (once again) pulled the bill off the House floor and back to committee, where, it too, died.

Your efforts also derailed an attempt to raise fees charged for gun purchase background checks. As you know, these checks are not a “service” requested by gun owners. Because of your calls and e-mails, that bill was yanked off the Senate floor and killed.

Without a doubt, the anti-gun bill that got the most attention was Ginny Burdick’s attack on CHL holders. As she does in every session, Burdick pushed legislation to outlaw concealed carry on school property, or anywhere school children gathered.

In an attempt to exclude as many gun owners as possible from attending, the first hearing was held at the Multnomah County Courthouse, where concealed carry is prohibited and parking is nonexistent. Supporters of Burdick’s bill were treated to reserved seating while opponents were left standing in the hall.

But gun owners from all over the state arrived anyway and made their feelings known.

That bill languished, but Burdick came back with another, similar bill.

After a contentious meeting of Senate Democrats, another hearing was held. Once again, articulate gun owners showed up to oppose this mindless assault on freedom and common sense.

In the end, even Senator Floyd Prozanski (an outspoken anti-gunner) voted against the bill and it died in committee. Burdick was predictably apoplectic and defeated once again.

Given the makeup of the Senate, this was a great victory for gun rights activism.

Unfortunately, because of the makeup of the Legislature this session, positive action was almost out of the question.

Most pro gun bills that were introduced in the House, never went anywhere because of the fear that they would be amended into bad bills when they were sent to the Senate.

The exceptions were a bill to protect gun makers and sellers from frivolous lawsuits and a bill to define “loaded”when carrying a firearm on a snowmobile or ATV.

Both passed in the House and died in the Senate.

Pro-gun bills introduced in the Senate were never heard because the Senate was controlled by anti-gun militants. And sadly, some great opportunities were missed because “pro-gun” legislators were simply too timid to force the issue.

For example, a version of our bill to help active duty military personnel was introduced in the Senate. It was assigned to the committee chaired by anti-gun militant Ginny Burdick who refused to hear it. A motion could have been made by any pro-gun Senator requesting that the bill be removed from her committee. Whether the motion passed or failed, we would, at least, have had a recorded vote on the issue. (A valuable tool come election time.)

But despite our requests, not a single Senator would step up and make the motion. After endless rhetoric about helping our men and women who are risking their lives far from home, and though even the anti-gun governor approved, this simple, cost free measure died.

Despite these disappointments, we held our ground because of your willingness to step up and make your voice heard. Never underestimate the power you have as an activist. Your immediate responses not only stopped bills from moving, but actually reversed bills that were already well on their way to passage. This is an impressive feat.

This session reminded us once again about the importance of immediate action in the face of a threat. As you can imagine, our e-mail alerts are the most timely way to get information and act on it. If you don’t get our alerts, please go to our web page and sign up for them. And remember, you can always call us for up to the minute info on what’s happening legislatively.

This state legislative session is over. The action now moves over to Federal legislation.

As you know, the US Senate recently passed a bill to protect gun makers and dealers from baseless lawsuits. However they allowed some dangerous amendments to be included.

One requires the purchase of gun locks with handgun purchases. The other opens the door to a whole host of restrictions on ammo in the future. The bill is now in the hands of the US House.

The NRA announced their intention to get the bill passed through the Senate even if it contained bad amendments. Their stated intention was to “clean up “ the bill when it went to the House.

We felt this was a dangerous policy, but now we have no choice but to deal with the bill and attempt to either fix it or kill it. Both of the included amendments are more dangerous than they appear.

The trigger lock language is an open invitation to prosecute anyone who does not use one, and the ammunition language opens a Pandora’s Box of potential problems down the road.

We will be working with other national and local groups around the US to track the progress of this bill and stop any gun control from being added.

But for right now congratulate yourself on a session ending with no loss of rights. You’ve done fine work.

By Executive Director Kevin Starrett

06/04/2001

After months of disrupting hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Ginny Burdick proved an important political point.

You don’t need to be in the majority party. You don’t need to have a rational issue. You don’t even need popular support.

If you are sufficiently juvenile and contentious, you’ll probably get your way.

Burdick is, without question, the loudest, most shrill, least intelligent but most obsessed hater of self defense in the Oregon legislature. A self styled one trick pony, Burdick seems oblivious to any issue except further restrictions on the rights of gun owners.

Voters in her district could rightfully ask what she has produced for them beside the nearly endless stream of anti-gun legislation for which she has become notorious. If they did, they might very well demand a refund.

Still, this is Burdick’s quotidian fascination. Her mantra. She remains fixed, glassy eyed, on her delusional obsession. Senate Bill 508 is the perfect case in point.

508 dealt with a problem that existed only in the twisted minds of Burdick, a few of her lackeys in the legislature (Senators Deckert and Duncan and House Reps Charlie Ringo, Lane Shetterly and Randy Leonard) and some genuinely paranoid bureaucrats from the government education establishment. (Yes, there are also the usual collection of crackpot “Million Moms” and their brainwashed, feminized, wussified offspring cackling about the value of “toy gun buy backs,”but by and large, 508 was the provence of professional idiots.)

What 508 was intended to do was outlaw the carry of concealed handguns, by holders of concealed handgun licenses, anywhere school children gathered. Not just on school property, but anyplace the unwitting prisoners of the government schools might assemble as part of a school outing.

As a result of “Burdick and friend’s” repeated obstructions of the legislative process, and in defiance of all rational thought, Republican Senate President Gene Derfler, the term limited puppet of Democrat Governor John (“Kidsgrabber”) Kitzhaber, folded like a $10.00 Hide-A-Bed and authorized a hearing on this lunatic legislation. (Even the Portland Oregonian, which champions new attacks on liberty with the regularity of a metronome had a rare and inexplicable burst of lucidity and criticized the bill as needless. We are, of course, still recovering.)

It is, needless to say, an exercise in futility to enumerate the many reasons this legislation is imbecilec. Those who are so intellectually challenged that they don’t understand the idiocy of it are certainly incapable of being educated about the obvious reasons that its only likely effect will be to get kids killed.

Those of us with a sufficient supply of functioning brain cells don’t need to be told that people intent on using guns to hurt folks at schools will most likely not be deterred by a law banning their presence. This simple fact seems to escape the supporters of this legislation, not one of whom could point to a single example of a permit holder misusing a firearm in a school or anywhere else.

The hearing on SB508, held on May 23rd from 6pm to 11pm, was truly theater of the absurd.

It started on a high note when Senators Steve Harper and Roger Beyer arrived in the hearing room wearing NRA hats. NRA’s regular sell outs aside, it was clear that they meant it as a positive gesture to gun owners. It was largely downhill from there.

The most chilling aspects were not the testimony of the legislative buffoons who testified on its behalf. But let’s review them anyway.

Senator Verne Duncan, a Republican, seemed, as usual, totally out of touch. As one of the sponsors of the bill and also a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee that was hearing it, Verne came across as a lovable, aging uncle who really meant well but was dealing with unfortunate episodes of dementia. Verne repeatedly asked if there was a legal remedy for someone who just happened to leave a gun at a school. Information, we are reliably informed, that he had been given numerous times in the recent past.

Senator Ryan Deckert, still looking all of 11 years old, seemed like he would be more comfortable seated in the lap of Burdick, either as beloved grandchild or a ventriloquist’s dummy. Lane Shetterly was predictably bland to the point of becoming translucent.

House Rep Randy Leonard, who his best known for his explosive temper, limited vocabulary and diminutive intellect, shared that he had a concealed handgun license ( a frightening thought) but that carrying a licensed handgun where school children were was like “shouting fire in a crowded theater.” Ah Randy…never had an original thought in his life.

Still, we Oregonians have come to expect insipid stupidity from many of our elected officials. (In some districts it’s mandatory.)

But the really unnerving testimony came from the hacks who populate our school boards.

Anyone with loved ones in government schools in Oregon should take time to listen to the testimony given by some of these mountebanks.

You can hear the testimony (if you can stand it) by clicking here and scrolling down to the May 23 Senate Judiciary Hearing at 5: 55pm.

But here’s the short version.

Although they were forced to admit that not a single incident with a licensed handgun at a school had ever occurred, the witnesses from the establishment were convinced that some tragic and criminal act was imminent.

One of these bozos actually said that “sooner or later,” if a person had a gun he was “going to use it”. He was referring to license holders in schools on official business! He also said if he knew a parent in his school was legally carrying a firearm he would immediately summon an armed guard.

Even Senator John Minnis had to characterize these ravings as “paranoid.”

These people are responsible for running our schools? Well it might explain the testimony of young Cody Hill. A high school student who conducts toy gun buybacks entitled “Guns Aren’t Fun,” the poor kid has been so ruined by the institutions he’s been subjected to that someone should be getting charged with child abuse. I, for one, felt sorry for the kid. Taking my young son to the range has been one of the most enjoyable experiences I’ve ever had. This young man is a testimony to the rising tide of girlifying our boys. The whole episode was a great boost for the home school movement.

What follows is quoted from an e-mail sent out by Senator Burdick on June 1st 2001:

“Those of you who have attended or testified at gun violence hearings before expect having to run the gauntlet of men with bulges under their coats as you make your way to the hearing room. You expect to hear the jokes from them when they are at the microphone to testify that “Yes, as a matter of fact, I am packing right now,” referring to the fact that they have their loaded handguns with them. You expect jeers and rude interruptions from the opposition while you testify. But on Wednesday, May 23rd the contempt for the gun violence prevention movement reached a new low by certain Senators. They did a gross disservice to you and your children as well.”

Paranoid? Delusional? You bet. And now they want your children.