Category: OFF Alerts

As you know, the Oregon Legislature passed, and the Governor signed, HB 4045 the “CHL Privacy Bill.”

While HB 4045 started out as a simple and understandable bill to protect private information about concealed handgun license holders, it was twisted by Floyd Prozanski into a complex, poorly crafted, and easily misunderstood pile of legalize. We warned about this here, here and here.

A recent event in Clackamas County proved how little this bill has done to protect CHL holders.

Almost immediately after a shooting incident in a Clackamas Fred Meyer store, the shooter was identified as a CHL holder. Long before there had been an opportunity for an investigation, the CHL holder’s private information had been disclosed to the press by the Clackamas County Sheriff. While there are conflicting reports about  the confrontation, the shooter has been convicted of nothing and may very well have been acting in self defense.

Recently the Department of Justice adopted temporary rules to implement HB 4045. You can see those here. As part of the process to adopt permanent rules, DOJ will convene an advisory committee to make recommendations to the Department in order to “obtain a broad range of perspectives.”

OFF has been invited to be part of this committee. We welcome feedback from our supporters. Please feel free to share any ideas or concerns you have and would like to see addressed by this committee. While we do not yet have a date for the meeting we have been informed it will be in mid to late September.

We Can’t Even Shoot On Our Own Property?

Jerry Conrady and his wife have been fighting to be able to continue to safely shoot on their own rural property. This is their story in their own words, why it should matter to you, and how you can help.

Lincoln County is attacking Oregon residents’ rights to shoot on private property. If Lincoln County wins the repercussions for shooters in the State of Oregon will be staggering. Every county will be able to use the following cases as precedent to require anyone on private property to obtain a condition use permit before discharging a firearm. Your support is needed.

Jerry Conrady and his wife own 120 acres in rural Lincoln County. Mr. Conrady is a State certified teacher, has a degree in Gunsmithing from Lassen College and is an Eagle Scout. Mr. Conrady’s wife is an estate paralegal and writer. Neither have any form of criminal record. Mr Conrady gives out free gun locks at Portland gun shows.

Currently the Oregon Revised Statute allows for landowners and their guests to discharge firearms outdoors on private property without any permits. The Conradys and their guests have been doing so since they purchased the property in 2002 with no complaints or negative comments from anyone. In 2008 Mr. Conrady proposed building an indoor range in the center of his property. A small group of their neighbors, backed by someone with a good deal of money is now attempting to sue the Conrady’s into poverty and submission.

There are currently two cases pending:

Case number 111143 in which, after the County threatened to sue them if they didn’t stop shooting on their property the Conrady’s filed a suit asking a Judge to read and interpret the law. Instead of ruling on the law in question, the Judge determined that the County has a right to regulate shooting ranges. The County has taken that to mean that anywhere an individual discharges a firearm is then considered a range and thus they have the right to regulate the discharge of firearms on private property and that anyone who wishes to do so must apply for a conditional use permit. This case is currently in the Appeals Court.

Case number 112006 in which 5 of the Conrady’s neighbors are suing them for an “abatement of a nuisance”. Even though the Oregon Revised Statute says that noise from firearms cannot be regulated and does not fall under the nuisance statutes, the same Judge is allowing the case to go through and Lincoln County has jumped on board with the Plaintiffs. The remedy they’re seeking? First they want warrantless search and seizure. They want to be able to enter the Conrady’s property at any time for any reason and arrest anyone suspected of shooting, whether a firearm is present or not. Keep in mind that the Conradys are law abiding citizens who do not currently have nor have ever had a criminal record. They hold concealed weapons permits in multiple states and Mr. Conrady holds an FFL. If they were criminals they would never have passed the checks that allow them these privileges. The Plaintiffs also want the house that the Conrady’s are building on their property with approved permits removed, as well as their well and septic and anything else the County deems an improvement related to a shooting range. There are no improvements as no range was ever built as the County has been told multiple times.

This case will be heard November 6th.

The Conradys don’t shoot 24 hours a day 7 days a week. They try to be respectful of their neighbors including voluntarily reducing their shooting hours. In addition, they are not the only people in the area who shoot. Several neighbors on Mr. Conrady’s property line discharge firearms on their property whenever they want, yet is it only the Conrady’s who are being sued.

Oregon Revised Statutes 166.170, 171 and 176 state that NO conditional use permit is necessary for a landowner and guests to discharge firearms on private property. In fact, Counties cannot restrict the discharge of firearms on private property in rural unincorperated areas. Lincoln County is attempting to get around this statute by claiming the Conrady’s were running a shooting range and that anywhere a firearm in discharged is a shooting range, thus they have the right to regulate all shooting. They have yet to define the difference between a commercial shooting range, private shooting range on private property or a landowner and guests discharging firearms on private property. The Conradys never ran a range. They created a non-profit and did what was necessary to prepare to apply for a conditional use permit to build a range. They sent letters and emails and left phone messages for the County asking for guidance which never came. Mr. Conrady had to finally send a letter to the County Commissioners before the county attorney finally responded with a contradictory and confusing letter that baffled every attorney the Conrady’s spoke with and left them wide open to litigation.

The Conradys have been fighting this battle for 4 years now and it’s taken a dramatic personal and financial strain on them. They are no longer fighting for just their rights but the rights of every shooter in the State of Oregon. If they lose, anyone who wants to set up a target or shoot at a can will have to have permission to do so first. It’s once again time to show that shooters will not be bullied.

If you’re interested in supporting the Conradys and your rights call the Lincoln County Commissioners and voice your opinion at 541-265-4100 or write or email them. Anyone who would like to assist with their defense fund may do so as follows:

MAKE CHECKS TO: GERALD CONRADY TRUST ACCOUNT
Send to:
Gerald Conrady Trust
Care of Attorney Russell L. Baldwin
P.O. Box 1242
Lincoln City, OR 97367

In the wake of the Colorado shooting, we all expected the media and the victimhood promoters to do all they could to use a crime to attack your rights as gun owners. But the anti-rights vultures never fail to find a new low to sink to.

We all know that Oregon is cursed with one of the worst congressional delegations in the country, given that 6 out of 7 of our members of Congress are foaming-at-the-mouth gun haters.

But every time we think we have reached a new low, the bottom feeders who “represent” us pull out their shovels and dig a little deeper.

Let’s take a look at a “survey” that Oregon Congressman Earl Blumenauer emailed out today. You can see it here:

Question 3 of his survey asks:

“Should the gun show loophole be closed, so that the people who buy weapons in the open-air gun bazaars, like what occurs in Portland at the Expo Center, be required to submit to the same background checks and record-keeping as people who buy from licensed gun-dealers.”

Let’s put aside that no Portland Expo show we have ever been to has ever been “open-air.” Does a rabidly anti-gun Oregon Congressman NOT know that private sales at Oregon gun shows have been banned for 12 years? Blumenauer was one of the main forces pushing for a ballot measure that banned private transfers in 2000. And now he is unaware that this is current law? Should this guy really have a job of this importance if he doesn’t know a law he pushed actually passed?

Question 4 says:

“Should people with a history of domestic violence be able to purchase guns and carry concealed weapons?”

Is this member of the Oregon Congressional delegation REALLY unaware that people with even the most minor “domestic violence” convictions are banned from owning guns or even a single round of ammo FOR LIFE and have been for 16 YEARS!?

Earl is a shameless liar who is counting on the ignorance of the people in his district to promote his anti-rights agenda. You may want to take a moment to answer his bogus survey.

You may also want to check out the following links to see more on the never-ending debate between those of us who take responsibility for ourselves and those who rely on the forces who “responded” to Hurricane Katrina.

Kevin Starrett vs Oregon University System

A MESSAGE FROM KEVIN STARRETT

Early this week, KATU TV in Portland invited me to debate Penny Okamoto of Ceasefire Oregon. I accepted. Soon thereafter they called back to tell me that if I came I would be required to leave my firearm unsecured in my car.

I declined their invitation. A few hours later, in a display of breathless ignorance, they called our Foundation seeking someone who would comply with this ridiculous and ignorant demand. Imagine their surprise when I answered the phone. The following day they called again to ask if they could send a satellite truck to my home to tape the show remotely. I agreed. They opened the show, which will air tomorrow morning at 9 AM, with a somewhat lengthy explanation for why I was not in their studio.

Shortly into the debate Okamoto refers to the “guns Kevin has to kill people with…”

It’s interesting to note that this is the same idiot who says “We need to stop selling these machine guns that are basically built just to kill humans”. Her website demands a ban on “assault weapon ammunition.” Despite Okamoto’s utter and staggering ignorance of the most basic facts, she was the best KATU could get.

In a press release posted on their website, KATU said: “According to Tamerlano, an employee pointed out that the company had a no-gun policy when Starrett wanted to bring his gun with him to the taping. The station then decided to strictly enforce the policy.”

To set the record straight, the only time a firearm came up was when KATU called back to inform me that I would have to agree to be disarmed, I never brought up carrying a gun when I initially agreed to participate. One has to wonder what they mean by “The station then decided to strictly enforce the policy.”

In the body of the press release, KATU includes this gem: “KATU’s SVP and general manager, John Tamerlano, said Fisher Communications, which owns KATU, has had a no-gun policy since 9/11 that prohibits anyone from bringing a weapon onto its property. The only exception is given to law enforcement officers such as police officers or FBI agents.”

Why their paranoia about firearms does not extend to police is curious, but what is weirder is that they developed this policy as a result of 9/11. Would it not have made more sense to implement a company policy that prohibited anyone from crashing airliners into their studio?

The website release ends with this incomprehensible statement “This version corrects process in which the station decided to enforce the no-gun policy.”

If you are in the KATU viewing area you can watch the entire sideshow tomorrow at 9 AM, but for the misleading press release and a short snip of the “debate” you can click on this link.

Note, archives of previous episodes of the show are available here. We presume the full video of this episode will be as well

UPDATE. THE ENTIRE SHOW CAN BE SEEN HERE..

If you’d like to get in some shooting and help Bruce Starr in his bid to be Oregon’s Labor Commissioner, here’s your opportunity.

Bruce has been a solid pro-gun vote in his time in the Oregon Legislature, and now in spite of every dirty trick thrown at him by ethically challenged Secretary of State Kate Brown, he is seeking the office of Labor Commissioner.

On August 16th friends of Bruce are hosting a fundraising shoot at Mitchell’s at Salem Clay Target Sports in Gervais Oregon.  For all the details you can contact Mike Fitz at fitz@staroilco.net or call him at 503 283 1736. Or you can simply download this flyer.

Come out and have some fun for a good cause.

As you know, the United Nations is working on an international treaty to regulate small arms.

This treaty has been the subject of speculation and the rumor mills for several years. It now appears that it may very well be finalized soon.

While many are claiming it will not infringe on American’s Second Amendment rights, every major pro-gun organization disagrees and considers it a massive threat.  If Hillary Clinton promises it’s good for you, it’s safe to say something very dangerous is being cooked up.

According to Ted Bromund of the Heritage Foundation, a suggestion was actually made to regulate police cars!

Obama told the Brady Campaign that he was working “under the radar” to enact gun control. We could see the results of this in the ATF’s “Fast and Furious” operation.  Guns sent to drug cartels with the approval and assistance of the Obama administration were intended to inflate the number of American firearms confiscated in Mexico and give a boost to efforts to restrict sales in America.  As of now, we have no idea how many innocent people have been killed with these guns, but for the first time an Attorney General  has been held in contempt, and anti-gun organizations have actually praised this operation!

Now with an international treaty pending, Obama and Clinton have another opportunity to attack gun rights while claiming to protect them.

The good news is that there is opposition in congress. Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois has sponsored HB 3594 opposing the treaty. The bad news is that not a single member of Oregon’s Congressional Delegation has cosponsored, including the only Republican, Greg Walden and NRA darling Kurt Schrader.

Of course, treaties must be ratified by the Senate, and while there is opposition there too, Oregon has two Senators who are as consistently anti-gun as any members of the Senate.

Still they need to hear from you. Please contact Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley and tell them to vote NO on any small arms treaty foisted on us by the United Nations

TUESDAY UPDATE TO THE UPDATE. KATU HAS NOW OFFERED TO SEND A SATALLITE TRUCK TO OUR PLACE TO DO THE DEBATE.

Special Update. Late Monday, July 23, OFF’s Director, Kevin Starrett, was contacted by KATU television to be part of a TV show they would be doing about gun control in the wake of the Colorado murders.  After agreeing to appear, KATU called Kevin back and informed him that he would not be allowed in the studio armed, something he has done many times before (and one time needed to be.)  If someone claiming to represent gun owners DOES appear on this show, scheduled to air Sunday, be advised that they agreed to this hysterical and paranoid policy.

2010, the Democrats in Congress attempted to pass a bill they called “The Disclose Act.” This bill was intended to intimidate advocacy organizations by requiring them to turn over the personal information of their donors.

You can refresh your memory of this debacle here and here. When the original bill was drafted, the NRA opposed it, until they received a “carve out” and were exempted. Initially they were the only organization exempted. At that point, they gave it their blessing and threw countless advocacy organizations under the bus. For more, see here and here.

Fortunately the bill eventually failed although every member of Oregon’s Congressional delegation except Greg Walden supported it. Now with little notice it’s risen from the ashes and is due to be voted on on Monday July 16th in the US Senate.

The current version does not seem to have the exemption for the NRA, so it should be interesting to see where NRA will come down on the bill. (As of this writing, we have seen nothing from NRA or GOA about this bill.)

The Senate Republicans have promised a filibuster. The news on this is coming in very late and without a lot of details. We will continue to monitor this and keep you informed.

The winner of our 4th of July raffle has been announced.

Kevin Kriske of Troutdale won the Black Rifle Company AR-15 with a Hi-Lux Optics Scope, and finish by Sur-Tac Gear.

This beautiful rifle was a donation of MK Tactical in Hillsboro Oregon (who also donated the case) and the Black Rifle Company of Clackamas.Hi-Lux Optics provided the scope. Sur-Tac donated the Cerakote Finish. Rich’s Guns in Donald handled the transfer. The winning ticked was drawn by Dawn Phillips who is the legislative aid for pro-gun House Rep Kim Thatcher and one of the hardest working friends we have in the legislature.

We want to congratulate Kevin and thank everyone who helped our cause by purchasing tickets for this rifle.

The companies that donated to our cause are all great friends of gun rights and we cannot thank them enough for their generosity. Please consider patronizing these companies for your firearms needs. They have done much to support our cause.

MK Tactical

Black Rifle Company

Sur-Tac-Gear

Hi-Lux Optics

Rich’s Gun shop

Eric Holder Held In Contempt of Congress.
How Did Your Representative Vote?

Eric Holder, the Attorney General who has been lying to Congress to cover up information about the Obama administration’s scheme to smuggle guns to Mexican drug gangs, has been held in contempt of Congress.

The Brady Campaign and many Democratic politicians have actually been defending this murderous scheme.

You may recall that some time ago Obama informed the Brady Campaign that he was working on gun control “under the radar.” Now it’s clear what he meant.

But how did your member of Congress vote?

Every single Democratic Oregon Congressman voted to protect the lying Attorney General whose policies have cost countless lives, including Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and scores of Mexican civilians.

The entire purpose of this scheme was to boost the number of American guns confiscated from Mexican crime scenes in order to implement more restrictions on law-abiding American gun owners.

NRA endorsed Congressman Kurt Schrader of Oregon’s 5th Congressional District voted with three other Oregon Democrats to protect Holder.

Please remember, none of this would have ever happened without the tireless efforts of David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh, who are virtually never acknowledged in the press unless they are being attacked. But they broke the story long before the mainstream media ever touched it.

As far too many of you know, the Oregon State Police ID Unit  was shut down for most of Sunday, crippling multiple gun shows, halting countless sales and costing dealers, buyers and gun show hosts untold thousands of dollars. If you ever wondered why we oppose background checks, this should tell you. All OSP has to do is throw a switch or blow a fuse and gun sales end. Both their phone lines and their new “computer system” were unavailable. But there is a bigger, more constant problem we need to address.

Several years ago OFF was receiving so many complaints about the awful treatment people were receiving from the State Police ID Unit when they attempted to make firearms purchases that we arranged a meeting with them.

At the time both dealers and buyers were frequently lied to about the process, and attempts to contact OSP for an explanation of a delay or denial were routinely ignored.

During our first meeting, OSP gave us a copy of a manual they said they provided to gun dealers that explained “the rules.”  On the very second page we noted information that was false and against state and Federal law.

During that meeting we were promised that service would improve, the error in the manual would be fixed and staff would be retrained so they would no longer dispense false information to dealers and buyers. For a long time things did seem to improve. The complaints we got dropped off to almost zero. Calls to the challenge line were, as promised, being returned promptly. We have never approved of background checks, but it did seem like an effort was being made to do a better job. Still we believed that because of several factors, including a $10.00 fee and the fact that OSP was databasing info on the gun being purchased, and thereby creating a gun registry, that this job was better done by NICS directly. In 2011 we introduced a bill to do just that. It passed out of House Judiciary only to die in Ways and Means when the Public Employee Unions came out to testify that the Oregon economy would collapse if OSP was not doing gun purchase background checks.

Now it seems we are back to the bad old days.  The number of complaints we receive about unjust delays has once again started climbing, but what’s worse is the new attitude of the OSP ID Unit.

Where once if you received a  delay or “pend” you were promised a response in 24 hours, now OSP is telling people not to bother them and not to expect a call back. Their “challenge line” has an outgoing message saying you will be delayed at least a month and don’t even bother to leave a message before a month has gone by since they will NOT call you back. This is an astonishing response from a State agency. “We are going to deny your rights and you’d better not ask us about it.”

The attitude of the OSP ID Unit is outrageous and unacceptable. The outgoing message tells people that their “standard delay” is 35 days. But that does not mean you will even get a response then. They can extend their delay forever.

Clearly, a right delayed is a right denied.

Think of the person who has a reasonable fear for their safety. The State Police tell them “tough, it’s your problem.” and then to add insult to injury tell that person, “don’t bother us with questions.”

It is important to note that with or without the OSP’s approval you are entitled to the gun after three business days as long as there has not be an outright denial.  As you would expect, there is nothing in their message that informs callers of this and it is the policy of the OSP not to inform buyers or dealers of this fact. NICS, on the other hand, informs buyers of their rights.

The State Police ID Unit has turned itself into a dictatorial gun control agency that routinely denies people their rights and then demands that it not be questioned about it. This has to stop.

First, call the challenge line to listen to the arrogant and outrageous outgoing message if you press 1 for a “delay”. That number is 503-373-1808.

Then call Patricia Whitfield and demand to know why her agency is treating taxpaying Oregonians like an unwanted nuisance when they are denied their rights by her agency.

Whitfield’s phone number is 503-934-2305.

Her email is patricia.whitfield@state.or.us

A sample cut and paste message follows:

——————————————————————————————————–

Ms. Whitfield,
I am astonished by the attitude of your unit when dealing with firearms purchase delays. The OSP ID Unit is a state agency tasked with serving the residents and taxpayers of this state. When your unit delays a firearms purchase, they are denying a right. To treat callers to your “challenge” line as though they were an unwelcome annoyance is outrageous and unacceptable.
If you cannot complete your checks quickly you should at least inform delayed buyers of their rights under State and Federal law. If this situation is not improved, I can assure you that I will do all in my power to see that the Legislature turns these checks over to NICS.

Today the Oregon House concurred with the Senate and re-passed House Bill 4045B. This bill is the heavily amended bill to provide some protections for CHL holders’ private information.

There were 6 “no” votes. That means that even in its greatly watered-down state, 6 House Democrats voted to keep as much information public as possible.

They were Bailey, Dembrow, Frederick, Greenlick, Nolan, and Tomei. They represent the worst of the worst in the Oregon House. The bill now goes to the Governor.

It’s interesting to note that while Floyd Prozanski (who had gutted and stuffed the bill on the Senate side) responded to a question from anti-gun zealot Ginny Burdick by saying “This is not my bill” he did add his name to it as a sponsor in its final form. Floyd seems to have some difficulty making up his mind. (And based on his recent email blast it may be worse than we thought. His most pointed attack on us is that we…oh the horror.. raise money! He also said we would be using him as a “whipping post.” We are pretty sure he meant “whipping boy.”)

As you know, the Oregon Senate rejected efforts to ban CHL firearms on school property yesterday. This decision was met with all the expected hysteria from the forces who so fear inanimate objects.

Today, the Oregon Higher Education Board passed new regulations created to try to circumvent the Appeals Court’s ruling that they (the Oregon University System) had no authority to regulate guns on campus. From the moment we won this case we knew this would be coming. Here is a quote from OUS spokeswoman Di Saunders: “If somebody leaned over and their jacket opened, and somebody saw a weapon, they’d be nervous or scared or concerned.”

Why these people would be more “scared or concerned” on campus than off is a matter of some speculation. But even that is not as ridiculous as this quote from Ben Eckstein, the U of O student body president:“A college campus is statistically one of the safest places on the planet. There’s a reason for that. We have a culture of peaceful, informed, engaged activism. A deadly weapon of any kind runs counter to that culture.”

Compare that to the mass email that was sent out to all staff and faculty at Mount Hood Community College on Feb. 29th. It said:

“This email is being sent to All Staff. Faculty are asked to remind students to check the announcements page on My MHCC for the following notification. Timely Notification Bulletin, Feb. 29, 2012 In compliance with the “Timely Notice” provisions of the federal Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act of 1998, Mt. Hood Community College (MHCC) is giving notice of a violent event reported to have occurred on the Gresham Campus last evening. REPORTED OFFENSE: A female student reported that a male assaulted her at approximately 6:20 p.m. while she was walking on the lane that runs behind the Academic Center. The female student broke free and reported the incident to the MHCC Public Safety department, which is working with Gresham Police to identify the suspect. SUSPECT: The female student described her attacker as 6 feet to six feet, two inches tall, approximately 30 years old, with tan skin. She also reported that he was wearing a dark baseball cap, a dark sweatshirt, blue jeans and either dark tennis shoes or dark boots. He possessed no facial hair. The College urges people on campus to exercise safety by being aware of their surroundings and reporting any suspicious behavior to Public Safety (emergency number: 503-491-7911). To request an escort by a Public Safety officer, call the non-emergency line: 503-491-7310.”

Clearly there is a disconnect here.

The Board of Higher Education and the Oregon University System have made every effort to ignore or circumvent the Oregon Appeals Court. By doing so they have put their staff and their students in danger. We strongly recommend that if you have any reason to be on Oregon University property, you do what they have done: ignore regulations. If the OUS feels free to pay no attention to the clear direction of the Oregon Courts, any rational person would pay no attention to their unlawful regulations.

If you are a CHL holder, carry your self-defense tool. The bureaucrats at the Higher Education Board have demonstrated that they have no interest in your safety. Take care of yourself.

Well, That Was Interesting

Today the Oregon Senate passed a CHL privacy bill and killed a bill by Ginny Burdick and Peter Courtney to ban CHL holders from school property.

It was a good day for gun owners, and frankly, this would not have happened except for the extraordinary efforts made by OFF supporters.

We have made no secret that we were not happy with the final version of the CHL privacy bill. We believe it was needlessly complicated and preferred the original version. But that being said, we will wait and see if it provides the protections it claims to. Let’s hope so.

It was interesting that during the floor debate, Floyd Prozanski, who carried the privacy bill, responded to a comment by Ginny Burdick by saying “It’s not my bill.” As we have come to see so often, that’s just Floyd being Floyd, meaning “don’t believe a word of it.”  In fact, it was 100% his bill since he removed all the original language and replaced it with his own. Here is the bill as passed by the Senate. It now must go back to the House for concurrence, which we expect to happen. No idea on where the Governor will be on this. See the vote count here.

The “no guns in schools” bill failed in a squeaker. We were very happy to see that not a single Republican caved and voted for this monstrosity. All Republicans except Bruce Starr voted “no.” Starr was not in the building and had been excused from the floor. His failing to vote had the same effect as a “no” vote. Two Democrats joined gun owners and voted “no” as well. A number of people have asked for their contact info to thank them for taking a stand. All their contact info is at the bottom of this alert.

As we mentioned in our email alert today, Prozanski sent out an email on Feb. 28th, in which, in addition to his usual attacks against us, he attempted to imply he was pro-gun by saying he had “stopped” a previous version of the “no guns in school” bill in his committee. What utter nonsense.

You will recall that Prozanski, as chair of the Judiciary Committee, actually scheduled a hearing on that bill, SB 1550, in his committee. Since the Chair has nearly total control over what bills get hearings, it was clear that Prozanski intended the bill to move forward. Chairmen do not schedule bills they want to kill. The reason the bill was “stopped” was because Prozanski, at that time, had failed to get the co-chairs of the House Judiciary Committee to agree to his proposed changes to the privacy bill. So Floyd decided to take his ball and go home. In the end it did not work out that way. Any suggestion that Prozanski “stopped” the bill in order to protect gun owners was laid to rest today, when Prozanski voted in favor of a nearly identical bill to the one he says he “stopped.”

Here is the vote count on the “no guns in schools” bill that failed today.

Many thanks to all of you who took the time to write or call and express your outrage at the process, engineered by Peter Courtney, to ram through HB 1594 with virtually no notice and no public input allowed. His shady tactics failed because of you.

Contact info for the two Democrat Senators who stood up for gun rights follows:

Senator Betsy Johnson
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1716
District Phone: 503-543-4046
Capitol Address: 900 Court St NE, S-215, Salem, OR, 97301
District Office Address: PO Box R, Scappoose, OR, 97056
Email: sen.betsyjohnson@state.or.us

Senator Joanne Verger
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1705
Capitol Address: 900 Court St NE, S-401, Salem, OR, 97301
District Office Address: 785 Virginia Avenue, North Bend, OR, 97459
Email: sen.joanneverger@state.or.us

 

GUN BILLS MOVE. PUBLIC SHUT OUT.

With barely an hour’s notice, the Senate Rules Committee passed two gun bills: HB 4045, which had been Kim Thatcher’s CHL privacy bill, and SB 1594, a bill by Peter Courtney and Ginny Burdick to outlaw self-defense firearms on school property. (03.01.12 New
amended bill)

HB 4045 was “gut and stuffed” with language that Floyd Prozanski wrote. None of the original bill was left. Whether the new bill actually extends any protections remains to be seen, but since the bill’s sponsor agreed to the changes, any hope of saving the original, clean, understandable bill was gone. All members of the Rules Committee voted “yes”.

Many of you may have received an email from Floyd Prozanski in which he said “While Kevin Starrett wants to give me all the credit for the amendment, Rep. Thatcher was equally instrumental in getting this compromise moved forward (as noted in the Sheriffs’ letter of support).”

He included a URL for the Sheriff’s letter.

It is correct that the Sheriffs’ lobbyist issued a press release about the bill. However if you read it you will see that they stated “Senator Floyd Prozanski (D- South Lane and North Douglas Counties), the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has been instrumental in drafting minor changes to assist in getting the measure adopted in the Senate.”

I guess the Sheriffs’ lobbyist read different amendments than we did. In fact, the entire original bill was removed. Maybe they consider that a “minor change.” We don’t.

In any event, that bill is off to the full Senate. There will be no opportunity for Senators to vote for the clean bill. It’s unfortunate that they never had the chance.

The committee did not allow the public to testify on the new version of the bill. To no one’s surprise, Ginny Burdick was not even satisfied with the the “gut and stuff” and voted “no.” Diane Rosenbaum voted to move the bill out of committee and reserved the right to oppose it on the floor. That’s what “compromise” gets you.

SB 1594 was the last minute backstab by Peter Courtney at the demand of Ginny Burdick. This bill is essentially the same as her SB 1550 which would make you a criminal if you took responsibility for protecting yourself or others on “school property.” This has been one of the most shameful abuses of the process we have ever seen.

The bill was essentially recreated this morning and heard this afternoon with no opportunity for public input. And make no mistake. That was the point.

The bill was passed out of committee on a party-line vote with Ginny Burdick, Dianne Rosenbaum and Lee Beyer, all Democrats, voting to make schools “criminal-safe” zones and Ted Ferrioli and Jason Atkinson voting “no.” No public testimony was allowed on this bill either. None
.
The bills now move to the Senate floor where it is unclear when they will be heard. It could be tomorrow or Thursday.

Please contact your State Senator and tell them in no uncertain terms NO on SB 1594. You can use this link even if you do not know who your Senator is.

Short and sweet. “NO ON SB 1594”

Thanks for your activism.

COURTNEY TO RAM THROUGH “NO GUNS IN SCHOOLS” BILL

Today in addition to gut and stuffing the CHL privacy bill with language by gun hater Floyd Prozanski, we expect the Senate Rules Committee to pass a bill by Senate President Peter Courtney banning guns on school property.

The bill, SB 1594, is a re-write of Burdick’s Senate Bill 1550. It was redrafted in order to bypass all the rules about bill deadlines.

The bill was introduced today, heard on the Senate Floor and referred to the Senate Rules Committee where we expect it to be passed to the Senate Floor as early as today.
We have been informed that several Republican Senators plan to cave and vote for the bill. Folks, we have been totally shafted this time by Courtney and Company.
Please call Peter Courtney’s office right away and express your outrage at this game of bait and switch.

503 986 1600

sen.petercourtney@state.or.us

CHL Confidentiality Confusion

As many of you know, the fertilizer has hit the ventilator in the matter of HB 4045, the CHL privacy bill.

Floyd Prozanski has drafted amendments that gut and stuff the original simple bill and complicate it considerably. The bill was NOT assigned to his committee but instead sent to the Senate Rules Committee.

There is a lot of speculation about why the bill was sent there. Many assume Senate President Peter Courtney sent it there to be killed. Based on comments Courtney has made lately about not wanting to deal with gun bills, this is certainly a possibility. The Chair of the Rules Committee, Diane Rosenbaum, makes the final decision about whether or not to hear the bill, although if Courtney told her he wanted it dead, that’s the most likely outcome.

Since Prozanski has sent out a blast email (using the legislative email address and not his own) many are wondering what to make of the amendments he attached. Since the NRA has now stated they will acquiesce to the amendments and have asked people to support the amended, gut and stuffed bill, there is a lot of confusion.

As we have said over and over, HB 4045 was simple, straight forward and easy to understand. The gut and stuffed version is anything but. Prozanski’s last amendments mark the 33rd time this bill has been amended.

Kim Thatcher, the sponsor of the original bill, has signaled that she will go along with the changes. We continue to support her original bill which did not require an army of lawyers to understand.

Oregon’s current statutes are so confusing that some DA’s do not understand them. (True story.) In the past we have spent weeks trying to get legislators to figure out that some of our gun laws literally make no sense. (Why for example could a person with a felony conviction petition to have his rights restored to BUY a gun and still not be allowed to OWN it?) That is why we feel so strongly about the unamended bill.

It’s no secret that HB 4045 was drafted with the specific intent of keeping the privacy protections OUT of the “public records” statutes because of their weak and limited protections. Prozanski’s changes put them right back in there.

We believe that the original bill got the job done in the simplest way. Whatever protections the amended bill claims to provide, it remains complex and confusing for no particular reason other than to stroke the egos of politicians who want to control the process.

We refer you to yesterday’s alert.