Category: Uncategorized

01.25.19

01.11.19

20 rounds a month. That’s all you will be able to buy if the Democrats in Salem have their way. And you’ll need a background check to get those. You’ll also need a permit to simply buy a firearm.  And there’s lots more.

We have posted the gun bills introduced so far. You can see them all here.

As we predicted, 2019 is going to be a very hostile year for gun owners in the Beaver State. So roll up your sleeves folks, we are in for a hell of a fight.

We will keep you posted as these bills move and are added to. But for now, if you’d like to express your feelings about SB 501 you can contact its sponsors:

Senator Rob Wagner
503-986-1719
Sen.RobWagner@oregonlegislature.gov

Representative Andrea Salinas
503-986-1438
Rep.AndreaSalinas@oregonlegislature.gov

07.30.18

A ballot measure to protect common firearms from new and restrictive regulations has been filed and we need your help to get it on the ballot.

We will need 1000 signatures to get a “ballot title”. That is the first step. Then, after the expected court challenges we’ll need a lot more signatures to actually get it on the ballot.

To start, here is the website for the measure https://www.commonfirearms.com/index.php

Here is the link to read the language of the measures and download a petition you can sign with instructions on how to print it and where to send it. PLEASE read the instructions and follow them. If you don’t, your signature won’t count.  https://www.commonfirearms.com/sign.php

Here is a link for FAQ’s about the measure . https://www.commonfirearms.com/faq.php

There has been an enormous amount of misinformation floating around the web about this measure. People believe it creates new restrictions on NFA firearms and things like “bumpstocks.” It does not. We strongly urge you to read the FAQs so you have accurate info.

Some folks are claiming this is some kind of “Trojan Horse” and or is a scam to collect data on gun owners. Others are saying OFF has “sold out” because the measure does not include machine guns in the definition of “common firearms.”  But the fact is the measure was carefully written to survive not only judicial scrutiny, but the inevitable lies and misinformation that the media and the anti-gunners will create to oppose it.

A lot of work went into crafting a measure that not only would withstand the coming attacks, but would also get a good ballot title and have a good chance of passing.

We hear from gun owners every day who ask “What can I do?” Well folks, this is what you can do.

Please download and sign the petition and encourage others to do the same, then send them in as soon as possible.

Please send your signed TWO SIDED petition to:

Common Firearms
2570 Greenwood Road S.
Independence, OR 97351

The sooner we have the required number of signatures the sooner we can move on to the next phase. It’s up to you now.

 

 

06.20.18

The backers of IP 44, the ballot measure that would eliminate virtually all firearms competitions and require you to keep all firearms you were not carrying locked up and useless for self defense for you and your family, appear to have thrown in the towel for now.

Make no mistake, these haters of liberty and common sense have lots of money. But for now they seem to have postponed their plans to gather signatures and are counting on anti-rights bigots like House Rep Jennifer Williamson to achieve through legislation what they could not do by ballot measure.

IP43, the measure that would ban most modern firearms, has still (as of this writing) not received an approved ballot title. That could happen any time.

This fight is far from over but we are grateful for all the support we have received in our legal battles to fight these attacks on liberty. We will keep you informed.

06.08.18

Yesterday OFF attorneys filed two challenges to the ballot title for IP43, the “inter-hate” gun confiscation measure.

Measure 43 would ban the purchase, sale or transfer of most modern rifles and shotguns, countless handguns and even some lever action rifles.

Owners of the firearms would be required to submit to another background check to keep them, “register” or “reregister” them with the State Police and store them in a manner approved by OSP.

Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds would also be prohibited from purchase, sale or transfer and these too would have to be “registered” with the police.

Once “registered” the firearms and magazines cited in the measure would only be allowed to be used at approved ranges.  You could not hunt or sport shoot with them and you could not use them for self defense outside the home.

Persons moving into the state with banned firearms or magazines would have to surrender them to the state. There would be no provision for “registration” only confiscation.

The penalty for possessing an unregistered firearm or magazine would be a felony punishable by 10 years in prison and fines of $250,000.00.

According to the Oregonian, the petitioners “… have leaders of Jewish congregations, black churches, liberal-leaning Protestant denominations and Islamic mosques on board.”

The Oregonian also reports . ”The Oregon Supreme Court can also expedite the process at the justices’ discretion by shortening response deadlines or bypassing oral arguments, given that the signature deadline is near.”

Previous reviews of ballot titles have taken from 49 to 150 days. But the Supreme Court has already agreed to a time table that favors the petitioners and hurts our side.

As you know, these essential legal battles are expensive. And we are not done yet. IP 43 is only one of two right’s-smashing anti-gun measures filed for the 2018 election. IP 44 would require that any firearm you own be locked and inaccessible for self defense unless you were actually carrying it.

It would hold you responsible for any damage done with one of your firearms for five years if your gun was stolen and you could not prove it had a “cable” or “trigger” lock on it.

This is turning into a very ugly year for Oregonians who dare to exercise their God-given, constitutional rights. But we have no choice but to face down the hateful bigots who would use a mob to deny you a fundamental right.

The other side has billionaires on their side. All we have is you.

Please consider contributing to our efforts to keep Oregon safe and free.

You can donate to the battle here.

05.11.18

Your response to the ballot title language for  gun confiscation measure IP 43 has been unprecedented. The Secretary of State received over 1500 comments on the misleading and incomplete title language created by the anti-gun Attorney General which attempted to downplay the scope and dangers of IP 43. 

Congratulations on a job well done. We have a long fight ahead of us but a message has been sent. Thank you. But we are not done yet.

As we have reported previously we now need you to make your voice heard on another equally dangerous ballot measure, IP 44.

Under IP 44 you would be a criminal if you kept a firearm next to your bed for home protection at night and went to the bathroom while your spouse slept.

Under the guise of “safe storage” it would hold you strictly liable for damages done by others with a firearm you transferred, lost, or had stolen from you for 5 years unless you could prove the gun had a “cable or trigger lock” or was stored in a locked container at the time of the transfer, loss or theft.

It’s blatantly absurd to suggest that a person you transferred a gun to would be any more or less likely to misuse a firearm for 5 years simply because you delivered it with a removable “trigger lock.”  It is even more bizarre to imply that if your gun was stolen it could not be misused because of a flimsy “cable” for five years!

When you make your comments please address the failures of the ballot title language, not the language of the measure itself. The ballot title includes the “caption,” the summary and the effects of both a “yes” and “no” vote. You can comment on any or all of these components.

Keep in mind that while you will be addressing your comments to the Secretary of State, he did not write the ballot title language. Our anti-gun Attorney General did.

When you make your comments be sure your name is included. Identify yourself as an “Oregon Elector” (voter).

An address is helpful but not required.

The language of the actual measure can be seen here.

The language for the ballot title can be seen here.

Some things to consider when you make your comments.

Based on the Heller decision , the ballot measure is almost certainly unconstitutional.  In Heller, the late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the court’s opinion :

“The requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self defense and is hence unconstitutional.”

The ballot “caption” says :

“Requires firearms be locked during storage/transfer, loss reported, minors’ use supervised; imposes penalties/liabilities”

Clearly, given the scope and potential liabilities, this language falls well short of  advising voters what the measure does.

Under this measure even temporary or momentary “transfers” like handing a firearm to a friend at a range or using an instructor’s gun in a class would require the firearm be disabled each time it was handed to another person. The same is true of guns you might handle at a gun store.

There are no exceptions for displays of antique firearms even if there are no ammunition components available. There are no exceptions for historical or educational displays or museums.

Section 6 (2) says :

For purposes of sections 1 and 3 of this 2018 Act, a firearm is under the control of a person when the person is lawfully authorized to possess the firearm and the person is in sufficiently close proximity to the firearm to prevent another person from obtaining possession of the firearm.

This is vague and subjective and provides no real guidance for how far away a person has to be away from a firearm before he or she is breaking the law. Nor does it explain exactly what responsibility a person actually has to prevent another person from “obtaining possession.” Do they just have to be there?

We’re sure you’ll find plenty more to address.

You can send your comments to:

Email to irrlistnotifier.sos@oregon.gov

Fax to 503.373.7414
Mail to 255 Capitol St NE Ste 501, Salem OR 97310

Your comments are due by May 15.

If you would like to support our efforts to defeat these mindless attacks on our liberty, safety and heritage you can do so here.

 

05.09.18

Last evening at 5pm was the deadline for submitting comments on the ballot title for IP 43, the  firearms confiscation measure.  This measure would ban not only almost all modern firearms but could potentially even ban some lever action rifles.

Anyone who commented has standing to challenge the ballot title created by the Attorney General in the Oregon Supreme Court.

The Secretary of State is reporting they received over 1000 comments. Typically they receive a dozen or fewer.

The comments can be seen here. Many of you have shared the comments you sent with us. We have seen some very impressive and thorough work and you should all be proud.

Next up as you know, is the same process for IP 44.

This outrageous attack on your rights and common sense would require that your guns be inaccessible and even holds you responsible for crimes and accidents that involve a firearm you owned,  for 5 years after you sold it.

Based on the Heller decision it is almost certainly unconstitutional.  In Heller, the late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the court’s opinion :

“The requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self defense and is hence unconstitutional.”

That, however, does not mean this dangerous act of theft will stay off the ballot. Once again, anyone who comments on the ballot title will have standing to challenge it in court.

The ballot title for IP 44 can be seen here. Deadline for comments is May 15. You may comment on any or all of the components of the title including the caption, the summary and outcomes of a “yes” or “no” vote. You may also propose alternative language for any of these components.

If you are sending your comments via email, we have been informed that a signature is NOT required. Nor is a street address, but it is suggested. First and last name are required.  Comments  can be sent to:

Email to irrlistnotifier.sos@oregon.gov

Fax to 503.373.7414
Mail to 255 Capitol St NE Ste 501, Salem OR 97310

There is plenty to find fault with in the ballot title as it does not even come close to clearly explaining the broad reach and damage this measure does.

OFF will be doing everything possible to stand in the way of the hateful people who are using the initiative process to steal your rights, your property and, if they have their way, your freedom.

Thanks to everyone who took the time to make your voices heard with comments on IP 43. We have no doubts you will do another outstanding job commenting on IP 44.

If you would like to support our efforts to defeat these mindless attacks on our liberty, safety and heritage you can do so here.

05.01.18

The Second Anti-Rights, Anti Constitution Ballot Measure has received a “ballot title”

IP 44 has the ballot “caption” :

“Requires firearms be locked during storage/transfer, loss reported, minors’ use supervised; imposes penalties/liabilities   

Of course that does not in any way describe the dangerous and unconstitutional things this ballot measure does. You can read the actual language of the measure here. 

The ballot language is, once again, incoherent. You can see the language of the caption, summary and results of a yes or no vote here.

The chief petitioners are :
Henry Wessinger 1000 SW Vista Ave #1105 Portland, OR 97205
Vincenza Passalacqua (Jenna Yuille) 1704 19th St. NW #9 Washington, DC 20009
Paul Kemp 8710 SE 137th Avenue Happy Valley, OR 97086

For reasons we cannot explain, Jenna Yuille, an anti-rights extremist and anti-gun activist and Bloomberg employee, is using a Washington DC address and another name, while still posting an Oregon phone number.

As with IP 43, Oregon voters can submit comments on the language of the “ballot title” which means any of the language in the “caption”  or “summary” or the language describing what happens if the measure passes or fails.

Here is the “summary”according to the Attorney General:

Summary: Requires owner/possessor of firearm to secure it with trigger or cable lock, or in locked container when not being carried by owner/possessor; must transfer firearm with trigger or cable lock, or in locked container; must report theft or loss of firearm to law enforcement within 24 hours; person who transfers firearm to minor must directly supervise minors’ use of firearm. Failure to comply with requirements treated as violation. Person failing to comply with requirements is strictly liable if injury to person or property results within five years from failure to comply; liability does not apply if injury results from self-defense/defense of another. Attorney General to adopt specifications for trigger locks, cable locks, firearms containers. Defines “firearm,” “transfer,” other terms. Other provisions

You can make comments on  the caption, summary or language describing the outcome of a yes or no vote here:

Scan and Email to irrlistnotifier.sos@oregon.gov

Fax to 503.373.7414
Mail to 255 Capitol St NE Ste 501, Salem OR 97310

 Please keep in mind the Secretary of State is NOT responsible for the ballot title language. They are just the “messenger”. 

As with measure 43, if you file comments about the ballot measure title you will have standing to challenge the ballot title in court.

Comments are due by 5/15/2018

 

03.20.18

Oregon’s new gun confiscation ballot measure has been filed. You can read the language here.

Get ready for the fight of our lives.

03.01.18

Lies, Platitudes and Cliches.

Yesterday’s gun control summit with Donald Trump and members of Congress was a frightening display of ignorance, arrogance, and deceit.

You would be hard pressed to find another example of so many people in positions of power expressing so little knowledge of the facts and so much willingness to ignore them.

Donald Trump said “Take the guns first, go through due process second.”

 

He promised to violate the law and the Constitution with an executive order banning “bump stocks”, encouraged Diane Feinstein’s new ban on modern firearms, pushed for an increase in age for long gun purchase, spoke approvingly of a national firearms owner’s license, called for an expansion of the failed background check system, and repeatedly (and incorrectly) noted that the reason more draconian gun control language had not passed before was because he was not President then.

(Elsewhere Feinstein said of a bill she is sponsoring with Jeff Flake:

“If you can’t buy a beer, you shouldn’t be able to buy a weapon of war. While we need to do much more to reform our gun laws, ensuring teenagers can’t legally buy weapons of war is a commonsense step forward.”

She made no mention of the fact that 18 year olds can vote and are issued “weapons of war” and sent into battle by the same people who want to deny them the right to own a rifle.)

Trump endorsed the “Extreme Risk Protection Orders” that passed in Oregon thanks to Republican Senator Brian Boquist who also believes that “due process” is an unnecessary intrusion on the state’s ability to confiscate firearms.

Trump said he “had lunch” with the NRA and “thinks they’re on board.”

In short, Trump is now promoting virtually everything Hillary Clinton campaigned for and is shoving a large knife in the back of the people who elected him.

Trump repeatedly stated that he wanted a “big,” “strong,” “beautiful” bill. But only one “comprehensive” bill.

Many, even some in the gun rights movement, believe that this may be a masterful ploy by Trump. That he is playing “three dimensional chess.”  They think that by insisting on one massive bill it reduces the chance of passage because there will be something in the bill for everyone to object to. But when Congressman Steve Scalise suggested that national reciprocity be considered as part of this “comprehensive ” bill, Trump brusquely dismissed the idea saying it would prevent the bill’s passage.

So while Trump did state his support for allowing school employees to be armed if they were permit holders, he also made clear how little regard he has for them.

Gun owners now face staggering risks to their rights and property because numerous government agencies refused to take action, either intentionally or through mind-boggling incompetence, and did nothing about a dangerous, violent, felon who posted his intentions to “become a professional school shooter” on the internet.

Because of their failures and those policies of ignoring reality, Trump, and many members of Congress, want to eviscerate your rights.

He cannot be allowed to get away with this.

Call Trump today at 202-456-1111 or 202-456-1414 and tell him that you do NOT support one word of the gun control measures that he’s promoting. Tell him that he was elected because he promised to oppose everything he is supporting now.

You can also contact the White House via webform at https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

You can cut and paste the suggested message below or modify as you like:

I am a law-abiding citizen, and I am contacting you to voice my strong opposition to any of the gun control schemes currently being discussed. This includes banning “bump stocks, “  or raising the minimum age for firearms purchases,  so-called “universal background checks” or reinstating the unconstitutional and failed ban on modern firearms.

Stop listening to the ignorant and deceitful nonsense you are hearing and work on real solutions. You don’t stop evil people by stealing the rights of good people.

I demand that you end this talk about gun control.  I will be monitoring your actions on this matter through alerts from The Oregon Firearms Federation.

 

02.19.18

Bloomberg /Brown Confiscation Bill Fast Tracked

HB 4145, the Bloomberg/Brown gun confiscation bill will get a hearing and work session tomorrow at 8am in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

If the past is any indication, the anti-gun organizations have been alerted to the timing of the hearing long before it was officially posted and are no doubt already planning to bus in rent-a-mobs to fill the room.

Once again, due to the large anti-gun crowd expected, the hearing will be in Room 50 in the basement of the Capitol building. If you can possibly attend, please do.

 If not, please consider emailing your testimony in opposition here:  sjud.exhibits@oregonlegislature.gov  

HB 4145 is not designed to protect victims of domestic violence. It is designed to do one thing, disarm the law abiding.

In the House, anti-gun zealot Jennifer Williamson said that existing law “protects” those who are falsely accused. Well it certainly did not “protect” Shane Morgan of Bend.

Shane was the subject of horrible stories like this and this. There was only one problem. Every single accusation was a lie.

Was the women who made these false allegations prosecuted? No. The DA said he did not want to “discourage” people from coming forward with these kinds of allegations.

This is an outrage and sadly not an isolated incident.   

So far, Knute Buehler, who represents Bend in the House and wants to be your next Governor, and who supports this dangerous legislation, has been silent about this travesty.

We have very little time. The Democrats are fast tracking the bill and hoping to peel off a few weak kneed Republicans.

If you can be at the hearing please come. But if not please submit testimony and take action here.

 

02.14.18

HB 4145, Kate Brown’s gun confiscation bill, was scheduled to be voted on today in the Oregon House.

However the bill has been pushed back to tomorrow’s floor session.

While this is potentially bad news since it’s possible they delayed it to have time to make it worse, it does give us at least one more day to voice our opposition to this dangerous legislation. 

We told you about the dangers of this bill in a previous alert. 

Please take a moment to express your opposition to HB 4145 one more time. 

Take action here. 

Today in the Senate Judiciary Committee, SJM 202 was passed on a party line vote. We told you about this pointless but expensive attack on gun rights here. It was sent to the Rules Committee in an apparent procedural move to prevent Republicans from offering substitute language. We still urge you to voice your opposition to it. You can do that using this link.

Bad things are happening fast in Salem. Please make your voice heard now.