03.21.2023
Tomorrow the House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to hear three anti-rights bills.
Those are House Bills 2005, 2006, and 2007.
We gave you the details here .
That link will also provide links if you want to testify on any of these bills or watch the hearings live.
Together these bills represent one of the most coordinated and hateful attacks on Second Amendment rights we have seen.
They will outlaw all privately manufactured firearms, eliminate gun and hunting rights for anyone under 21, and render CHL’s useless by declaring vast undefined areas of Oregon off limits to licensed carry.
All of these bills will, if passed, be found unconstitutional. The end goals of each have already failed court tests, the most recent being last Sunday when the US District Court in the Northern District of Texas decided that the ATF’s regulation of “unfinished receivers” was illegal. (Polymer Inc vs Merrick Garland).
As you know, Oregon Democrats have no concern about passing unconstitutional laws. If they pass YOU will have to pay to fight them in court while paying for lawyers on both sides of the fight.
You can still upload testimony or register to testify yourself either in person or remotely.
We assume you will be given a total of 2 minutes if you get to testify at all. They may consolidate testimony on all three bills which will give you a grand total of 40 seconds per bill. So be prepared.
“Invited testimony” will be at 8am. The public gets no time until 5pm. Please consider testifying anyway.
On another note, House Rep Dacia Grayber’s racist “paramilitary bill” which we warned you about here was moved to the House Rules Committee. The Rules Committee is not subject to the same deadlines as other committees. When a bill goes there it is either to keep it alive long enough to massage it into something that can pass, or to allow it die with dignity. Something this bigoted garbage does not deserve. We’ll keep watching it but for now it is not moving forward. And don’t think it’s because more rational people recognized that under Brandenburg v Ohio the bill was certainly unconstitutional. Far more likely was because the ACLU opposed it.