Oregon’s Senate Judiciary Committee began work Friday on a draft bill concerning background checks on private firearms transfers, and backers of the proposed legislation are lying when they claim it is not a gun registration bill, Oregon Firearms Federation charged yesterday in a member alert.
The purpose of yesterday’s work session was to determine if LC 154 would be introduced as a committee bill instead of one that identifies its sponsor, giving a degree of political cover that OFF characterized as “cowardly” in its release. In this case, they had more than that to say about the bill’s main proponent, State Senator and Committee Chair Floyd Prozanski, and actually accused him of lying.
“Floyd went on to say that this bill is not a ‘gun registration’ bill, something he would never support!” OFF explained.
“So let’s review,” the alert continued. “Floyd Prozanski’s background check bill requires that when you give a gun to your best friend, or your cousin, or your uncle, that the State Police record the recipient’s name, address, sex, (and social security number if they choose to give it) and the make, model, caliber and serial number of the gun!
“So the question is how is this not a registration bill?” OFF asked.
“The department may retain a record of the information obtained during a request for a criminal background check under this section for the period of time provided in ORS 166.412 (7),” the language of the draft specifies. Cross-referencing that to the cited Oregon Revised Statutes section confirms such records can be retained for up to five years.
The alert concludes with contact information for the Senate Judiciary Committee and a suggested message to send that includes a key contention, and the reason gun owners resist registration.
“We have seen how these policies lead to confiscations as they have in New York and now California,” the message points out.
With that most serious of end goals in mind, and recalling the recent display of gun owners lining up in Connecticut to register their firearms in order to comply with the deadline there, it’s fair to ask if there’s not something more that could be done than sending correspondence to legislators, many of whom are secure in their "progressive" districts and overtly hostile to the right to keep and bear arms without fear of political repercussions.
There is, but, as in Connecticut, unless grassroots groups like Oregon Firearms Federation can recruit 10, 20, 100 times their current memberships -- and there’s no legitimate reason why they shouldn’t be able to, and the only reason they haven’t is due to gun owner selfishness, laziness, apathy and excuse-making – their options and capabilities are limited.
In July, and again in December of last year, this column warned -- and has been the lone voice raising the alarm -- that Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns has been establishing well-funded “action groups” in the various states, as part of his committed strategy to impose New York-style “gun controls” throughout the land. In August, MAIG registered as an entity with the Oregon Secretary of State’s Corporation Division.
Groups like OFF are already overtaxed to the limit in terms of manpower and resources without adding more to their burdens. Once Bloomberg sticks “his whole foot” in the water, as MAIG Executive Director Mark Glaze has promised he’s getting ready to do, it’s not hard to imagine grassroots groups that don’t receive support getting overwhelmed.
Perhaps the gun owners who won't get involved now will only come to regret their non-involvement when it becomes their turn to make the choice of risking felony charges or complying with the "law."
If you're a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won't find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David Codrea) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit "The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance."
When your turn to be tested comes, how will you fare? Wouldn’t it be better to stop the antis before they get that far? How can we, if most gun owners let a relative handful of activists do all the work? The latest GUNS Magazine "Rights Watch" column is online, and you can read it before the issue hits the stands. Click here to read "The Unconstitutional State.”