Showing posts with label background checks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label background checks. Show all posts

Monday, July 18, 2016

Oregon Governor Kate Brown's Initiative To Reduce Gun Violence

A statement from Ceasefire Oregon...

Ceasefire Oregon is proud to be part of Governor Brown's new initiative to reduce gun violence.

Governor Brown's initiative includes:
  • Prohibiting purchases of extended-capacity magazines. This type of ammunition enables shooters to fire 10, 30 or even 50 bullets before stopping to reload the gun.  
  • Expanding the types of relationships that qualify under domestic violence by closing the "boyfriend loophole." This legislation will ensure that people convicted of certain domestic violence and stalking crimes will no longer have access to firearms. 
  • Closing the Charleston loophole so individuals who should not own a gun are not able to buy one simply because authorities were unable to complete a background check in a few days.
  • Strengthening existing law through executive order to give law enforcement the tools needed to track and analyze gun transactions.
  • Establishing a work group to review and assess firearms-related domestic violence offenses.
  • Directing the Oregon Health Authority, through executive action, to report annually on gun violence, its effect of public health and to recommend policies to reduce gun violence in Oregon.
In addition, Governor Brown calls upon Congress to end gun violence by:
  • Banning assault weapons and extended-capacity magazines. (S. 4269)
  • Strengthening anti-terrorist legislation so individuals on the FBI's watch list are prohibited from purchasing a firearm in the United States.  (H.R. 1076)
Governor Brown's actions are strong, positive steps we can take to stop the gun violence that we witness daily. Please call her office now at (503) 378-4582 to thank her. 
   
To stay up to date on the Governor's actions and to learn what you can do to stop gun violence, visit our website at ceasefireoregon.org and encourage your friends to do the same.
   
Working together, we can put an end to the scourge of gun violence. 


Addendum:  The transcript of Gov. Brown's speech can be found HERE.  You can find an additional fact sheet of Gov. Brown's "Oregonians United to End Gun Violence" announcement HERE.

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Extreme Pro-Gun Sheriff Arrested for Violent Assault And Strangulation

Back last spring, when Oregon legislators were working to pass Senate Bill 941 to require background checks for all gun sales in the state, including private sales (which passed in May and was enacted in August, much to the relief of most law enforcement), a small number of rural sheriffs said that they would refuse to enforce the law (against the oath that they took), and a number of county commissions in rural counties said they would not fund the law (also against the oath they took).

The extremist group, Oregon Firearms Federation, led the charge in encouraging these sheriffs and county commissions.


Sheriff Skrah speaks against keeping
guns out of criminal hands (source)
One of those sheriffs was Klamath County Sheriff Frank Skrah.  Klamath County commissioners condemned the background check law by passing a resolution.  O.F.F. was happy to report that Sheriff Skrah testified in support of the pro-gun resolution.  From an article:


“I will not be taking away guns from anybody. I will not be going out and confiscating guns,” said Klamath County Sheriff Frank Skrah. “People have the right to bear arms, and I will not abridge that right to bear arms. Ever. I’ll say it again: ever.”
Just to be clear, Sheriff Skrah is saying he will refuse to uphold his oath and enforce a law that he, personally, doesn't like, and won't be "confiscating guns" -- even if the person purchasing the guns has failed a background check!  Yes, you read that right.  If a person purchases a gun in a private sale, and fails a background check or refuses to have a background check (such as if they were a felon or dangerously mentally ill), Sheriff Skrah would refuse to arrest them or take their gun away.

Just another way that the pro-gun forces were willing to encourage criminal behavior.  Sadly, Oregon is no stranger to pro-gun, insurrectionist rural sheriffs.

Skrah released a statement railing against the background check bill and intrusion by "Big Brother."  Excerpts from his statement:


While I, as Sheriff of Klamath County, support keeping guns out of the hands of “CRIMINALS” this legislation (SB–941) appears to be nothing more than a further infringement upon those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment Rights.  
"Some may disagree with me, but I feel “Big Brother” need not know who owns a firearm. 
"We don’t need new laws to check the background of those who have the legal right to own a gun. We conduct background checks on those who “carry” (Concealed Carry Handgun Permits) and we do a very good job in that endeavor.  
"Upping the ante and requiring more Government Intrusion is not needed and not wanted by the vast majority of good hard working folks.  
"If I sell or give a gun to my neighbor should I or my neighbor be subject to a background check? My answer to that rhetorical question is a very firm NO! 
"Typical of government is to stack another law upon us!   Folks in Salem: ….. We have that little obscure document called the United States Constitution.  
"It might be good for those in the state Legislature (as well as Washington D.C.) to look at that document.   Read down to the Second Amendment: The right (our right) to keep and bear arms! ….. Without bureaucrats trying to make more decisions for us. I, as the Sheriff of Klamath County, will use the laws that are presently on the books to do my job.

Sadly, his love of guns has clouded his judgement.  He says he "supports" keeping guns out of criminal hands, but how is a gun seller to know if the buyer is a criminal without a background check?  And not all buyers have conceal carry permits or are a neighbor of Skrah.  And though he purports to be an expert in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has already stated in the Heller decision that background checks and other regulations are not unconstitutional (and Skrah, as with most pro-gun zealots, seems to forget the "well-regulated" part of the Second Amendment).  It is also not the role of sheriffs or county commissions to determine what is constitutional or not.  That's for the courts to decide.
Well, that was in April.  Flash forward to this month....
Now Sheriff Skrah has been charged with nine counts of violent crime by a grand jury, including assault and strangulation.  From an article:
A Klamath County grand jury charged Skrah with a total of nine counts, including three counts of harassment, three counts of official misconduct in the first degree, one count of attempted assault in the fourth degree, one count of assault in the fourth degree and one count of strangulation. .... 
The charges came after the Oregon Department of Justice launched an investigation in April into allegations Skrah had used excessive force against a suspect. Seven of the department's 30 deputies asked to be placed on paid leave after they were questioned about Skrah by state investigators. ... 
Sheriff Skrah's mugshot (source)
The charges stem from Skrah's dealings with three men, James Johnson, Kenneth Bragg and Jason Charles. In three separate incidents, Skrah allegedly held a flashlight against Johnson's throat on Feb. 11, 2013; he allegedly hit Charles on Jan. 14, 2014; and prosecutors claim he choked Bragg on Feb. 27, 2015. 
The Oregonian first reported the the Skrah investigation involved reports he had used excessive force, including hitting a handcuffed suspect, on Aug. 25.
The indictment also alleges Skrah failed to notify and compensate a local resident after one of his deputies had damaged their property.

Of course, Skrah denies all charges, like criminals often do.  

There is also a concern about him "for workplace harassment and retaliation by the Sheriff."

Should we be surprised?  Based on his pro-gun testimony, I'm guessing that Sheriff Skrah owns a great many guns.  According to a Washington Post report, those who own a large number of guns are significantly more likely to have explosive anger issues.

Well, he may not be able to own his guns anymore, after this.  Will the next Sheriff allow Skrah to purchase guns without a background check, too?

Let's hope that Klamath County has learned its lesson and will replace Skrah with a more reasonable Sheriff who is more peaceful and is willing to uphold the law, including enforcement of background checks for all gun sales.

Saturday, September 12, 2015

All Four Vengeful Recall Efforts By Pro-Gun Forces Fail In Oregon

In May of this year, after at least a couple years of work by concerned legislators, gun violence prevention organizations, public health organizations, faith organizations, and members of the public, the Governor signed into law Senate Bill 941, providing for background checks for nearly every gun sale in the state of Oregon, including private sales.  It was a tremendous victory for public safety, and one that had the support of up to 90% of my fellow Oregonians.  The bill went into full effect on August 9.

Unwilling to be bothered by a 5-minute, $10 background check at one of the many hundreds of licensed dealers around the state, the sort of which was already required for any gun purchased at gun shops or gun shows, the gun guys howled in anger, led by the extremist Oregon Firearms Federation (OFF).  They responded with openly-criminal responses.  OFF sent out angry email alerts to its followers, urging them to "defy" the law and spreading disinformation about the law (get the true facts, HERE).  Pro-gun county commissioners (including the sister of OFF's executive director) and a rural sheriff or two penned angry statements saying that they would not fund or enforce any background check efforts.  In their usual, treasonous way, local militia groups even vowed "armed civil disobedience."

And then, in an act that could only be called a political tantrum, OFF and its followers decided they would try to recall four of the state legislators who co-sponsored the bill:  Senator Floyd Prozanski, Representative Val Hoyle (House Majority Leader), Senator Chuck Riley, and Representative Susan McLain.  (Hoyle had previously received "A" and "B" ratings from OFF.  Now, suddenly, it was an "F").

I say it was a political tantrum because the entire purpose of a recall is to remove politicians who have demonstrated some form of malfeasance or scandalous conduct while in office.  SB941 went through all of the official committees and channels, with amendments and votes as befits any bill.  It was voted through committees, through votes in both the Senate and the House, and ultimately signed into law by the Governor.  There were no scandals involved in its passage, nor are any of the legislators involved in any political scandals.  In short, the entire process was normal and acceptable.

So why do the recalls?  Vengeance, plain and simple, with no regard for the democratic process.  Staging a recall attempt simply because they disagree with a dutifully-passed bill is an abuse of the process.  But when have gun nuts ever cared for democracy?

Well, the first recall attempt, against Riley and McLain, fizzled in July.  The petitioners had failed miserably to get anywhere near the number of signatures they needed, and no financial or volunteer support from any organizations other than OFF.  These legislators were relieved:

Riley and McLain both expressed their relief at not having to face a recall election.
"I think that's great," said Riley, reached while hiking on Steens Mountain in eastern Oregon.  "I've always said that recalls are really only for people who didn't do what they said they would do, and I wasn't one of those people."
Riley said he campaigned in favor of the expanded background checks and won election last year.
McLain said she was "pretty excited" she doesn't have to spend the next several months fighting a recall election.
"I'd like to be working in the interim on projects that I started during the session," she added.

Imagine that:  having our legislators work on improving our state instead of expending their energy fighting useless recall efforts!

Meanwhile, Val Hoyle prepared to fight the recall.  She started an  "I Stand With Val" campaign, complete with yard signs -- I had one in my yard, too -- and began asking for volunteers and donations.

And then the recall effort against Val Hoyle started to unravel.  A complaint was filed against the recall, demonstrating that the petitioners, which were mainly gun shops (the chief petitioner was a gun shop owner, no less), were using gun shop paid employees to get signatures without registering them as paid petitioners, and were leaving the petitions unsupervised with customers.  It was basically racketeering.  The effort was failing to get enough signatures, and then the recall was dropped entirely when Representative Hoyle announced that she is leaving her post as House Majority Leader to explore running for Secretary of State.

But the gun guys continued to harass Rep. Hoyle with angry and threatening phone calls and messages after the director of OFF shared her personal cell phone number.  Hoyle responded with a campaign to ask her supporters to respond to each threat with a $25 donation, to be used to pay off the cost of fighting the recall.  Her supporters responded overwhelmingly in support.

And then the Prozanski effort started to crumble, too.  Just as with the Val Hoyle recall, a complaint was filed against the Prozanski recall effort, alleging the same sort of mistakes by the gun shops who were collecting signatures.  But this time the gun guys were able to get around it by throwing out those petition sheets, and the Secretary of State ruled, just yesterday, that the other petition sheets could be used.

When the recall against Floyd Prozanski was announced, the supporters of this popular senator immediately jumped to his defense, soon forming a campaign of their own called "Stop Reckless Recalls."  Senator Prozanski later wrote an opinion piece in the local newspaper, stating his case:

The purpose of recall is to hold accountable an elected official who has committed an ethical violation, committed a crime or breached the public trust. According to the Secretary of State’s office, this recall will cost taxpayers $100,000 to $134,000 if it goes forward.
Do taxpayers really want to spend that amount of money because someone disagrees with my legislative votes?
Michaelson-Duffy is upset with my support for Senate Bill 941. The bill closed the last remaining loophole in Oregon’s successful 25-year-old background check law. But people’s rights to own and purchase a gun remain intact under SB 941 unless they are a felon or suffering a mental health crisis.

But the gun guys didn't care, of course.  Just over 10,000 unverified signatures were turned in, well-above the 8,415 that were needed.  It seemed that the $51,000 spent on the recall campaign, $45,000 of which came directly from OFF, was well-spent.

And then, later in the day, the Secretary of State announced that nearly 2,000 of those signatures were invalid.  Yes, 2,000!  Says a lot about these people.  They were either repeat signatures, or they could not be validated as registered voters in Prozanski's district. The last of the recall campaigns was officially dismissed. From an article:

Needing 8,415 valid signatures, the recall campaign submitted a total of 10,027 unverified signatures last week. Two separate statistical samplings done Friday by the state Elections Division found the recall failed to meet the required 84 percent verification rate, however. One sampling estimated there were 8,208 valid signatures, the other 8,062, the Elections Division said. ....

In a prepared statement, Prozanski said Friday that he was “grateful” for his constituents’ continued support.
“Despite their attempts to distort my record and their personal attacks on me, the political extremists who tried to force a recall vote have been rejected by the voters,” he said.
And so, once again, common sense prevails in Oregon.  If the gun guys had succeeded, not only
would good legislators lose their positions, but it would set a dangerous precedent that anyone who simply disagrees with a lawfully-passed bill of any type could punish lawmakers with a recall vote.  If that were the case, no politician would willingly take a stand on any hot-button topic.


Instead, the democratic process in Oregon remains secure, the gun guys don't get results from their political tantrum, and we retain commonsense background checks to help keep guns out of dangerous hands.

Thank you, Floyd, Val, Chuck, and Susan, and all those other legislators who sponsored or voted for SB941, for standing up for public safety and for continuing to face down the pro-gun forces.  You have protected the welfare of your people.


Addendum (9/13/15):  Oregon Firearms Federation released an alert wherein they blame their failure to recall Prozanski on interference by "Bloomberg lackeys" and "Bloomberg flunkies," a "Prozanski and Bloomberg cabal," and a conspiracy by the Secretary of State (with no evidence to back up their statement, of course).  I'm shaking my head at their utter refusal to accept the facts, and their conspiratorial, paranoid thinking, so typical of OFF and the gun nuts.
From the OFF webpage (red underlining added)

OFF posted the letter that was sent to the chief petitioner for the Prozanski recall, along with the statistical results, HERE.

In their typical, pro-criminal and violent fashion, OFF has told their followers to "Be prepared to resist and defy" (see screenshot from their homepage).

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

FAQs for Oregon's new background check law, the Oregon Firearms Safety Act

The Oregon Firearms Safety Act, which was signed into law back in May, and which requires background checks for ALL gun sales, including private and online sales, went into effect last Sunday.

But, thanks to the pro-gun forces and their dis-information attempts to obfuscate the law (and criminal-minded open rebellion against it), there has been some confusion about the law -- enough that some gun sellers are refusing to perform the background checks and some insurrectionistic sheriffs are refusing to uphold their oath of office to enforce the law.

Let's try to clear up some of this dis-information with some facts.

See the following link for frequently asked questions, or click on the specific questions, below:

http://www.ceasefireoregon.org/content/faq-oregon-firearms-safety-act



Friday, August 7, 2015

Oregon Law Requiring Background Checks for Private Firearm Sales In Force Starting Sunday






The following is a statement released by Ceasefire Oregon:

On Sunday, August 9, the new law from the Oregon Firearms Safety Act (OFSA)  requiring background checks for almost all private firearm sales will take effect. Ceasefire Oregon welcomes the new law and looks forward to a reduction in firearms-related crime.

The OFSA will help to reduce gun violence by requiring background checks for all gun sales with the exceptions of certain family members and during temporary transfers. Background checks will prevent people who are legally prohibited from purchasing firearms from buying guns.

“Over the last 25 years, background checks in Oregon have prevented thousands of prohibited people from buying guns,” said Monica Kirk, a board member of Ceasefire Oregon and the Central Coast Chapter of Ceasefire Oregon. “OFSA won’t interfere with anyone lending a rifle to a friend during a hunting trip or permanently giving a gun to a family member. The purpose of this law is to stop felons and domestic abusers from getting guns and killing people. It’s that simple.”

Two sections of OFSA not related to background checks will also reduce gun violence:

  • Oregon judges are now allowed to  prohibit the purchase or possession of guns by people during outpatient treatment for mental health illnesses if the judge decides there is a reasonable likelihood the person would constitute a danger to self or others.
  • Oregon State Police are now authorized to notify local law enforcement when a person prohibited from buying a gun attempts to do so and fails the background check.

Michael DeLong, who leads Ceasefire Oregon’s Workgroup on Suicide Prevention added, “We are very happy that Section 11 was included in the bill. Judges and mental health professionals now have another way to reduce suicide by gun in Oregon.” DeLong added, “About 75 to 85% of all gunshot death in Oregon are suicides. We expect this law will save lives.”

When asked if people will comply with the law, Penny Okamoto, executive director of Ceasefire Oregon, noted that, according to a poll by Americans for Responsible Solutions, 83% of Oregon gun owners supported expanded background checks. “The vast majority of Oregonian gun sellers are responsible people who don’t want to arm criminals. Americans have seen far too many reports of domestic abusers who kill their families and stories about felons who commit crimes with guns. Now, if people willingly sell a gun to a criminal, the seller will be held accountable.”

With OFSA taking effect on Sunday, felons, domestic abusers and people who have been adjudicated mentally ill will not be able to purchase firearms on the West Coast of the United States from Washington State through California.

Sunday, May 24, 2015

The Pro-Gun, *Pro-Criminal* Response to Oregon's Background Check Bill

(UPDATED -- See below)


Back on May 11, Oregon's new background check bill (SB941) was signed by the Governor.  At last, every gun purchase and transfer in Oregon must require a background check, including private sales.  


No longer will felons, the dangerously mentally-ill, wife-beaters, minors, or any other prohibited person be able to purchase a gun simply by answering an ad, meeting someone in a parking lot, and paying cash, with no background check.  The seller, too, will be held accountable, and will no longer be able to simply claim ignorance.


Prior to that, according to a report put out by Everytown for Gun Safety, of the people seeking guns in unlicensed, online sales in Oregon, 1 in 18 were barred from owning guns by state or federal law. At this rate, unlicensed sellers in these markets could transfer 1,360 guns to criminals each year.


But the pro-gun forces did their darndest to make sure that the criminals could keep getting away with it!  They employed every trick they could, including false claims that this would lead to gun confiscation and registration and lying about the intent of the bill.  They are now going out of their way to tell the world that they will openly defy the law or, in the case of a few sheriffs and commissioners, refuse to enforce the law.


In short, they are pro-criminal.


That's right.  Pro-gun advocates are pro-criminal and want to break the law. 


Don't believe me?  See it in their own words...


The extremist Oregon Firearms Federation, headed by Kevin Starrett, has worked for many years to undermine background checks, attempting to weaken them by writing bills to remove the State Police from monitoring them, and thinks they are no different than gun registration.  So you can imagine Starrett's outrage when SB941 passed.  After the bill was signed by the Governor, Starrett wrote in an alert to his followers (bolding included), 

"We urge you to defy this sinister attack on your rights. We urge you to refuse to comply." ... "My friends, this battle has only just begun. Don't despair. Subvert." 

And his most recent missive to his followers, ended with, "Be prepared to defy."

O.F.F. took a leading roll in contacting county commissioners, lying to them about the intent of the bill, and leading them to put out statements against the bill.  Starrett's own sister, Mary Starrett, is a county commissioner as well, and has urged her Facebook followers to contact their commissioners and tell them not to fund background checks in their county:



We wouldn't want our elected officials to actually fund the laws they are in charge of funding, would we?  Oh, wait, failing to fund enforcement of a law would be a breach of their oath, wouldn't it?  Mary and these other commissioners might want to go back and take another look at that oath.  Quoting from that oath:
.... I will endeavor to secure economical expenditure of public funds sufficient in amount to afford efficient and economical administration of government in the county for which I have been appointed ....
Commissioners don't make the laws (that's the job of legislators) nor determine if they are constitutional (that's the job of judges).  Their oath demands that they find ways to fully fund them.  That's it.  It's all for show, though.  Funds for enforcing this law don't go through county commissioners, as far as I'm aware.

A few rural sheriffs have also come out as insurrectionists, saying they won't enforce the new law.  Again, these pro-gun sheriffs are openly saying they will break their oath of office, just as they did when the last federal background check bill was being considered.  

Grant County sheriff Glenn Palmer is one of those.  During testimony for the bill, he openly stated, 
"I have no intention of enforcing this law.  State law allows me to use discretion on misdemeanors and I plan to use it every step of the way."


Sheriff Palmer seems to forget that the second offense for a gun seller who fails to get a background check for the sale is a felony, not a misdemeanor.  In any case, he swore an oath to enforce the laws of his state.  Sheriffs don't make the laws (that's the job of legislators) nor determine if they are constitutional (that's the job of judges).  Their oath demands that they enforce them.  That's it.

Some of these pro-gun forces, including O.F.F. and the equally-extreme militia group known as the Oath Keepers, have organized a rally against the bill at the State Capitol in Salem, on May 30.  In fact, they have even named it the "I Will Not Comply Demonstration."  That's right: they are stating that they won't comply with the law.  In other words, they would rather be criminals.  HERE is the Oath Keeper announcement for it.  HERE is the Facebook page for the event.  From the Facebook page text:
"Salem law says NON CHL people must open carry with an unloaded gun. we will not be in the capitol building, so no worries there. I Wont be checking your guns, so do what you think befits an i won't comply rally!" [sic]


Another pro-gun militia group, the "Sipsey Street Irregulars," sent a letter to Oregon legislators before the bill was passed.  In that letter, they stated, 
'Again I ask, how many of us are you willing to see dead to enforce your "benevolent" will upon us? Understand in advance, if you wish to enforce such a law, you will have to kill us. FOR WE WILL NOT COMPLY. We will greet it with the same tactic that we used to nullify every such law passed since Sandy Hook -- armed civil disobedience.'


So much for being "law abiding" gun owners!  It's not too surprising, though, since militia groups, including the Oath Keepers, have a long history of actual crimes and conspiracies.

Feeling vindictive toward the legislators who supported the bill, O.F.F. and some of their followers have now started petitions to recall some of the legislators who sponsored SB941, namely Val Hoyle (who had previously been given an "A" rating by O.F.F.) and Chuck Riley.  The petitions are being advertised by a handful of gun shops and hawked for signatures by their paid employees.  Given the fringe nature of these pro-gunners, and the fact that 79-90% of Oregonians supported the bill, they haven't a prayer of succeeding in a recall.  But vengeance is a virtue to these guys.

To all of these pro-gun advocates, I can simply say this:  We are a nation of laws, passed by duly-elected representatives of the people and interpreted by judges.  You have to follow these laws whether you agree with them or not.  Armed insurrection is illegal and specifically ruled out in the Constitution that you claim to hold dear.  If you don't like the laws, you can either elect officials who agree with you and will work to change them, or you can challenge the laws in a judicial court.  That's the nature of our representational democracy and the checks and balances called for in our Constitution.  You can either follow these laws... or be criminals yourselves.


UPDATE (6/1/15):  I mentioned above that there was now a vindictive recall effort being waged by the pro-gun forces against SB941 sponsor, Val Hoyle.  Well, it turns out that the petitions are being signed under questionable methods.   According to an article, the petitions are being improperly circulated.
The complaint says that investigators hired by Our Oregon found that recall petitions were improperly circulated at four gun stores in Hoyle's district. The group charged that employees helped gather signatures and should have registered with the state as paid petitioners. In addition, petitions were often left unsupervised, meaning that some people could have signed them without being witnessed by a canvasser, the complaint says.

A number of gun stores are pushing the petitions, using paid employees who are not registered as petitioners to garner signatures from store patrons.  This is a crime: racketeering.  They are also leaving the petitions unwatched, allowing for the possibility that people may be altering the petitions.  From the complaint:


Oregon elections law is unambiguous. If a person is receiving compensation while circulating a Recall Petition, that person must register with the Secretary of State and meet certain requirements (including passing a background check showing no prior convictions for forgery, fraud or identify theft). The evidence establishes that the Gun Stores and their employees appear to be engaged in paid signature circulation, in violation of Oregon elections law.

The evidence also establishes that the Chief Petitioner and the Recall Committee are not properly supervising circulation of the Recall Petition. The actions of Chief Petitioner Jason Thiesfeld, the Gun Stores and their employees, and the Recall Committee appear to constitute violations of Oregon elections law, Oregon criminal law, and ORI CO. Submission of the Recall Petition sheets discussed above, and petition sheets gathered under similar circumstances, may well constitute false certification under Oregon elections laws, and under Oregon's criminal code. The collective actions of Mr. Thiesfeld, the Recall Committee, the Gun Stores and their employees appear to be a racketeering, in violation of ORICO.
Sounds pretty airtight.  Not that the gun guys care.  As I said above, they are pro-criminal.  What's "racketeering" compared to helping prohibited people continue to buy guns?  

Gee, I wonder why the gun stores are pushing it so hard?  Could it be that they aren't really interested in a recall at all?  Could it be that, instead, their main interest is really just to sell more guns to the tiny minority of citizens who are vindictive, pro-gun extremists?  Hmmmm...


In any case, the named gun stores haven't stopped collecting signatures.  In fact, they've doubled down their efforts with new signs.


UPDATE (6/2/15): Lane County commissioners, led by the Tea Party member Jay Bozievich, recently wrote a resolution denouncing the background check law, siding with criminals and the opinion that prohibited people should continue to be able to buy guns without a background check, and going against their oath of office to fund the law.  From an article:



"Technically, it doesn't change the fact that you're going to have to abide by that law. Now whether or not you fail to do that, we're going to be able to investigate and prosecute your failure to do so, is basically what we're stating. We don't have those resources and we probably will not be prosecuting and investigating people under Senate Bill 941," said commissioner chair, Jay Bozievich.
The resolution passed 4-1. Pete Sorenson was the lone "no" vote.

In response to Commissioner Bozievich, the Executive Director of Ceasefire, Penny Okamoto, responded:


“This is just a way for Republicans to curry favor with Oregon firearms advocates," Penny Okamoto, executive director of Ceasefire Oregon, a non-profit organization that aims to reduce gun violence, said on Wednesday.
“Do they mean to tell me the sheriff won’t prosecute the person who provided a murderer, illegally, with a gun?” Okamoto said.
 
.

 

Monday, May 11, 2015

Victory in Oregon! Universal Background Checks Enacted!



Monday was a tremendous day of success for Oregonians and the gun violence prevention movement!

After a concerted effort this session, we were able to get a bill requiring background checks for ALL gun purchases, including private transfers, through the Oregon Senate, House, and finally, Monday, signed by Governor Brown.

The bill takes effect immediately.  Now, if a gun owner wishes to sell a gun to someone other than
Governor Brown signing Senate Bill 941
immediate family members, the seller and the buyer must appear at a licensed firearms dealer to complete the sale, and, for a small fee, the buyer must pass a standard background check.

With more licensed dealers in the state than there are Starbucks and post offices combined, and an average wait time of only 5 minutes for the background check to be completed, it is a minor inconvenience for gun owners with a very significant gain for public safety.

Prior to this, background checks were only required at gun stores and gun shows in Oregon.  Hundreds are denied by the background checks every month in Oregon, to the tune of around 2000 a year!  Most of these were convicted felons, but some were also due to being adjudicated mentally insane, convicted of domestic violence, had warrants for their arrest, were underage, or were dishonorably discharged.  That's 2000 guns that were not put into the wrong hands.  Background checks work!

But all they needed to do was leave the store, answer a private ad, meet the seller in a parking lot, and then walk away with all the guns they could pay for, no background check required.  At last, we have stopped this gaping loophole!

Oregon now joins both Washington and California to complete the entire west coast in this regard.

Additionally....

-- Senate Bill 941 also calls for law enforcement to be notified whenever a person fails a background check so that they can be held accountable for the attempt.

-- There are exemptions for hunting and for sharing guns at a gun range.

-- People who are dangerously mentally ill can more easily be prevented from purchasing a gun while undergoing treatment for the illness

-- and sellers are held accountable, as well....

From an article:  "The seller of a gun would face a misdemeanor for a first offense, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $6,250 fine. A second offense would be a felony, with a potential sentence of up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine."

Prior to this, the seller could just pretend not to have known that the buyer was prohibited and they would get off with it.  No more excuses!  This is a serious loss for black market gun runners!

Every Republican in the Oregon Senate and House voted against it.  But as I've commented before, numerous polls of Oregonians have shown support for the bill to the tune of 80-90%!! This mirrors numerous national polls, as well, where even 85% of gun owners support the regulation.

So who are the opponents representing??  A tiny fringe of pro-gun advocates?  The money from the NRA?  Aren't our elected leaders of our representational democracy supposed to actually represent the majority of their constituents?

Though this is a tremendous victory, we still have a long way to go.  For instance, there is a bill being considered right now in Oregon to require gun owners with children in the home to lock up their guns.  And there are dangerous bills to oppose, such as a bill that would allow conceal permit holders from very lenient states to have their permits recognized here, where requirements are at least a little more responsible, or a bill that would require schools to provide pro-gun training to kids as young as kindergarten!  We must stay vigilante and not let down our guard!  Shootings and gun crimes continue every day in Oregon.

But for the moment, we must bask in the glory of a job well done. 

We at Ceasefire Oregon would like to thank the legislators who sponsored this bill and helped champion it through the years, such as Floyd Prozanski, Ginny Burdick, and Val Hoyle, the numerous members of the Oregon Alliance for Gun Safety coalition, and the many, many volunteers who helped make this happen and who gave passionate testimony.

Together, we will make a new trajectory for our state away from gun violence.


UPDATE (6/4/15):  To see the pro-gun response to this responsible bill, go HERE.