Apparently, Oregon is tired of being a continual runner-up to California when it comes to restrictive gun control laws. The Oregon Senate recently released a lengthy 26 page bill composed of absurd and unnecessary regulations which will negatively impact the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.
This bill (SB 1065) was thrown together in a surreal Frankgunsteinian fashion. Like Frankenstein, the only thing this bill needed was an electrifying jolt of sincere disregard for the constitutionally codified natural rights of Oregon’s citizens.
Oregon's three leading Democrat gun grabbers, Sen. Prozanski (D-Eugene), Sen. Burdick (D- Portland), Rep. Williamson (D-Portland) introduced this villainous version of an omnibus, anti-gun bill. This bill includes legalese from several previous anti-gun bills that either died in committee or were set aside to be resurrected during the remaining weeks of this 2017 legislative session.
SB 1065 combines SB 764 and SB 797 plus portions of seven previous gun bills that never made their way forward (SB 495, SB 546, SB 549, SB 670, SB 804, SB 854 and SB 903).
Although this bill is a 26 page abomination, the metro-Democrats at least provided us with a delightful name for their legislation. The bill says, “this 2017 Act shall be known and may be cited as the Oregon Firearm Regulation Modernization Act.”
As usual, this very pleasant, forward-looking and enlightening language masks the true design of the legislation. Samuel Adams, in similar similar circumstances, noted, “It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer [our liberties] to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle; or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men.”
To wit, here are a few lines of text from the 1,150 lines smashed into this debacle:
In this section, it is easy to see the gradual and evolutionary mutations that happen under the guise of improving public safety. There is no statistical evidence documenting the benefit of an additional 14 days for the background check. Additionally, there is no evidence that more time is required. After all, they are using the internet for criminal background data aggregation.
The public is led to believe that more time would allow the security experts to do their job more thoroughly. Yet, information overload bogs down most government systems.
Remember, the FBI knew of Omar Mateen and interviewed him on two different occasions. Mateen is the man who killed 49 and injured more than 50 others at a gay nightclub in Orlando, FL. The FBI surveilled Mateen and they followed leads that he knew Boston Marathon bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Mateen’s co-worker reported that information directly to the FBI.
According to a 2016 report published by The Intercept:
“The bureau forces agents to close assessments because agents are pursuing thousands of assessments nationwide under a policy to pursue any and all leads, no matter how ridiculous they are. The caseload can be overwhelming for FBI offices.”
In any similar situation, how would Oregon’s State Police (OSP) wade through this overload? Will this eventually lead to funding increases for staffing, newer computer systems and evermore surveillance gear?
The complexity of the problem comes from believing that the state can protect everyone, all the time. They simply cannot. Security cannot be obtained by trading away our civil liberties. Evil can’t be stopped by disarming those who contribute most to public safety - the public.
Also, with regard to SB 1065, the restrictions apply to all firearms. Not just handguns. This includes every self-defense weapon, hunting rifle, varmint rifle, waterfowl and quail-gun.
A complete disregard for the public’s interest is inherent in SB 1065’s language. These lines of text describe that, “if the department fails to provide a unique approval number to a gun dealer,” then no transfer can legally take place.
“Fails to provide.” What does that mean? Didn’t want to; never got to it; misplaced the paperwork; computer glitch; all of these would be failures.
Firearm dealers carry a Federal Firearms License (FFL) that enables them to engage in the sale and transfer of firearms. Currently, federal law allows a licensed firearm dealer to release a firearm after three business days if they have not received any additional correspondence after being notified of a “delay” when conducting the initial background check for a firearm transfer. This bill would increase the wait time in Oregon to 14 days.
Today, a deferral from OSP does not necessarily mean a transfer to the recipient is prohibited, but rather that a determination has not yet been made. Would the “failures” clouded in SB 1065’s language be considered out-right “denials?”
Oregon Firearms Federation made this statement, “This bill does many other bad things and has serious technical flaws, but its clear intent is to create more obstacles and impediments to lawful firearms ownership.”
SB 1065 is proof positive that bad bills, or legislative mutants, can be brought back to life by a jolt of legislative juice from the Democrat majority.
Remember, if we don’t stand for rural Oregon values and Common-sense -
No one Will.
Oregon State Senate 28