The stupidity of Oregon SB941: liberals push to confiscate guns

It is extremely difficult to stand or sit or even walk. Pain does this to you. Even with heavy medications, it is a toss up on my best days. Yet I refuse to give up, give up my rights nor shut up and just go to my room.

The post below is a letter to the editor from our local fish wrapper.

Having resided in POORegon since 1978 with the exception of a few years away to find work which was non-existent in POORegon in the early 1980's, I have lived in POOReon since 1978.

I have watched and been disgusted by what liberal and progressive politics has done to this state. It is NOT my state, TEXAS is and always will be. God willing, one day I will be back in Texas or maybe Montana.

Oregon is New York of the west coast. SB941 was pushed through by Bloomberg money and nothing else. A feel good bill that will do nothing to stop the crazies from committing horrendous, tragic violent acts. Most of these tragic. violent crimes have been committed by eh hem, liberals. Do your own research. I am NOT your mommy. 

SB941 is strictly a move to eventually take away our guns and rights to keep and bear arms as laid under the second amendment of the Constitution. Spare me your leftist, progressive dribble and one life will not be saved by SB 941. This is not a reasonable solution and most gun regulations and laws are aimed solely to achieve eventual confiscation. Think England and Australia.

The local 'paper' is a joke. Their support of SB 941 proves this and more.

I have left out the authors name here for the obvious reasons.

I will NOT comply.  PatriotUSA

****************

Letter: What is reasonable gun control?

The Bulletin editorial board published its opinion in support of the new Oregon background check law that requires all citizens making private transfers of guns to first have a licensed dealer provide a background check. The editorial states that this new law “may not prevent the next shooting or significantly reduce gun violence.” It goes on to state, “The law will be challenging to enforce.” “With or without this law, no responsible gun owner would ever want to sell a gun to someone if the seller felt uncomfortable about that person.” The board feels that this new law is “a reasonable change.” 

No society should make laws that are likely to be violated by many, difficult to enforce, unnecessary or unlikely to accomplish the desired results. This bad law violates all of these principles. Most gun owners will do the right thing regardless, and most criminals will ignore the law. This law is not reasonable it is just another imposition on the rights of law-abiding citizens. 

As for being “challenging to enforce,” I would give the board an award for understatement. Some sheriffs and some gun dealers have already declared their refusal to enforce or participate. Some parts of the law will require further clarification as they are ridiculous or difficult to understand. For example, if I store my friend’s guns in my safe to prevent theft while he is on vacation, must we pay to have a background check completed prior to the transfer? Which of us is responsible? 

Didn’t the government recently close the so called “gun show loophole” by requiring that all gun transfers conducted at gun shows include the passing of a background check? Now they want to apply such rules to private transfers in order to close another “loophole.” Why aren’t they enforcing the present laws regarding illegal transfers of firearms? What will be the next “loophole”? How will the government become aware of such private transfers in order to enforce this law? 

How about Universal Gun Registration? There are some who believe that all firearms should be registered with the government like cars. Of course if you have registration it only follows that there will be government inspection of the registration, as with cars, to ensure that the item is with the registered owner and used in accordance with all laws and regulations. Extra taxes and insurance fees are sure to follow. Where is all of this taking us, England or Canada? 

There are some who believe that guns are evil, they only serve to kill, and that no one should have them. They may not be able to take them all at once but they might be able to reduce the number gradually. Do you know the best way to boil a frog? 

Some on the left have declared gun owners to be crazy, paranoid and unreasonable in their resistance to new gun regulations. After all, Obama said he does not want to take your guns. In defense of it they say, “If this new law only prevents one incident it is worth it.” Are they being reasonable? 

What happens when someone mentions reasonable restrictions regarding abortions? Such seemingly reasonable measures as parental notification for minors, ultrasounds, pre-abortion counseling, or a 20- week limit, are all met with angry protests that they are unreasonable and trying to take away a woman’s right to a free, safe abortion on demand. In the end it is all about trust. No one, on the right or the left, completely trusts government or the people who make up the rules. Reactions to this latest gun control law should surprise no one. After all, what is “reasonable” depends on where you sit. It seems that everyone has an agenda. If you “just don’t care” about gun restrictions you probably just don’t care about guns. OK, what about freedom? 

Link to post is here from the local fish wrapper. A conservative newspaper they are NOT!

---

Tags: US Constitution, Second Amendment, Freedom, Guns,  Oregon SB941, Gun confiscation, Communism, Socialism, Russia, England, Australia, Europe, Cultural Marxism, Prgogressives, Liberals, Democrats, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!