Bad News for Gun Lovers

Buellxb Forum

Help Support Buellxb Forum:

more action taken by your 'elected' officials in Oregon

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/massive-gun-ban-introduced

Two days after Senate Democrats claimed they would not seek a ban on modern firearms and feeding devices, Democrats in the Oregon House introduced just that.

Seven Senators joined with eight House Reps to introduce a sweeping ban on virtually all modern firearms. Among the Senators is, of course, Ginny Burdick, who claimed on Wednesday “that she is backing off an attempt to push through a bill on gun clips that she drafted following the December shootings at the Clackamas Mall.” The other sponsors are:

Representatives BAILEY, BUCKLEY, DEMBROW, FREDERICK, READ, REARDON, TOMEI, Senators , DINGFELDER, HASS, MONNES- ANDERSON, MONROE, SHIELDS, STEINER- HAYWARD.

Remember them.

HB 3200 not only bans most modern guns and magazines, it allows warrantless searches of your home, requires background checks and registration for a firearm you already own and as-of-yet undefined storage requirements. We say “a firearm” because even if you comply with the restrictions in this bill you may still only own one.

(Of course the bill does not apply to “government employees”.)

The bill combines the most extreme and irrational elements of other bills that have been introduced across the country. For example, one of the firearms banned under this bill would be a pistol with a “folding, telescoping or thumbhole stock.” No, that is not a misprint.

The principle sponsor of the bill is House Rep Mitch Greenlick, who in the past has concentrated on such worthy endeavors as banning children in bike trailers and making possession of cigarettes a crime.

The bill bans such deadly features as “pistol grips” and “barrel shrouds” because clearly they add to the lethality of any firearm. These people are so full of hatred for gun owners they don’t even understand what they are banning.

Never have we seen legislation that was a product of so much ignorance and blind hatred. And don’t take any comfort from the claims that bills of this kind are not going to get a hearing. You will recall that last session they said the same thing about a ban on licensed carry in schools. They claimed it was dead and then revived it in the closing days of the session without even allowing public testimony. It was only your relentless efforts that killed it. And now we need you again. Please use our automailer* to send a message to the legislature to do all they can to stop HB 3200 and any bill like it. You can use the message provided or write your own.


While we know that the automailer has had an amazing effect (the sponsor of HB 3200 has claimed “The calls were so abusive and threatening that Harriet stopped answering the phone and we began deleting emails.”) some have had problems with emails bouncing or a failure to get a confirmation that their emails went through.

If you have had this problem please consider using the direct contact info for the sponsors of this dangerous bill to reach them.

You can use this link to find and contact your own reps. Your Oregon Senator and House Rep will be the last two people listed. The people who dreamed up this nonsense are listed below.


SPONSORS OF THE GUN BAN:

Mitch Greenlick

503-986-1433

[email protected]

[email protected]

Jules Bailey

503-986-1442

503-236-3681

[email protected]

Peter Buckley

503-986-1405

[email protected]

Michael Dembrow

503-986-1445

[email protected]

Lew Frederick

503-986-1443

[email protected]

Tobias Read

503-986-1427

[email protected]

Jeff Reardon

503-986-1448

[email protected]

Carolyn Tomei

503-986-1441

[email protected]

Ginny Burdick

503-986-1718

[email protected]

Jackie Dingfelder

503-986-1723

503-493-2804

[email protected]

Mark Hass

503-986-1714

[email protected]

Laurie Monnes Anderson

503-986-1725

[email protected]

Rod Monroe

503-986-1724

503-760-4310

7802 SE 111th Ave, Portland, OR, 97266

[email protected]

Chip Shields

503-986-1722

503-231-2564

5313 N Vancouver Ave, Portland, OR, 97217

[email protected]

Elizabeth Steiner Hayward

503-986-1717

[email protected]

[smirk]
 
^ you should look into the no hesitation target package.they use them in amarillo the targets are pregnant woman,old people and children.
 
Zeroflat how do you explain this quote then?



"The subjects in NMH targets were chosen in order to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training. I found while speaking with officers and trainers in the law enforcement community that there is a hesitation on the part of cops when deadly force is required on subjects with atypical age, frailty or condition (one officer explaining that he enlarged photos of his own kids to use as targets so that he would not be caught off guard with such a drastically new experience while on duty). This hesitation time may be only seconds but that is not acceptable when officers are losing their lives in these same situations. The goal of NMH is to break that stereotype on the range, regardless of how slim the chances are of encountering a real life scenario that involves a child, pregnant woman, etc. If that initial hesitation time can be cut down due to range experience, the officer and community are better served."
Click to expand...

or this article

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/02/us-is-third-world-hellholeaccording-to.html#more

'Law enforcement agencies in America are using the No More Hesitation series of cardboard and paper targets for shooting practice. The Minneapolis-based Law Enforcement Targets Inc. (LET) has produced at least eight of them, with photos ranging from a young boy to a pregnant woman in her third trimester, both of whom are pointing guns. Other posters include an elderly man in his home holding a shotgun and a young mother with her daughter in a playground. There does not yet appear to be a baby in a playpen target. Available for 99 cents a sheet, the posters are approximately two-feet-wide by three-feet-tall. (Note: all the posters I've seen are of white people; perhaps it is too controversial to shoot a non-white pregnant woman or child?)

LET is a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) supplier. It has contracts worth at least $5,471,126 with several federal agencies, and it boasts of providing training materials throughout the military and to “thousands of law enforcement agencies at the municipal, county, and state levels.” Law enforcement customers are admonished to “Mix & Match 'No More Hesitation' targets for best pricing.” Presumably, officers who shoot the elderly man will also want the companion elderly woman target.

Under an advertised image of a pregnant woman, LET explains the purpose behind the training material, “No More Hesitation Targets were designed to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training. No More Hesitation faded background enhances the isolation and is meant to help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusual targets for the first time.”

Correction: LET did caption the pregnant woman target in the foregoing manner. Some time last week, LET either removed the images of civilian targets or blocked open access to them. It is not clear what happened because LET's "explanation" is ambiguous: “These products have been taken offline due to the opinions expressed by so many, including members of the law enforcement community.” Are they available offline? And why are some target posters still on the site (as of noon 25/02/13)?

To view many of the targets, however, it is now necessary to use the Wayback Machine – a free online service that archives the Internet and preserves 'vanishing' data. The pregnant woman target can be accessed by feeding the old URL into the Wayback search box.

The officers are being conditioned to shoot their next door neighbors without reservation or pause. They are being desensitized to the confrontation with civilians that will occur if a door-to-door disarmament is conducted or civil unrest erupts. The police are being trained to shoot young children who hold guns even though the vast majority of such weapons will turn out to be water pistols or their equivalent. Those who believe the police can tell the difference should remember the recent manhunt for Chris Dorner – a large, young black man. Without warning, Los Angeles Police Officers fired more than a hundred bullets into a truck containing two small Asian women – one of them 71 years old – before the officers realized neither was Dorner.

Meanwhile, last September, the DHS purchased at least 7,000 automatic assault rifles, calling them “Personal Defense Weapons”. These are the same weapons DHS wants to make illegal for private ownership. As well, DHS has either purchased or intends to purchase approximately 1.8 billion rounds of ammunition. (Accounts vary.) That is about 5 bullets per person in America. And, remember, DHS operates domestically. A retired Houston police officer named T.F. Stern also observed, “[T]his past September FEMA graduated its first class of cadets, not sure what you should call them; but FEMA corps is how they are classified. This is a national police force, a standing army by definition, a standing army that reports to the president and has powers that go beyond even local police departments; I find that disturbing on many levels.”

It looks like law enforcement is preparing for domestic battle. This has led to widespread speculation about the inevitability of a war by the government against civilians [a topic we consider at length -- along with how best to live through it unscathed -- at TDV Homegrown].

In fairness, and as noted by LET, some complaints about the civilian targets have come from law enforcement. For example, Stern added, “There’s something wrong, seriously wrong here. If we start to desensitize law enforcement officers, have them disregard humanity, to feel nothing’s wrong in shooting a pregnant lady or an old man with a shotgun inside his own home…then what kind of society have we become? How will police officers react after they no longer believe they are part of the society which they have been charged with policing, when they have become used to shooting pregnant ladies and old men?”

Similar comments from law enforcement seem to indicate a trend, however. They seem to come from retired officers who may have escaped the reckless militarization that grips current agencies. Law enforcement is no longer a part of the public it "serves"; it is an occupying force that views prepubescent children as target practice.

There are anecdotal reports of public response.

Many people apparently accept law enforcement's constant warnings of constant dangers from which only officers of the law can protect them. They are afraid. And fear makes people politically malleable. They applaud a hard and fast crackdown on lawlessness. Such people will side with law enforcement whatever happens. If they are shown video of police officers slaughtering a newborn baby, they will exclaim, “Ah, yes, but what did the baby do to provoke the reasonable police response before the tape was turned on?”

Other people are taking action. These people know they pose no threat to civil society – they are civil society! – and, yet, they are being targeted for abuse by the state.

A story related by a gun enthusiast friend is particularly chilling. In a post entitled “Something funny happened on the way to tyranny”, gun owner Bob Owens described walking into a gun shop in his small town. Other businesses on the street were almost empty but the gun shop was a beehive of activity with “at least” 6 clerks rushing to keep up with demand from customers. He notes:

The cases of ammunition that typically lined the far wall were picked to pieces. There was a 100-round case of .50 BMG, and cases of European shotshells suitable for small game. The .223 Remington, 5.56 NATO, 7.62×39, 7.62 NATO, and 7.62x54R had sold out long ago, along with the bulk 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP. A few pump shotguns remained along with a smattering of deer rifles, single-shots, and longer double-barreled shotguns suitable only for trap or skeet. Even the semi-automatic .22LR rifles like Ruger 10/22s were gone, along with all but one BX-25 magazine.

Every weapon of “military utility” under 100 years old was gone. Owens commented, “This isn’t a society stocking up on certain guns because they fear they may be banned. This is a society preparing for war.”





[smirk]
 
220213target.jpg
 
Man, this thread has degenerated into a massive cut & paste fest... that target post above though is pretty alarming...
 
this thread has degenerated into a massive cut & paste fest
Click to expand...

I often feel the same way when I engage in online topics such as this, I would have tried to express my own view of the things I bring to the table but feel that if I provide the link to whatever the point may be as well as cut/paste the article itself for whomever to peruse, whereas I think if it's just the link and a witty sentence or two that most may not want to take the time to see whatever the point or fact may be.

Another example (kinda/sorta) is whenever my wife who is on Facebook posts a cutesy animal pic or something that is non confrontational and does not require one to think she gets a ton of 'likes' or a myriad of vacuous comments...
but if she posts something such as several links found in this thread or anything that makes a person stop, think and apply critical thinking to a topic, she has found over time that people tune out and/or make disparaging comments that practically scream their cognitive dissonance thru the monitor.

As well most get caught up in a Hegelian Dialectic of whats what and that is not my intention.

:)
 
I know what you mean. I don't use FB currently, but when I did, the pseudo-intellectual garbage people would spout was always amusing and/or infuriating, usually both.
 
I came across this vid/article and being a tinfoil hat wearing kinda guy who does not trust ANY government/multinational corporation ,etc, etc.
I figured I'd post it here to see what my fellow Buellers think....

[smirk]



Dr. Jim Garrow is a renowned author and whistleblower who has been nominated for a Nobel peace prize for his humanitarian work. He is the author of The Pink Pagoda: One Man's Quest to End Gendercide in China.
He has spent over $25 million over the past sixteen years rescuing an estimated 40,000 baby Chinese girls from near-certain death under China's one-child-per-couple policy by facilitating international adoptions. He is the founder and executive director of the Bethune Institute's Pink Pagoda schools, private English-immersion schools for Chinese children. Today he runs 168 schools with nearly 6,300 employees.

Dr Garrow was recently contacted by a high ranking military official who implored him to reveal the truth about a "litmus test" that is being proposed by the Obama administration to the military asking the question "will you shoot Americans if they won't give you their guns?

Will You Shoot..
 
Bottom line I don't want my person weapons taken away. With that in mind, all this target shooting of Americans etc. It's a failed attempt at overcoming the inability to pull the trigger on a person that isn't your typical target. When you look at a child you see an innocence that can't be overwritten, until you see one pointing a weapon at you. At that point you have to get past the fact that they are a child and instead recognize them as a threat to humanity(any part of it they wish to pull the trigger on). Honestly that kind of action is traumatic and probably isn't easy to work through if at all.

Bottom line is that everyone is entitled to their opinion, with that being said you can read into any news article however you want. At some point you've got to put information out there and let people decide for themselves. The fear mongering needs to stop though..... IMO. Not that it's being done here or anything but when a Police Department buys targets, I honestly feel that they know more about what they're doing than any of us do(unless of course you're a cop). On top of that I highly doubt your average American Law Enforcement officer is going to be pursuaded to pull the trigger on anyone they don't see as a threat. But then again that means they have to think on their own rather than follow the beat of the drum, just remember both sides are swinging the drum sticks.
 
hmmm...quotation marks with no quote from even a real person? You can do better than that. That means this MUST be real
w83ts6.png
 

Latest posts

Back
Top