Dude this for you.

Dude it appears that your so great state is now officially a part of CA. when it comes to new gun laws. This is just the beginning that your liberal Democrats will shove down your throat. Have a good Day.

RELH
____________________________________________________________











Today, Senate Bill 1065 has been assigned to the Senate Rules Committee chaired by state Senator Ginny Burdick (D-18), who is also one of the main sponsors of the bill. SB 1065 is an omnibus gun bill that was introduced yesterday in an effort to revive two previously dead anti-gun bills, Senate Bill 764 and Senate Bill 797. Both SB 764 and SB 797 failed to pass the policy committee deadline on April 18 and were considered dead for the rest of the 2017 legislative session; however, Senator Burdick along with Senator Prozanski and Representative Williamson, introduced SB 1065 as a priority bill to avoid this committee deadline.

Please contact committee members in strong opposition to SB 1065! Click the ?Take Action? button below to contact committee members.

As a combination of SB 764 and SB 797, SB 1065 would require firearm transfers to be delayed for 14 days if the Oregon State Police (OSP) are unable to determine eligibility. A deferral from OSP does not necessarily mean the recipient is prohibited, but rather that OSP is not satisfied with the background check inquiry and a determination has not yet been made. Currently, federal law allows a licensed firearm dealer (FFL) to release a firearm after three business days if they have not received any additional correspondence after receiving a ?delay? when conducting the initial background check for a firearm transfer. This safeguard prevents the potential shutdown of sales via endless delays and allows law-abiding individuals to take possession of a firearm in a timely manner.

Further, SB 1065 would change the Oregon Concealed Handgun License (CHL) permit process by making the requirements to obtain a CHL much more stringent. This would make it much more difficult for law-abiding Oregonians to exercise their constitutional rights by requiring live range requirement and restricting the courses that could be used to meet the competency requirement. Like SB 764, SB 1065 is also an omnibus bill combining portions of SB 495, SB 546, SB 549, SB 670, SB 804, SB 854 and SB 903. While there are good portions of this omnibus bill taken from legislation introduced by pro-gun Senators, the NRA remains strongly opposed to this bill because of the changes it makes to firearm transfers and Oregon's CHL process.

LAST EDITED ON May-27-17 AT 09:36AM (MST)[p]Sooo, if your background check isn't looking good you may have to wait up to two weeks to get your street sweeper. and if you want a CWP you're going to have to go to the range and prove you know how to shoot your gun. WHAT TOTAL BULLCHIT !!!

If a criminal wants to learn how to use his new gun in a robbery that's his right!


















Stay Thirsty My Friends

Just wait until you are the first one to wait 14 days to pick up that new rifle because the OSP was to busy to get your background check done.
As for the going to the range. Only certain courses will be allowed. That really means they will have a severe limit on who can qualify you and you will be paying anywhere from 125-200 bucks for firearm qualification.

That will limit older folks on SS from being able to get a concealed weapons permit. I guess you consider that as fair. As I said. it will get worse.

RELH

I've never been held up for more than an hour for a background check, and that was because the lines were busy. and if it did take a week or two I'll use one of the other 70 I own.


You can talk shooting all day, but doing it is another matter. I've seen it myself when some gal shoots the first time and it scares the chit out of her. or they can't pull the slide back without pointing the muzzle at their forehead. if you really cared about their safety and those around them you'd want them to know how to use the gun and what to expect when they do.

so should we just have a 3 hour class on driving and eliminate the driving test? if blue hairs, dipchits or tweekers can't pass or afford the test it's discrimination?


Hell yes let's put them in a 3 ton SUV and send them down the road with a UZI under their arm. they'll figure it out one way or the other.

if you can't handle a gun safely you can't get a CWP. now we have a lost sale, there is where the NRA get's heartburn.







Stay Thirsty My Friends

Dude I am all for regulations that require a person to be taught when it is legal to use deadly force for a CCW permit. Also I believe it should be mandatory that they can show they are proficient with the firearm they plan to carry.
My department required this for a CCW permit and I supervised the program as a det. Sgt.

What I have seen with liberals making the laws is a program that makes it difficult to obtain a permit. One is raising the fees to obtain a permit and then requiring higher fees to obtain the training. Liberals do this as a means to dissuade citizens from obtaining and using firearms for self defense.

As a firearms instructor I with the permission of our sheriff used to train women for free and completion of the course counted towards them getting a CCW permit. My department can no longer do this due to manpower shortage and people in my area have to pay a STATE APPROVED firearms instructor around 125 bucks for the same course we used to offer.
Your liberals in state office goals are to make it as hard as possible to obtain guns for self defense and this is the start of that process.

RELH

Just hope that in 20 years they aren't more like California.

Something I've always wondered-
When transporting pistols in CA, they have to be unloaded and locked in something other than the glove box. What if, a law abiding person justifiably kills an attacker because they had a loaded pistol in their possession but broke the law transporting it. Will that person be put in prison? That's something that ca residents should push for to get that ridiculous law overturned.

With the makeup of our state law makers, majority of liberal Democrats, that law will not be changed. The answer is yes, the citizen who broke that law in a self defense incident will more then likely face prosecution for illegal transportation of a firearm.
You have to understand our liberal anti gun Democrats in power do not give one damn about the safety of the citizens, they only want to ban all guns. They already know that the legal use of firearms have stopped far more crimes of aggression then there is crimes committed with firearms and they ignore those facts because they DO NOT CARE.

RELH

The only thing Democrats want you to do on your own is pay taxes and shut up.

Amen!

RELH hates what the democrats have done to CA so much he won't leave it.


Why is it the only time you care about the less fortunate is when they want to buy a gun and conceal it?

Something doesn't add up here, selective compassion ? we want uneducated skinny homeless people with untreated cancer sporting a concealed Glock in their bindle . thanks for doing your part in making America great again.











Stay Thirsty My Friends

Dude why do you fear a honest law abiding citizen carrying a concealed weapon for self protection?
As for a homeless person having a CCW permit is a outlandish reach by you. In all jurisdictions I am familiar with, a person must have a permanent residence in the county or city that he applies for a CCW permit. No permanent residence, not qualified for a permit.
It seems you do have a unreasonable fear of law abiding citizens having the right to protect themselves and their family with a firearm. WHY IS THAT????

As a 30 year veteran of law enforcement I will honestly state that when the crap hits the fan, 99% of the time you can forget about a cop getting there in time to save your life or the life of a family member. We normally get there to pronounce death and take a report and try to locate the suspect to arrest him/her for the homicide or attempted homicide.

RELH