Wednesday
May 12 2021
2:00 AM
banner-icon1 banner-icon2 banner-icon3

Local Oregon News

Local News Index


Previous story Oregon Gun Storage Bill Endangers and Blames Victims Next story
  Oregon Gun Storage   Oregon Law To Require Firearm Locks  


Story by David Codrea - Story Source
Published on Tuesday March 16, 2021 - 3:25 AM

 
U.S.A. (Ammoland.com) "A proposed bill that would require a lock and safe to be purchased when buying a firearm, could minimize the use of stolen firearms, an issue the Medford Police Department (MPD) says they see routinely," CBS affiliate News 10 reported Friday. "[T]he Oregon House Health Care Committee held a hearing for Bill HB2510… The bill would require current and future firearm owners to secure their device(s) with a trigger or cable lock and place it in a locked container, violating this bill could result in a maximum $500 fine."

This seems a good place to repeat some information that has been around for a while, but that too few seem aware of:

"Dennis Henigan of the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence drops the ball in front of a roomful of reporters, while trying to prove the efficacy of Saf-T-Lok, a purportedly easy-to-use combination lock in the gun's grip. Henigan fumbles and fails to unlock the gun in a well-lit room with no intruder at the door… Finally disengaging the safety, he apologizes, "Most people aren't as klutzy as I am.'" – From "Lawyers, Guns and Money" by Matt Labash, The Weekly Standard, Feb. 1, 1999

And from Gambino crime family underboss Sammy "The Bull" Gravano:

"Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins."

Just to make sure everyone is primed to accept disaster if the bill is not enacted into law, proponents cite a homicide by a 17-year-old that might have been prevented. They then reluctantly admit they really have no idea where the killer had obtained his stolen gun from. And as usual with such reports, it presents "expert opinions" from "authorities" as diverse as the police, Democrat politicians, and Moms Demand Action members, even citing Everytown "studies" for added "credibility"!

"No one wants to take guns away," one Demanding Mom assures us. "We just want them to be stored."

You believe that, don't you? Once they pass this, they'll go away and leave us alone?

In fairness, the report also cites the NRA's Eddie Eagle program, the claim that victims will be penalized and that their firearms will be rendered useless for self-defense. It also quotes gun owner Heinz Mueller, who opposes the bill on Constitutional and practical grounds.

But what it does not do is go to the most knowledgeable source for how Oregon politicians work and the real impacts such measures will have on freedom, Oregon Firearms Federation's Executive Director, the tireless Kevin Starrett.

"Today the House Committee on Health Care heard HB2510, a bill to hold gun owners liable for the violent crimes of thieves," OFF alerted members Thursday. "As expected, the deck was strongly stacked in favor of gun grabbers and the technical failures that have become the hallmark of Oregon Legislative hearings seemed to occur almost exclusively when opponents of the bill were attempting to testify."

OFF gave a representative sampling of testimony by gun-grabbers, a government official "who supported the bill because she had been attacked by a rapist with a gun" a teacher who asserted "that the word "regulate' in [the Second] Amendment referred to guns," and even "a long time anti-rights activist [who] testified against the bill because it did not punish gun owners harshly enough."