Editor's note: this is the second in a multi-part series which is a reprint of a letter from a desperate gun owner and her thoughts on the current proposals in the legislature.

I heard during the testimony on Monday that tax payers are paying approximately 81 Billion dollars to local government, that's incredible. Is it not more prudent that tax payers, and NOT public officials and special interests groups, be the ones making the decisions for the people? We the people should be making the decisions and you should be there to uphold them. Laws are only followed by those who choose to follow them, you are attempting to restrict and subsequently disarm responsible gun owners who chose to protect themselves and those around them. Throughout the testimony you could hear the "Us vs. Them" typical rhetoric coming from proponents of SB 554 while those in opposition clearly wanted to be heard, understood, and allowed their freedoms and constitutional rights.

The disconnect and divide in our country is becoming a weapon itself. One woman in support of the bill stated that "our laws communicate our values", but this bill does not communicate the values of Oregonians, this bill and others like it impede our rights and disregard our values of family, freedom, liberty, safety and bodily sovereignty. Another woman in favor of SB 554 made a statement that "Our Democracy does not work at gun point", and she is right -- but not in the way I believe she intended. This country was founded on the basic God given rights of our citizens, and that includes the ability to bear arms and protect ourselves and our families from violence and tyranny- at any time and in any place. No one knows when or where they may need to utilize this right but thank God we have it. Unfortunately, we are watching as one political party is holding the other at political gun point in an attempt to prove their moral superiority over the other and slowly erode our constitutional rights in the name of "safety". It seems as though proponents of SB 554 think they deserve their own definition of safety. If the Capitol buildings and schools mentioned so frequently in the proponents arguments, are as dangerous places as they would have us believe, isn't that even more reason to allow citizens their second amendment right in these places? Criminals do not abide by, they are not deterred by, and they do not care about laws, recidivism rates explain that very clearly. This bill will not do anything but cause undue burden and subsequent harm on law abiding owners of firearms.

While listening to the testimony on Monday I was upset to hear more of the biased rhetoric used as an excuse to systematically legislate away our second amendment rights. I am a small statured woman and I do NOT feel safe knowing that anyone or any agency believes they have the authority to tell me when or where I can defend myself. I am also extremely insulted when I hear proponents of this bill insinuate that CHL holders are inexperienced or part of some extremist group, where does this false claim come from? I won't even glorify it by calling it "information". We are law abiding Oregonians who are not fooled by what this bill really is, another attempt to slowly erode away our second amendment rights. The proponents of this bill did nothing more than slander millions of American citizens in an attempt to intimidate, bully and restrict our second amendment rights.

This is not any politicians or special interest groups right to take away. My right to defend myself in any space at any time is not someone else's to make. I heard one proponent mention there are "non-lethal" ways of self defense, and though that may be true, at 5ft tall and 100lbs -- my use of force when it comes to an attacker larger than me is going to be much higher than someone of a larger stature. I do not want to get close to an attacker or go hands on in any way, that puts me at risk for being grabbed, attacked or worse. I believe this bill also restricts the use of pepper spray and tasers, why do you want a defenseless population and yet advocate to grant more rights to criminals? As one of the other brave opponents of this outrageous bill mentioned, her daughters ability to draw her firearm when faced with a stalker possibly saved her life and could have also prevented a separate attack the mother experienced if she would have had her firearm.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Others gave testimony and mentioned how simply drawing their firearm deterred an attacker. If more individuals were armed in more places, violent crimes would go down and not up, most crimes are crimes of opportunity, and I DO believe criminals would have less opportunity and think twice before committing crimes in areas -or against individuals who are visibly carrying or may be carrying a firearm. Multnomah County Commissioner Sharon Meieran gave testimony and stated that she feels vulnerable because of "Anti-democratic extremism" and stated that public officials are the ones who should be making decisions about controlling what happens in public buildings, implying that they should have the right to deny citizens the option of expressing their second amendment rights in those places. To me this is another nod to just how out of touch and self serving Oregon politicians have become. Another gentleman named "Wessinger" I believe, stated that "armed protesters attacked a "journalist" and "counter protesters", he and other proponents of SB 554 would have you believe that conservative CHL carriers are the aggressors. "Wessinger" made no mention of the actual attacks being committed by members of Antifa and BLM that were carried out on anyone who did not comply with their fascist dictates, dared to film them or opposed their violence and destruction, including attacking police. Just ask Ted Wheeler. Portland and other cities have been under siege by far left extremist groups who are emboldened by individuals like this and yet they claim SB 554 is needed to ensure our safety. Wake up Oregon.

A self described member of "Antifa" lay in wait this summer and murdered a man in the streets of Portland because he was recognized as a conservative while other members of "Antifa" celebrated the death of the murdered man in the streets (yes this disgusting act is on video). "Antifa", members of BLM and the mainstream media push the false narrative that the murdered man was a "white supremacist", a "Racist" and "white nationalist" due to his conservative values, somehow I suppose it allowed them to look at this loss of life as justifiable, or somehow less tragic. I have watched endless live streams of the unspeakable violence taking place in our streets, I listen as members "Antifa" and members of BLM tell officers and citizens to go "Kill Yourself", they make awful threats against them and their families and follow through on unspeakable mob violence. If the tables were turned I can't help but think of how Oregon politicians would address these actions. I should remind you that we have not seen near the level of violence from conservatives as we have from these far left extremist groups, and the racist rhetoric coming from the far left is far more damaging to our democracy than allowing law abiding citizens into "safe zones" with firearms.

The outright terrorism that took place and is taking place in the streets of Portland and across our country in 2020 and into this year has been largely ignored, while law abiding citizens have fallen victim to the violence in our streets and the slanderous violent rhetoric spewing from the mouths of politicians. The bias is becoming clear and appears to be the motive for this anti-second amendment legislation. It seems as though politicians are asking for protection from the citizens, not protection for the citizens. Giving local governments the discretion to restrict our rights clearly opens them up to the pressure and bullying from radical groups seeking to dissolve our second amendment rights all together. We have already started to see the dissolution of our first amendment under the rise of cancel culture, this is a very slippery slope and it must not be allowed to go any further.

Randy Tucker, the Legislative affairs manager for METRO, where my uncle worked under Tri-Met's authority for many years and I volunteered as a park naturalist, made a statement during his testimony regarding how METRO would like to increase their authority when it comes to enforcing anti-gun legislation, and that METRO is opposed to any laws that takes away their rights to enforce those laws against tax paying Oregonians. I believe that if someone would have been on the MAX on May 26th, 2017 with a CHL the fatal stabbing that took the lives of two men and severely impacted another could have been prevented. Portland has become a dangerous place, and with legislation like this politicians are attempting to make it more dangerous for law abiding citizens. Guns and knives do not kill people, criminals with the intent to to do great harm kill people and we deserve the means to protect ourselves from such unspeakable violence.

Politicians and special interests groups want to make laws that give them more control over Oregonians constitutional rights, and they clearly do not want to leave these decisions up to the people whom the laws actually impact. We are not being heard and instead are forced out of the peoples Capitol and into virtual meetings that are ran through as quickly as possibly and handled without care. As I listened on Monday I heard brave citizens get "accidentally" muted by those hosting the meeting, interrupted by others, and heard many that seemed confused as to when it was their turn to speak, names were rattled though quickly, and many who signed up were not heard all all. Yet the second hearing for testimony was canceled and hundreds who waited to speak were told to send in written testimony that may not even be read. Are you reading this? Have you even made it this far?

This is not a system set up for the people and by the people, this is a system set up to pursue political agendas. While HUNDREDS of brave Oregonians spoke out against this bill on a Monday morning I only heard a handful of special interest groups and local agencies support this bill, all spewing the same bias and illogical rhetoric. I made the statement before, people fear what they don't know and it's clear that the majority of those involved in supporting this unconstitutional legislation do not have experience with firearms. It's also clear they have a political bias against the very large community of Oregonians and Americans who value their second amendment right. This is not a partisan issue, no matter how desperately some may try to turn it into one. This is a God given right that should never be up for debate.

To be continued...


--A Fed Up Oregonian

Post Date: 2021-02-27 07:39:09

Last Update: 2021-02-28 11:13:35