Obey The Law, Go To Jail
To illustrate just how dangerous Floyd Prozanski's gun registry bill is, we need only look to a case heard in the Supreme Court Wednesday.
The Court heard "Abramski vs United States" a case in which OFF contributed to an Amicus brief filed by other statewide gun groups and Gun Owners of America.
Bruce Abramski purchased a pistol (legally with a background check)in Virginia. He then took the pistol to Pennsylvania and transferred the pistol to his uncle, through a dealer, with a background check.
As a result he was charged with making a "straw purchase" and convicted. The implications of this are breath taking. Just imagine if they start applying this logic anytime a gun is transferred, (sold, given, traded) from its "original" purchaser. (Some of the comments by the Justices will also trouble you.) And this is why Prozanski's universal registration scheme is so very dangerous.
Floyd wants to extend this kind of entrapment into virtually every transfer that takes place, even if you give a gun to your best friend.
But Floyd and his cronies can't stop lying about what the bill is and what it does.
In a Statesman Journal article published today, Prozanski said:
"If the Legislature wanted to create a statewide gun registry it's been collecting this information on dealer and gun show sales for 23 years. It's not a registry. [The bill] extends what our current law has been since 1989; a process for background checks to be completed. All we are doing is closing a loophole."
This does not even make sense. First he admits the state has been collecting this information for "23 years" (personal info and the make, model, caliber and serial number of the transferred gun) then he says "It's not a registry." Really? Then what IS it?
But the lies don't stop there. Floyd then said:
"In the 23 years that we've had background checks in this state, it has never led to confiscation of gun."
The absurdity of this statement can only make you wonder if Floyd is only a liar or if he is actually delusional. Perhaps he never heard of David Pyles.
David's life was turned upside down, his home was invaded, and his property confiscated based on the Oregon State Police turning over information about his legal gun purchases to local police. David had broken no law, had been accused of no crime and there was no warrant for his arrest, yet he was taken into custody based on nothing more than the fact that he had purchased firearms.
The State Police broke the law when they turned over this information. Their punishment? Nothing. David's punishment for having done nothing wrong? He lost his job and his home.
And it is this very agency that Prozanski wants to take over the job of giving you "permission" to give a gun to your uncle.
Of course, when a truly prohibited person attempts a firearm's purchase and is denied, nothing happens to him.
According to the Statesman Journal:
"Oregon State Police spokesman Gregg Hastings said sellers aren't told why a person was denied, and OSP doesn't notify parole or probation officers."
If that's true, and we have every reason to believe it is, it makes this following quote from the same article all the more interesting:
"...but Prozanski, who works as a prosecutor in Eugene and Florence, said he is working on a case where someone is facing a parole violation for trying to buy a gun."
Now how do you suppose anyone knew? Given Prozanski's history of lies, we have no way of knowing if this statement is true.
The Statesman Journal says :
"If you pass your background check, OSP destroys your information after 10 days"
But the fact is, that is only the OSP's published policy (after the David Pyles debacle) it is not the law. The law says they can keep the info for 5 years and in a conversation we had with the retired director of the ID unit a few years ago, he could not tell us how or when records are destroyed. Is it daily? Annually? Is there ever an audit to demonstrate that, in fact, the OSP is not keeping a very easily duplicated database?
As far as enforcement of this Prozanski said:
"We have a code of honor as citizens that you are going to follow the law,"
If he believes that, why would he think Oregonians are selling guns to felons now?
The Abramski case is very troubling and should make you very concerned about expanded background checks. The fact that the State Police ID unit will have complete control over virtually all lawful transfers is cause for concern as well. Please take a moment to contact the members of the Judiciary Committee and express your opposition to this bill.
OFF---Gun Bills Officially Posted
OFF---Five Years In Prison For Giving a Gun to Your Best Friend
OFF---More on Portland Slime Moving South
OFF---Update on anti-gun bill introduction, suggested message, troubling video.
OFF---IS PORTLAND EXTENDING ITS TENTACLES?
OFF---Santa Claus is Coming To Town. So Is Michael Bloomberg.
OFF---ACTION ALERT: Comment On Obama's Anti-gun Rule Proposal
OFF---Supreme Court to Hear "Straw Purchase" Case
[OFF Alert] Legal Analysis of Two Recent Court Cases
[OFF Alert] Gun Control Bills Not Dead
[OFF Alert] New anti-gun bills coming?