Rep. Esquivel: Anti-gun rights bill passes House.

by Oregon State Representative Sal Esquivel

I would like to thank everyone for their emails regarding Senate Bill 719.  Our office received approximately 2500 emails – Vote NO emails. As you know I am a very dedicated Second Amendment advocate – I can only hope that the majority party received as many or more Vote NO emails as I did.

The bill passed on the House Floor yesterday – 31-29 fear it will pass – that was my worst fear. The conservatives just do not have the numbers to stop the majority party – and your majority party for the most part votes how they are told to vote.
Each of you might give it one more try – the bill will be on the Governor’s desk for signature.
Let her know how you value your Second Amendment rights and that this bill does nothing to protect people.

Yours truly,
Representative Sal Esquivel

  • Jack Lord God

    This is a good one for the liberal acid test of “And Abortion” . My proposal that any bill that restricts gun rights somehow fails the “reasonable” test in liberal eyes if applied to abortion.

    The bar to strip a right should be very high. Hearsay evidence in a secret court is not that.

    So lets try “And Abortion” to see if the bill is reasonable – Should abortions be prevented if a person is not of sound mind to make the decision based upon hearsay evidence in a secret hearing?

    If you are a liberal and believe abortion should be restricted if a law enforcement officer, relative or doctor pops up and says something, then congratulations, you actually are logically consistent.

    However if not, then you really are just interested in restricting other peoples rights.

    • William Butterfeld

      Does this mean we either have to outlaw felons from getting abortions, or allow felons to buy or possess firearms? 😉

      • Jack Lord God

        Bad example, as both sides agree with regard to felons and guns.

        The test is one to determine use of the word “reasonable” whenever the lefts uses it in conjunction with its newest attempt to restrict peoples rights, particularly gun rights.

        Thus it is unreasonable to argue a waiting period for a gun purchase is reasonable, but a waiting period for an abortion is not.

        In short, if you have a situation where both sides agree, as both do with regard to felons possessing guns, the test would be inapplicable, thus the example you gave equally inapplicable.

        • William Butterfeld

          My attempt to make my point with humor was a failure. Let me try more explicitly.

          You are engaging in a false equivalence. The two similarities are more than easily countered by the differences in the two issues. It would be better to simply treat them separately, rather than make for a forced conjoining.

          The kind of argument you are advocating for is designed to shut down discussion, not encourage it and a sharing of ideas and viewpoints. It simply clouds the issue. Which is fine if that is your intent, and the liberals you’re speaking to either aren’t good at argument, or simply willing to give up. My liberal friends would laugh at me if I attempted such a tactic.

  • bifford

    We thought you were “very dedicated” against billion dollar tax increases, too.
    The only Republican in the House to hop into bed with the Democrats to screw small business… Really, Sal?

  • 年年有今日,岁岁有今朝!

  • Ron Glynn

    Well, there goes our bedrock principle of Due Process. So now, a SWAT police unit will show up at 4 am to tell the occupant: “Sir, you have been judged by Secret Tribunal to be suicidal or dangerous and we are here to seize your weapons! Refusal to submit will result in our forced entry to locate said weapons. Do not attempt to resist or interfere which would result in your arrest.”