Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Regarding Democratic Party of Oregon and Guns

It's time to run this again:

RESOLUTION NO. 2005-008

A RESOLUTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF OREGON

WHEREAS, the Democratic Party has long been dedicated to the preservation of civil liberties; and

WHEREAS, the Democratic Party has long been dedicated to the preservation of freedom and social justice.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF OREGON RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. To recognize and support the right to keep and bear arms in Article 1 Section 27 of the Oregon State Constitution and the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America as an individual right not granted by the government, but rather guaranteed by the government.

Section 2. In recognition of the tremendous personal responsibility engendered by the right to keep and bear arms, the Democratic Party of Oregon further advocates severe penalties and their enforcement for criminal use or misuse of the right.

ADOPTED by the Democratic Party of Oregon on 16th day of July, 2005.
Resolution submitted by Charles H Butcher III, Baker County.

Platform and Resolutions Committee recommends adoption.

Date approved
7/16/05
Resolution sponsor(s)
Chuck Butcher

If you want to try and make the Republicans look better on the issue, you'd better have them re-write their mess. Yes, there are Democrats that don't like this; but to take measure this passed with 73% vote. The DPO also has The Gun Owners Caucus with Blue Steel Democrats as its unofficial Blog and a page on DPO's website and it is one of the best attended and most active Party caucuses. We (I'm a charter member, not an officer) aren't quiet and some candidates carry R08-2005 in their pockets when they campaign.

16 comments:

Steve Culley said...

Ask all the candidates running for president if they support the Oregon democrats position.

KISS said...

Still waiting for Merkley and Novick to get back to me on their position on gun control...waiting waiting waiting 2 months maybe 3????

Steve Culley said...

I think I heard Ginny Burdick will introduce a bill to prohibit teachers from carrying a gun. Seems like same old same old to me.

Chuck Butcher said...

steve,
Ginny Burdick is not reflective of most Democratic candidates and is not in my district.

Obviously she and I don't see eye to eye on the 2nd. I do have some ideas, but that's not something I want to discuss.

Kiss,
I know from personal conversation that Steve Novick supports this resolution, he's not a recreational shooter for obvious reasons.

joycemocha said...

As a teacher (and one who owns guns) I'm not supportive of any notion that teachers should be carrying. The dynamics of the job, as well as security concerns (keeping the gun away from students) just don't work with carrying on the job.

Heck, it's hard to keep *purses* safe at school, and not every teacher has access to a locked drawer. Plus, if it's meant to be security, the time it takes to pull the gun out of the secure site plus lock down the classroom and secure the students...

In any case, the prohibition already exists. No need for Burdick to go any further with it.

Zak J. said...

Hey Kiss - both Merkley and Novick have made pro-second amendment positiions, but obviously this isn't widely known. I'll ask their campaigns to post a message on BlueSteelDemocrats, and hopefully ChuckFor... and other sites can run cross-posts. Thanks!

Zak Johnson, Gun Owners Caucus Chair

Steve Culley said...

Can't remeber if Chuck posted my article that appeared in the local paper about this issue or not but in a nutshell my position is that the police show up in time to do a body count when a school shooting happens. That's true in all cases. You are right about prohibitions, Joyce. Districts are prohiited from enacting gun laws, that is the sole perogative of the legislature. Enter Ginny Burdick.
I'm having an on going discussion about this with a local school board member. I hope to have a new policy by the time my grand kids start school. I want some teachers and administrators to be trained and have acess to a firearm, in a safe secure place, just in case we get a local Columbine. I would like to keep the issue local and not have to fight the state. Ginny Burdick and her downtown Portland ways does not make me happy. One more reason I decided to reregister as not a democrat.

KISS said...

With all due respect I went to Novicks site and:
On the Issues
Health Care
Energy Independence and Global Warming
Veterans

Getting Out of Iraq
Government Waste
Working Men and Women
Protecting Social Security
Tax Fairness
Civil Rights ... For Everyone
Prioritized Defense Spending
Net neutrality
Nothing on gun control also checked your links and you, alone were for protecting my rights in regards to 2nd amendment, Than You.
As for Merkley, I already know his position...same as Loony Burdick.
Nothing has changed IMHO. Will this one issue change my vote? Probably

Zak J. said...

Hi KISS,
I'm really glad you raised this issue. I think all candidates need to be held accountable for their views. But here is what Merkley has actually said, as reported 11/11/07 in the East Oregonian:

"As far as the NRA, 'I believe strongly in the Second Amendment,' he said. 'I also believe in keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, so I do support background checks. I think that's very much in line with where the National Rifle Association is.' "

Here's the link if you want to read the whole article:
http://eastoregonian.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=69158&SectionID=13&SubSectionID=&S=1

Thanks. I anticipate a more inclusive statement from the Merkley (and probably Novick) campaigns in the near future.

Chuck Butcher said...

There's an element of the shoot yourself in the foot with this idea that these guys aren't strong enough on the issue so Gordon should get the vote. They're where you want them, they don't jump up and down and scream about it, they would like to get elected and looking like a single issue loon gets the other guy elected.

I could post Nugent vids on this site, I won't, he'd scare off the very people there's a chance of persuading. You want to accuse ME of being soft on the 2nd?

I can't do anything about Ginny Burdick other than make an enemy and I don't want to go there, this is something the folks in her district would need to handle, there is such a thing as a Primary.

Steve Culley said...

Burdick is an enemy, Same as Rudy.

Chuck Butcher said...

Well, you know you have 2 Parties to choose from and you all didn't turn out 2 years ago in the Primary and vote for me so my sympathy is a little limitted for the "too good" to pick a Party crowd.

Less than half the registered Ds turned out and the Indies stood aloof, so who ran is who ran, but blaming the Democratic Party for running the elected candidate is pretty self-serving. The Party offered 4 candidates and not one of them was the same as the others. I don't mind that I didn't win, but I'll be damned if I'll stand still for my Party being kicked for running the winner of a Primary. That's BS.

If you don't participate why the heck are you kicking me? I get this, "run again, Chuck," and my reaction is, I already did and it cost me a lot of money and time and the folks who would've benefitted were too damn good to put a pencil mark on their ballot and mail it.

So go ahead and kick the Democrats if it makes you feel good...but it's meaningless. You won't come out and play but you don't like the score?

Steve Culley said...

That election was a test for me. They had a gun totin democrat to choose from, to show the democrats really had turned over a new leaf. They didn't, Oregon democrats anyway. Did elect some Lou Dobbs democrats in the heart land though.
( sanme complaint as the conservative, I lose part of what I type)

Chuck Butcher said...

I hate word verifcation absolutely, but you should see the spam I have to try to clean out of posts all the way back to the beginning, not to mention the computer dangerous junk.

Steve I know you backed me, financially also, but the defection by so many to NAV only aggravates the situation. The only reason ANY group has infuence is numbers and money, both curable by an infusion of the same from other points of view, not abdication.

Steve said...

I haven't abdicated, just joined the revolution, Lou Dobbs, Ron Paul? who knows? Guns and borders are front burner now. A year ago they just blew you off if talked about these issues. Be a few days away. Got to babysit some grandkids.

Chuck Butcher said...

It ain't a revolution, it's a joke. NAVs don't agree enough on anything to create a Party out of them, and single issue Parties die very quickly.