Here is the Testimony I am sending to the House Judiciary committee, I would encourage you all to send similar testimony to the same. The email addresses are email@example.com, as well as all the addresses in this piece I put out earlier http://oregon.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/02/hb2796-oregon-firearms-freedoms-act-to-do-list-revised/ . Remember the members on this committee should be hearing from us often. Once you have sent testimony, send emails, and call as well.
I am writing to you in the hopes that you will pass the Oregon Firearms Freedoms Act. The Federal govt. only has the authority contained in the text of the U.S. Constitution. This plain fact is affirmed not only by the text of the document, but also by the quotes of the Founders at the ratifying conventions. The fact that other versions (the “Virginia” Plan) or amendments (proposed by Madison), which would have enlarged those powers, were specifically rejected. The Tenth Amendment caps the powers of Congress, as those powers delegated – and reserves all powers not delegated to the Federal govt., nor forbidden to the states, to the states (or to the people).
As if this was not enough… not only is the Federal govt. denied the authority to “legislate” upon ”the right of the people to keep and bear arms,” but by using the mandatory language of ”shall not be infringed” in the 2nd Amendment, the Founders made it clear that the subject of citizen ownership of arms was a forbidden topic for the Federal govt.
All of this being clear, the Federal govt. has seen fit to use a dishonest and specious interpretation of the ambiguous wording in the Interstate Commerce Clause in an attempt to render Oregonians defenseless (or at least.. less defended) …by undermining the clear exact and concise language of the 2nd Amendment. This Bill (the Firearms Freedoms Act) is actually much weaker than some would desire, however, as a baby step this skirts the Federal authority… making it legal to ignore unconstitutional Federal laws when transacting in firearms that are manufactured/sold/retained entirely within the state of Oregon.
Aside from the obvious boost to liberty in Oregon, this Bill would also encourage firearms’ manufacturers to relocate plants and shops here (to make/sell things wich could not be sold elsewhere). Citizens from nearby states could also relocate here in search of additional liberty. This would have axiomatic benefits for the state of Oregon’s budget, as well as for our ailing economy.
To be clear, this Bill truly has no downside. Eight states have already passed Firearms Freedoms Acts, and the Federal Government has yet to stop any of them. I doubt any of our precious highway funding (which comes from Oregon initially anyway) would be threatened. Thank you very much for your time, and for your consideration.
Latest posts by Timothy Reeves (see all)
- Don’t Fall for Their Trap, Keep it In House! - June 30, 2014
- Are we Done Waiting Yet? - June 19, 2014
- Hold Your Nose and Vote for the Other Guy? No way. - April 14, 2014