Good morning, Representative Frederick:
We are PSU Students for Concealed Carry, and we are very disappointed in your views on the Second Amendment.
The video https://www.youtube.com/watch?
shows the utter lack of understanding of what the Second Amendment is. Please read District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010).
In the same way that we have seen tremendous growth in technology during our lifetimes, the founders of the constitution saw incredible growth in the technology and philosophy of their day. It is unreasonable to assume that they were not capable of understanding that technology would continue to improve, just as we look with anticipation to the kinds of technology and advances we'll see in the next 20 years, or what our descendants will see in the next 200.
Additionally, your assertion that the second amendment should be interpreted during the era in which it was written - namely, that it should only apply to the technology available to the authors - shows a concerning lack of understanding on how the constitution works. The constitution and bill of rights are meant to ensure basic human rights that are inherent to all living people in the United States while growing to adapt to new challenges that arise through time. They were not meant to keep people living in the 18th century, nor were they written as government-granted rights susceptible to withdraw as the government sees fit.
We expect better from our representatives. We share your concern about gun violence, and expect that our leaders will come up with meaningful solutions that address the root causes of violent crimes - systemic inequality, lack of education, lack of resources or access to opportunities. The right of every person to self-defense is just as important as our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
We strongly urge you to vote NO on any anti-gun legislation which does nothing to stop violent crime (which is down nationwide, by the way, during the same time of record breaking gun sales), and all to do with placing undue burdens on law abiding gun owners.
Sincerely
Kendra Moon
President
PSU Students for Concealed Carry
https://sites.google.com/site/
Thursday, February 4, 2016
Monday, February 1, 2016
PSUSCC response to Oregon SB 1551
February 2nd, 2016
Written Testimony for SB 1551
Dear Oregon Senators:
We're Portland State University Students for Concealed Carry (PSUSCC). PSUSCC is a student club that was officially launched a little over a month ago, and now has 31 members. Our members have found an incredibly diverse group of people who all share an interest and a passion for the sport of shooting and the Second Amendment. We are from diverse racial, religious, and socio-economic backgrounds; we are men, women, conservatives, and liberals; we are straight, bisexual, and queer; we are survivors of sexual assault, veterans, older adults with incredible life experiences, and young adults just beginning our careers. What unites us is our firm belief that self-defense an unalienable human right, and our commitment to safe, responsible gun-ownership.
We're 100% opposed to SB 15511 and urge you to VOTE NO for the following reasons:
1. The bill would grant a wide range of individuals the ability to make the assumption that someone is experiencing a mental health crisis. The problem here is that neither educators, school principles, instructors or administrators of a college or university have the mental health education or experience necessary to make a report whose ramifications are so severe as to strip someone of a constitutional right without due process.
2. It is a curious thing to consider that a report sent to the State Police Firearms Unit alleging that someone is experiencing a mental health crisis and shouldn't be able to buy a firearm, isn't serious enough for any kind of followup. In fact, the accused will have no way of knowing their constitutional right has been taken away until they attempt to purchase a firearm.
3. There is ZERO due process.
4. There is no limit to the number of times someone vindictive (or have someone else on their behalf) renew the report.
5. The burden of proof is on the accused to show “clear and convincing evidence” that they're not a danger to themselves or others. This is time and money.
We are incredibly concerned with SB 1551 and the direct attack on the constitutionally protected rights of all Oregonians. In particular, we are troubled with the lack of due process afforded to individuals in this bill. Under SB 1551, any individual can have their second amendment rights taken away from them without knowing who is accusing them of being unsafe, or even when they have been accused. Under this bill, the burden is on gun owners to prove they are innocent – at their own time and expense – in order to restore their freedom to purchase a firearm. This is unconstitutional, and in our democratic republic, this type of legislation is unconscionable.
We believe Oregonians can do better than a secret system designed to strip away the rights of citizens unless they can prove their innocence. We can address gun violence and mental health issues without sacrificing the rights of the thousands of Oregonians who have been diagnosed with a mental health issue, the majority of whom are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime, rather than the perpetrator.
We need forward thinking, compassionate solutions that address the real causes of violent crime and create lasting, positive changes for Oregonians. SB 1551 will not achieve this. It will create an environment of fear where those who are struggling with difficult emotions are scared to get help, for fear that it could cost them their freedom. Meanwhile, violent criminals will continue to get guns the way they always have: on the black market.
We urge you to vote no on SB 1551. This is a direct attack on law abiding gun owners. It will do nothing to stop violent crime.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kendra
President
Portland State University – Students for Concealed Carry
Written Testimony for SB 1551
Dear Oregon Senators:
We're Portland State University Students for Concealed Carry (PSUSCC). PSUSCC is a student club that was officially launched a little over a month ago, and now has 31 members. Our members have found an incredibly diverse group of people who all share an interest and a passion for the sport of shooting and the Second Amendment. We are from diverse racial, religious, and socio-economic backgrounds; we are men, women, conservatives, and liberals; we are straight, bisexual, and queer; we are survivors of sexual assault, veterans, older adults with incredible life experiences, and young adults just beginning our careers. What unites us is our firm belief that self-defense an unalienable human right, and our commitment to safe, responsible gun-ownership.
We're 100% opposed to SB 15511 and urge you to VOTE NO for the following reasons:
1. The bill would grant a wide range of individuals the ability to make the assumption that someone is experiencing a mental health crisis. The problem here is that neither educators, school principles, instructors or administrators of a college or university have the mental health education or experience necessary to make a report whose ramifications are so severe as to strip someone of a constitutional right without due process.
2. It is a curious thing to consider that a report sent to the State Police Firearms Unit alleging that someone is experiencing a mental health crisis and shouldn't be able to buy a firearm, isn't serious enough for any kind of followup. In fact, the accused will have no way of knowing their constitutional right has been taken away until they attempt to purchase a firearm.
3. There is ZERO due process.
4. There is no limit to the number of times someone vindictive (or have someone else on their behalf) renew the report.
5. The burden of proof is on the accused to show “clear and convincing evidence” that they're not a danger to themselves or others. This is time and money.
We are incredibly concerned with SB 1551 and the direct attack on the constitutionally protected rights of all Oregonians. In particular, we are troubled with the lack of due process afforded to individuals in this bill. Under SB 1551, any individual can have their second amendment rights taken away from them without knowing who is accusing them of being unsafe, or even when they have been accused. Under this bill, the burden is on gun owners to prove they are innocent – at their own time and expense – in order to restore their freedom to purchase a firearm. This is unconstitutional, and in our democratic republic, this type of legislation is unconscionable.
We believe Oregonians can do better than a secret system designed to strip away the rights of citizens unless they can prove their innocence. We can address gun violence and mental health issues without sacrificing the rights of the thousands of Oregonians who have been diagnosed with a mental health issue, the majority of whom are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime, rather than the perpetrator.
We need forward thinking, compassionate solutions that address the real causes of violent crime and create lasting, positive changes for Oregonians. SB 1551 will not achieve this. It will create an environment of fear where those who are struggling with difficult emotions are scared to get help, for fear that it could cost them their freedom. Meanwhile, violent criminals will continue to get guns the way they always have: on the black market.
We urge you to vote no on SB 1551. This is a direct attack on law abiding gun owners. It will do nothing to stop violent crime.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kendra
President
Portland State University – Students for Concealed Carry
Sunday, January 24, 2016
Someone, probably within PSUSU, struggles to offer proof that PSUSCC breaks the no firearm policy and uses hate speech in flyers
(1) PSUSCC is supposedly breaking the PSU no firearm policy, even for those who have a valid Concealed Handgun License:
(2) PSUSCC is supposedly "bashing minority students" through our posters:
We will investigate as to whether either of these two claims have any validity. It will be demonstrated unequivocally that these claims are patently false. By making these claims, "Gregory Hamilton @GregHamilton96" is attempting to smear PSUSCC. They have failed miserably.
Claim #1: PSUSCC breaks PSU firearm policy
@GregHamilton96 can't come up with any definitive proof that members of PSUSCC are advocating to break campus policy, or that they're carrying concealed firearms at Portland State University. When pressed to come up with definitive proof:
@GregHamilton96 came up with the following brilliant pieces of evidence to "prove" members of PSUSCC advocate breaking PSU's no firearm policy:
Indisputable proof there. Throughout the back and forth tweets, @GregHamilton96 wrote similar statements that supposedly prove PSUSCC members are breaking the no firearm policy:
It quickly became apparent that @GregHamilton96 has an ability nobody else the planet possesses:
@GregHamilton96 fails at proving that PSUSCC endorses breaking PSU's no firearm policy or that PSUSCC members are currently breaking the policy. @GregHamilton96 can not come up with one single piece of definitive evidence to support their claim.
Claim #2: PSUSCC bashes minority students/uses hate speech in flyers
This unsound claim is even more hilarious than the first claim. Consider for a moment that the goal of PSUSCC is to increase the number of minorities exercising their Second Amendment rights (unlike #DisarmPSU which seeks to disarm minorities). Not only is this written on our website, we believe and live it because there are minorities in PSUSCC. They've even helped by designing flyers such as this:
and several other flyers. But @GregHamilton96 believes that our flyers bash minorities:
Much like the first claim, @GregHamilton96 doesn't come up with a single piece of evidence. They offer nebulous reference points for specific instances of bashing minorities.
And yet more of the same:
Amazing. It is right there! And in public no less! When @GregHamilton96 was asked to URL link from our website, which contains all of our flyers, of any photo offering concrete proof as hate speech, there was NO response except for one last tweet of defeat:
@GregHamilton96 gives not one single piece of evidence to support their claims that PSUSCC endorses breaking PSU no firearm policy or uses hate speech in flyers. The burden of proof is on them. They completely failed in substantiating either claim.
This writer cringes with concern at the thought about whether @GregHamilton96 is doing well in their university coursework.
-Alex
PSUSCC
Friday, January 22, 2016
"OFFENSIVE! TRIGGERING!!" says Tony Funchess
Update 1/24/16 Tony Funchess has blocked PSUSCC from viewing his Twitter and Instagram account.
Tony Funchess is an important leader at PSU, and his comments carry a lot of weight that are echoed throughout Portland State University. This is our response to his opinion that a particular flyer is "offensive" and "triggering". We believe that the University setting is where people can and should encounter ideas they may not like or agree with. Here is what Tony Funchess had to say about the flyer PSUSCC posted:
In a reserved glass case on the first floor in Smith, PSUSCC posted the front cover of the book Negroes and the Gun: The Black Tradition of Arms by NYC law professor Nicholas Johnson.
Here is an excerpt from Amazon about what this book is about:
Why did professor Johnson title his book Negroes and the Gun? He explains this in his book, but also wrote an article on the Washington Post that goes into detail behind his reasoning (emphasis is mine):
The entire two page article was printed and posted directly under the book cover in our reserved glass case (you can see part of the article in Tony Funchess' photo). Anyone who bothered to spend twenty seconds reading would understand why the book is titled the way it is. Our goal by posting this book cover isn't to be offensive or triggering, though we do respect those who feel that way and wish to express their opinion.
Our goal is to bring even greater numbers of PSU African American students into the Second Amendment community. African Americans are, in fact, the second fastest demographic buying firearms and getting Concealed Handgun Licenses behind women of all ethnicities. Many of them feel ashamed to be gun owners or expressing the desire to learn how to shoot. Our goal is to reduce the fragmentation experienced by those who are interested in firearms. We feel that this fragmentation has, to a large extent, been perpetuated by the institutional left because it doesn't fit the dominant narrative of who is a gun owner.
Negroes and the Gun is worth reading for any student of history. Too often black history is erased in our culture, especially about the critical role firearms played and continue to play for black folks in America. Though it is uncertain whether it was Tony Funchess or someone else at PSU, several complaints were sent to University officials regarding this flyer. Perhaps it was an attempt to have PSUSCC forced to take it down. If that was the intention, it is incredibly anti-intellectual and disheartening that some within the academic community dislike the First Amendment. Not only is it a failed attempt to silence PSUSCC, but it is a failed attempt to silence a black law scholar.
Do you want a university that only considers innocuous ideas worth studying? We refuse to take it down and will continue to use it.
Thankfully PSUSCC is on the side of liberty. Welcome to PSU!
and...
----Alex
PSUSCC
Tony Funchess is an important leader at PSU, and his comments carry a lot of weight that are echoed throughout Portland State University. This is our response to his opinion that a particular flyer is "offensive" and "triggering". We believe that the University setting is where people can and should encounter ideas they may not like or agree with. Here is what Tony Funchess had to say about the flyer PSUSCC posted:
 |
| OFFENSIVE! TRIGGERING!! Tony Funchess writes |
In a reserved glass case on the first floor in Smith, PSUSCC posted the front cover of the book Negroes and the Gun: The Black Tradition of Arms by NYC law professor Nicholas Johnson.
Here is an excerpt from Amazon about what this book is about:
"Chronicling the underappreciated black tradition of bearing arms for self-defense, this book presents an array of examples reaching back to the pre—Civil War era that demonstrate a willingness of African American men and women to use firearms when necessary to defend their families and communities. From Frederick Douglass’s advice to keep “a good revolver” handy as defense against slave catchers to the armed self-protection of Monroe, North Carolina, blacks against the KKK chronicled in Robert Williams’s Negroes with Guns, it is clear that owning firearms was commonplace in the black community [...] Nicholas Johnson points out that this story has been submerged because it is hard to reconcile with the dominant narrative of nonviolence during the civil rights era".
Why did professor Johnson title his book Negroes and the Gun? He explains this in his book, but also wrote an article on the Washington Post that goes into detail behind his reasoning (emphasis is mine):
"Much of my scholarship over the last two decades has focused on gun issues. Some find this an odd specialty for someone like me. Negroes and the Gun is a sort of answer to people who wonder and often have asked, how is it that a black law professor at a New York City law school comes to write sympathetically about the Second Amendment and gun rights. But Negroes and the Gun also demands its own preliminary explanation.
No one really uses the word Negro anymore. I haven’t said it out loud in decades. So the title of this book is odd in that sense. But in other more important ways the title is entirely apt. Some will recognize the title as a variation on Robert Williams’ memoir, Negroes with Guns (readers will become acquainted with Williams in the first chapter and again in Chapter Seven as he provokes a conflict with the NAACP that captures the central theme of the black tradition of arms). Negroes is also evocative of the deep roots of the black tradition of arms which emerged at a time in the American story when most black people had the legal status of mules and would have been gratified to be called Negroes..."[Continue reading]
The entire two page article was printed and posted directly under the book cover in our reserved glass case (you can see part of the article in Tony Funchess' photo). Anyone who bothered to spend twenty seconds reading would understand why the book is titled the way it is. Our goal by posting this book cover isn't to be offensive or triggering, though we do respect those who feel that way and wish to express their opinion.
Our goal is to bring even greater numbers of PSU African American students into the Second Amendment community. African Americans are, in fact, the second fastest demographic buying firearms and getting Concealed Handgun Licenses behind women of all ethnicities. Many of them feel ashamed to be gun owners or expressing the desire to learn how to shoot. Our goal is to reduce the fragmentation experienced by those who are interested in firearms. We feel that this fragmentation has, to a large extent, been perpetuated by the institutional left because it doesn't fit the dominant narrative of who is a gun owner.
Negroes and the Gun is worth reading for any student of history. Too often black history is erased in our culture, especially about the critical role firearms played and continue to play for black folks in America. Though it is uncertain whether it was Tony Funchess or someone else at PSU, several complaints were sent to University officials regarding this flyer. Perhaps it was an attempt to have PSUSCC forced to take it down. If that was the intention, it is incredibly anti-intellectual and disheartening that some within the academic community dislike the First Amendment. Not only is it a failed attempt to silence PSUSCC, but it is a failed attempt to silence a black law scholar.
Do you want a university that only considers innocuous ideas worth studying? We refuse to take it down and will continue to use it.
Thankfully PSUSCC is on the side of liberty. Welcome to PSU!
----Alex
PSUSCC
Wednesday, January 20, 2016
The accusations of victim blaming and homophobia are false
We reserved a glass case in Smith for PSUSCC flyers. Someone covered up one of our flyers with a piece of paper that said "trigger warning" and another piece of paper that said "Wall of victim blamming [sic]".
It is impossible to read the flyer in the above photo that was covered up with a trigger warning. Here is an exact copy of what was posted:
This is an exact quote from a survivor of a pretty brutal sexual assault on a college campus. This particular survivor uses firearm training as a source of healing and empowerment. She believes in the right for law abiding students to be able to carry a concealed firearm on campus in Florida.
We're not victim blaming. We're not saying that if a woman was raped that she deserved it because she wasn't armed. What we are saying is that for many women, and many survivors, arming themselves is a personal decision that makes a lot of sense to them. Their decision shouldn't be erased, silenced, or receive derision. Stopping a violent physical or sexual assault is the #1 reason many women get a license to carry a concealed handgun. Nobody has any right to tell a woman or a survivor how to heal or feel empowered. Some of our members are survivors; for them they choose to carry concealed firearms. They never judge other survivors who choose not to carry or own firearms. Our message is for those who have thought at one point in their lives, "I don't want to be a victim of physical or sexual assault; maybe I should learn how to shoot.."
The next charge against PSUSCC is that we're homophobic. That's patently false. Some of our members self-identify as LGBTQ. We're an extremely open group; we've made that quite clear on our website and in our meetings. Spend 10 minutes talking with us, getting to know us, and you'll see that. Why are we being accused of being homophobic? Because of this flyer:
That logo and tagline "Armed Gays Don't Get Bashed" is from the PINK PISTOLS, a national pro-gun LGBTQ organization. Once again this accusation, from someone on Twitter who also admitted to defacing the glass case, is completely unfounded.
PSUSCC is welcoming to everyone. Many of our members are LGBTQ, and some help design flyers. One member went by the Queer Resource Center for feedback on those flyers. Spoke to Melanie Altaras (Office Manager) about the flyers. What was the response? "Not homophobic" at all.
-Alex
PSUSCC
 |
It is impossible to read the flyer in the above photo that was covered up with a trigger warning. Here is an exact copy of what was posted:
 |
We're not victim blaming. We're not saying that if a woman was raped that she deserved it because she wasn't armed. What we are saying is that for many women, and many survivors, arming themselves is a personal decision that makes a lot of sense to them. Their decision shouldn't be erased, silenced, or receive derision. Stopping a violent physical or sexual assault is the #1 reason many women get a license to carry a concealed handgun. Nobody has any right to tell a woman or a survivor how to heal or feel empowered. Some of our members are survivors; for them they choose to carry concealed firearms. They never judge other survivors who choose not to carry or own firearms. Our message is for those who have thought at one point in their lives, "I don't want to be a victim of physical or sexual assault; maybe I should learn how to shoot.."
The next charge against PSUSCC is that we're homophobic. That's patently false. Some of our members self-identify as LGBTQ. We're an extremely open group; we've made that quite clear on our website and in our meetings. Spend 10 minutes talking with us, getting to know us, and you'll see that. Why are we being accused of being homophobic? Because of this flyer:
That logo and tagline "Armed Gays Don't Get Bashed" is from the PINK PISTOLS, a national pro-gun LGBTQ organization. Once again this accusation, from someone on Twitter who also admitted to defacing the glass case, is completely unfounded.
PSUSCC is welcoming to everyone. Many of our members are LGBTQ, and some help design flyers. One member went by the Queer Resource Center for feedback on those flyers. Spoke to Melanie Altaras (Office Manager) about the flyers. What was the response? "Not homophobic" at all.
-Alex
PSUSCC
Thursday, January 14, 2016
Welcome to Portland State University Students for Concealed Carry
PSU Students for Concealed Carry (PSUSCC) believes
that self-defense is a universal human right. We also believe that
so-called "Gun-Free Zones" offer entrants nothing but the illusion of
safety and security. Signs and policies declaring an area to be a
Gun-Free Zone either discourages or makes it unlawful for properly
licensed individuals to defend themselves with a concealed firearm.
This not only emboldens a violent criminal, but assures them that they
will face no resistance that would thwart their violent goals. Gun Free
Zones are nothing more than easy killing zones.
Visit our website here or send us an e-mail at scc@pdx.edu for more information. If you wish to communicate with Alex directly, start the subject line with that name.
Visit our website here or send us an e-mail at scc@pdx.edu for more information. If you wish to communicate with Alex directly, start the subject line with that name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)