Imagine the scene: You’re at the Fair. It’s the first big event you’ve been to in over a year. Maybe you’re holding the hand of someone you care about. Maybe you got the elephant ear that you’d been craving. You’re happy and doing something normal feels good. Then someone shouts out “Hey, do you want to sign a petition to protect the Second Amendment?”
It’s an obvious yes for a lot of people. Maybe even me. But then I would ask what were they doing with the petition. I’m always wary of the ol’ bait and switch.
Good people take things at face value and sometimes not-so-good people take advantage of that.
I can believe that folks signed the petition to get Measure 29-161 on the ballot based on a false promise that it protects the Second Amendment. It doesn’t and there is every chance that signers weren’t given the opportunity to read the full ordinance before signing.
If they had they would see that it had no power to affect the Second Amendment and that the real question should’ve been “Hey, do you want to sign a petition that limits local law enforcement on basically all firearm regulations?”
That question is not as obvious of a yes. They wanted the signatures so they didn’t ask that way.
I know this to be true because every signer that I have checked with has told me that it happened as described above.
With transparency Measure 29-161 would’ve never made it on the ballot.
It’s up to voters to right this wrong.
Vote NO! on the false promises of Measure 29-161.
Yvette Clark
Nehalem, OR
