Central Oregon's News Leader - KTVZ NewsChannel 21, Bend, Oregon
Would you support requiring gun safety training before being able to buy a firearm?
KTVZ Asked by KTVZ
1,034 Votes

Would you support requiring gun safety training before being able to buy a firearm?

Yes, I would support!

10

No, I wouldn't support!

11

Yes, I would support!

10 Comments
Robert Northrup
1
Robert Northrup

I had to take a class to carry concealed. In the end only law abiding citizens will comply. The criminals will still have guns and our justice system will continue turning criminals loose so they can prey on the innocent..

Reply
Gabe West
1
Gabe West

Yes but that doesn't matter to the criminals

Reply
Ron Johansen
0
Ron Johansen

You have to learn to drive before you can drive. You have to take a forklift before you can drive a forklift. Why not know what you're doing before obtaining a deadly weapon of war?

Reply
Nicole Jackson
0
Nicole Jackson

Other counties with stringent mental health, & gun safety programs have the lowest crime rates & out of them Australia has had 3 shootings since 1996...Japan has had 6 people die by gunfire in the last year...The U.S. has miserably failed in the safety arena

Reply
Les Adams
0
Les Adams

How can anyone oppose gun safety classes for people who want to own guns? That's like being opposed to driver training before someone is permitted to drive on public roads.

Reply
Jeff Sanders
0
Jeff Sanders

There are many, many countries we could follow the example of. The 2nd amendment talks about a well armed militia, not a overly armed militia of one.

Reply
sharder8
0
sharder8

13 years in the Army and CHL holder for over 30 years. There's no such thing as too many firearm safety classes. Laws change and one way to get those changes out is through firearms safety class. A yearly refresher course should also be available.

Reply
Pam Robbins
0
Pam Robbins

It makes sense, and might cut down on "accidental" shootings.

Reply

No, I wouldn't support!

11 Comments
Penny Hansen
3
Penny Hansen

This will not stop anyone from obtaining a gun. If they are planning an attack of any type, they will just choose a different weapon.

Reply
John Philo
John Philo

Your common sense answer has no meaning to the anti - 2nd Amendment people. They only want to eventually remove your rights completely.

Mark
2
Mark

I dont mind more safety courses, Those should be accepted, but not mandatory. The rest of the proposed bill is absolute nonsense.

Reply
Rob Mozz
0
Rob Mozz

It's your right to own a firearm so unless you forfeited that right by committing a felony there shouldn't be any restrictions. Oregon should be a constitutional carry state.

Reply
Robert Mozzetti
0
Robert Mozzetti

Just another way for the government to tax you for practicing your constitutional right to bear arms. It's not a privilege like driving.

Reply
Adam Johnson
0
Adam Johnson

I dont support it being mandatory but I would support an additional 5% tax on firearms and accessories to pay for training for people that want/need it.

Reply
Greg Moore
0
Greg Moore

The 2nd Am't, according to the Founding Fathers, was to preserve liberty, not hunting, not self-defense. Therefore, no registry may ever be allowed. Thomas Jefferson best discusses this: “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, 1/30/1787

Reply
Greg Moore
Greg Moore

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

Kevin Crabtree
0
Kevin Crabtree

but they should put in schools maybe part of PE or another class for 2 weeks.

Reply
Nik Myles
0
Nik Myles

This would be one step away from preventing us our rights to bare arms.

Reply
Do you think higher  SDC fees will lead to fewer new homes in Bend?
KTVZ Asked by KTVZ
137 Votes

Do you think higher SDC fees will lead to fewer new homes in Bend?

Yes

1

No

0

Yes

1 Comment
Latterdaysaint
0
Latterdaysaint

People are already dealing with bidenomics, vote this woke city council out

Reply

No

0 Comment
No one has commented yet
Do you agree with piping of canals in Central Oregon?
KTVZ Asked by KTVZ
314 Votes

Do you agree with piping of canals in Central Oregon?

Yes

4

No

3

Yes

4 Comments
Michael Thille
1
Michael Thille

Piping the canals to conserve water is the logical next step. Where does Commissioner Adair think the wildlife got a drink before the canals were made over 100 years ago? I will admit reducing Junipers and reinvigorating our wild grasslands makes sense.

Reply
Delaney Gates
1
Delaney Gates

The canals were not put in as "water features" for people's backyards. Build your own water feature and pay for the water. This water is meant for agriculture.

Reply
SunnySunshinestein
1
SunnySunshinestein

Get it done, it's way past time.

Reply
happy jean
0
happy jean

Commission Adair, where do you think wildlife get water when irrigation water is off Oct-March? Please share your plan and funding strategy for removing 5 million juniper trees. What will happen to the wildlife that live in those trees. Your argument is weak.

Reply

No

3 Comments
snowzone
1
snowzone

Why do Bend residence have to accommodate Jefferson county. I'm sure someone up there can figure a way go pump the water they need out of Lake Billy Chinook

Reply
Alma and Bruce Miller
1
Alma and Bruce Miller

I agree with commissioner Patti Adair - there are other alternatives.

Reply
Robert 'Lew' Lewandowski
1
Robert 'Lew' Lewandowski

Wildlife has relied on these open canals for decades. There is no other option for critter water.

Reply

We use cookies to ensure you get the best possible experience on our website. Learn more OK, GOT IT