Bill Meyer Show Podcast - Sponsored by Clouser Drilling www.ClouserDrilling.com - 03-06-25_THURSDAY_8AM

Episode Date: March 7, 2025

Kevin Starrett at Oregon Firearms Federation - Legislature trying to move HB3075 which would give us Measure 114 gun permits and control good and hard. If it passes, it's because GOP doesn't fight using all its tools. Open phones follow.

The Bill Myers Show podcast is sponsored by Clauser Drilling. They've been leading the way in Southern Oregon well drilling for over 50 years. Find out more about them at clauserdrilling.com. Kevin Starr at Oregon Firearms Federation, the head cook, chief bottle washer, just making tons of money, tons of money getting paid. Yeah, I'm just, I'm always being sarcastic with people that have said, oh my gosh, Kevin, Kevin gets paid? Yeah, Kevin does have to pay the bills too,

over at Oregon Firearms. But I am so proud and happy to send you money out of my little meager bank account, now when the time comes. To help defend the Second Amendment here in Southern Oregon because for the most part, nobody else is. All right, that's where we find ourselves in, the semi-communist

and hardening communism state of Oregon, which we're always fighting back on a lot of times here, Kevin. And the latest iteration here, I couldn't help but notice that over in Oregon Live, and was it Max Bernstein writes over there? Yeah, Max Bernstein at the failing Oregonian, which is now basically a glorified real estate wreck. Yeah, I know, but I couldn't help them. They're about HB 3075 and they're having all these people in there. They're testifying and, oh, we got gangs in our neighborhood. And it's because, you know, the reason we've got gangs in our neighborhood is because the easy availability of firearms

and of course what's not talked about by Max is the fact that these firearms are largely stolen from law-abiding people. That's the bottom line here. It doesn't explain the gang problem in New York where there is no availability of firearms legally. But yet they're still shooting and killing each other all the time, right? And so the solution to this was measure 114, which barely passed the Oregon electorate and then was promptly declared unconstitutional by the Harnie County judge and has been grinding its way through the courts.

And so now the state legislature, because they care about us so much in the rural lands here of Oregon, everywhere, we need to be disarmed so that gang bangers aren't shooting each other in Portland. Is that the the overall intent of House Bill 3075? Could you set the table here for us? Yeah, it's basically it's 114 back as legislation, which we, long before the session started, we said this was absolutely going to happen. This was going to be on the table. And I think it's probably safe to say we will see it come soon because Max Bernstein from the Oregonian is basically the PR agent for the anti-gun movement. And when you start seeing stories bubble up in the Oregonian, that means that she has talked to the anti-gun people and they like this sponsor this bill crop and they're

getting us ready for it. You know they've done this. She's greasing the media skids for it in other words. When they that we knew there was a there was a bill that had not been gotten stuffed yet but we knew it would be that was going to screw gun dealers and the bill in its original language was just, oh, we're going to do a study about this. Well, when all of the media started talking about that bill with the language that was going to actually be in it, you know, it was kind of a, they spilled the beans. But what 3075 is, is 114 is currently held up in the courts because it's clearly unconstitutional

and it's just a vicious attack on Oregonians and reality. So because that's tied up in the court, we knew the legislature would come back with their own version of it. And so that's what 3075 is. They did, you know, the bill was drafted by morons at, you know, the anti-gun movements in Portland. And it was so poorly written. I mean, it even referred to statutes

that didn't exist. And basically, it created a situation that prevented you from buying a gun unless you complied with a set of requirements that are impossible to comply with. In fact, I recall there were background checks, there were firing line checks and all these other things and tests that had to be provided by your local police or sheriffs and the local police or sheriffs are saying we don't have time or money to do any of this and it's not going to happen but that didn't matter right there were there were many many elements of it that were impossible to comply with and what and you know looking at that that that ballot measure you thought it's impossible to

come up with something stupider than this but Jason Krupp House House of Rep Jason Krupp has in fact managed to make this worse not only did he more than double the fees involved double the amount of time the issuing agents had to give the permits but there's elements of it I will tell you frankly there's parts of it that I frankly do not understand The so much of it is what the original angle language of 114 was so there's a lot in there That's that's language that was already existing One of the most interesting things is you can't do anything without this permit

You can't get the permit without a class that no one teaches. Once you take the class that no one teaches, apply for the permit, which may or may not be issued after several months, that allows you to do nothing. The permit is not permission to buy a gun. In fact, the language is quite clear. It says this permit is not a permission to purchase a gun. Well, then what is not a permission to purchase a gun. Well, then what is the permit permission to do then? The permit allows you to go try to buy a gun and conduct yet another background check, which could take two, three years.

And you know currently, thanks to Floyd Prusanski and the rest of the leftists in the legislature, private transfers of firearms are now illegal in Oregon, with the exception of family members. Well, this bill says you can't even give a gun to your wife or your son anymore unless they've had this class that's not available. That's not available, yeah. And have this permission. You know, this sounds like it is a legislation designed to make it absolutely impossible to have a constitutionally enumerated right. And it gets worse than that because, as you may recall, Measure 114 prohibited

the possession of standard capacity magazines, you know, the feeding devices for modern firearms. Any one of those that held more than 10 rounds became contraband. Well, because measure 114 was declared unconstitutional in the courts, it never went into effect. So since 2022, magazines have been available for sale in Oregon. This bill makes you a criminal if you bought one of those magazines going back to 2022. So if you bought or sold a magazine, which are freely available in Oregon because there is no law against them, they can now prosecute you for doing something that is currently perfectly legal.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong here Isn't there something constitutionally against you know the ipso what is it the ipso facto or expo facto facto? Yeah Well, you know after the fact we criminalize something which was perfectly legal for you to do and own prior You know to this law, right? Yeah I mean it's it's so bizarre because the problem is is and this is something that for some reason people are really having a hard time understanding. I mean I've had this conversation with lawyers and sheriffs

who totally misunderstand. I mean I have had an exchange with a sheriff who was advising people to take a picture of their magazine because if you purchase them prior to that date it's legal to have them if they never leave your house but how do you prove when you purchase them so I had this back and forth with the sheriff and I've even seen lawyers suggesting well take a digital photo of your of your magazine that doesn't mean anything it doesn't mean anything because as I posted on our website several years ago I took like three pictures of the same box of magazines. I just changed the date on the

camera one till like 1995 one to 2022 and one to like 2028 or something well into the futures exact same photograph. In addition to that people say well keep your receipts well receipts are utterly meaningless. Because magazines do not have serial numbers of any sort or any identifying other than here's the model of the magazine, correct? Precisely. So a magazine that you bought prior to this prohibition looks exactly the same as a magazine that you bought after the prohibition, and a receipt can't in any way identify which

is which. So what they've basically done is, you know, we like to think we live in a world where a person who wants to comply with the law can read the law and comply with it, but you can't get four lawyers to agree on what most things mean. And in this case, I mean, this is a very, very lengthy bill. If you try to understand me there are elements of it that I I really do not understand at all now you got to read these things fifty times but you know for example. It changes the rules for what happens after you buy something after twenty twenty eight but I can't for the life

of me figure out exactly what it's saying. There's so many elements. I mean, the other thing is, it's like, as I said, right now, you can give a gun to your wife or your son. Under this bill, that will no longer be legal. But if you look at how they worded it, it says that, well, I could give a gun to my wife or my son if they've taken the class and can prove to me they've taken the class. But then it me they've taken the class, but then it goes on. But the class isn't available. The class is not available, but even if you put that aside, it goes on to say that there's

an exception for that if they're purchasing these, there's certain firearms that are not included in this permit thing. Like there are certain firearms that you don't need a permit for. But you still need the class that you would take to get the permit. But in this case, they're referring to in the part of the bill where they're talking about me giving a gun to my wife, they're talking about her purchasing these guns. So it doesn't even really seem to make any sense. But the list of guns, you know,

there's a couple of guns like a single shot rifle, you're allowed to buy that without the permit, but you're not allowed to buy it without the class. And who can teach the class is very unclear, because now they're saying that part of it says that the instructor has to be certified by a law enforcement agency. They also say the instructor can be a certified NRA instructor. Well, I've been a certified NRA instructor for over 40 years, but the class requires things that virtually no NRA instructor is qualified to teach. For example, all the federal laws, all the state laws on safe storage, and then the effect of suicide on the country as a whole. Well, what qualifies me to teach that? Probably

nothing. But if somebody attempts, and there's no explanation in here for what that qualification is or how you meet those qualifications, which is like a lawyer's dream come true. So there's really no explanation, no direction to the sheriffs or the police how they're supposed to handle it. It still requires live fire and those classes are generally unavailable to most people. So it was designed to be not only that you can't comply with it but that in all likelihood you can't understand it. And if you can't understand it, the police and sheriffs are certainly not going to understand it. The DA are certainly not going to understand it.

The DAs are not going to understand it. The courts are not going to understand it. The judges most likely won't be able to understand it. But it does appear to be a really great way to instantly... Okay, well, let me just pose another silly question. Is it everything about this going against everything that the Supreme Court said in the Bruin decision about the individual right to keep and bear arms, and to keep and bear arms outside of the home, and that something that you can have inside your home doesn't

become illegal the moment you walk outside the door? Not only that, but the Supreme Court said you can't ban something that's in common use yet all over the country, I mean, to the north of Oregon and Washington, they ban magazines. Well, magazines are in common use. They have magazine bans all over the country. Now, there are several cases that

are before the Supreme Court to address that. But the problem is we've had this conversation before. The Supreme Court was crystal clear in the Bruin decision in how these cases have to be adjudicated and decided. And the lower courts have just said, we do not intend to abide by that. We are spitting in the face of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has not done anything about it.

So we have, you know, the Supreme Court was quite clear that AR-15 rifles are protected because they are in common use. And now the lower courts have come back and said, well, now wait a minute, we can ban those because they're dangerous or unusual. Well, in fact, that's not what the law says. The law says something can be banned if it's dangerous and unusual. The lower courts have just redefined it.

And it strikes me as very odd that the Supreme Court is okay with this. You know, there's all these cases that are backed up now that we've, there have been attempts to get the Supreme Court to hear them and they have not been hearing them. That if the Supreme Court is supposed to be the final decider of what is and is not constitutional and they make a decision and the lower courts just say, we don't care. I mean, look what happened to New York. Okay, so the Bruin case was about the laws of New York. And the laws of New York were so restrictive that the court said, no, you can't do this.

So after the Bruin decision, the New York legislature came back and made the laws more restrictive. Okay? And so nothing's been done about it. Now, obviously, we see efforts by federal agencies and the Oregon, everybody, which is like, Trump has said, we're going to do this, this and this. And the agencies have said, we're going to ignore you. We're not going to do what you want. I think that puts us in a really, really dangerous position because for years, gun owners and patriots have been attacked by Democrat policies but obeyed them because they were the law. Now when those

policies are being reversed and constitutional principles are being reenacted, police, courts, states, legislatures are saying we just will not obey the law. Yeah we don't care. happens. Yeah, that's not anarchy or anything, is it? Well, it's tyranny to a certain extent. Well, it's a narco tyranny. It's a narco tyranny. It's like anarchy and tyranny all wrapped into one, really. Anarchy allows us to fight back.

But tyranny is when you have a legislative system or a judicial system or a law enforcement body that simply says, we will not obey the law. You know, I mean, we've had this situation in Oregon where during the lockdowns, people had concealed handgun licenses that had to be renewed. And sheriff said, we're not going to do it because we won't let anyone in our office. Well, wait a minute. If you're not going to renew it, how do I comply with the law?

Well, you can't comply with the law. Well, if my permit expires, I'm violating the law. If I carry a gun, will you arrest me? Oh, yes, we'll arrest you. You know, we had those conversations with people, you know, with sheriffs who said, yeah, sorry, tough, tough, you know, your permit expired, you're breaking the law, and you're subject to arrest. Well, your responsibility to renew my permit, not going to do it.

It's very Soviet, you know? It really is extremely Soviet. But listen, this is the, what is the focus of the Oregon legislature right now, is to punish people. You know, we see this in everything that they're doing. Well, punishing people for living in the rural lands, punishing people for having property, punishing people for having firearms, punishing people for having firearms. Not doing anything about...

Punishing people for having automobiles. Yeah, automobiles. Yeah, yeah, that too. And fine. And you know the interesting part about this, Kevin, is I'm sure that the major challenge that we're looking here is that when it comes to House Bill, what is this? House Bill 3075 is what we're talking about this morning. Kevin Starrett, by the way, Oregon Firearms Federation. Have the Republicans already surrendered in advance on this bill? Do you know? I don't

know that they've surrendered on this bill. It is my position that ultimately after this gets enacted, I believe it will be found unconstitutional. I mean, it may be found unconstitutional before it's enacted. If the appeals court, where 114 is, the ballot measure, finds it unconstitutional, I don't really know what effect that has on the implementation of this bill. My guess is the legislature will just say, we don't care what the court said, it's law. And then the fight starts all over again, although, you know Ultimately post organizations like mine. We just run out of money, you know, the state has plenty of money

But what happens then is unclear, but the reality is this is no matter What happens in the future? when this if this bill goes into effect the results for The Second Amendment and gun owners will be catastrophic now The bill the bill says that as far as the permit system is that goes into effect in 2026 Which means there's a short amount of time for people to go out and make an attempt to buy the things that will soon be banned but If it goes into effect the problem will just be enormous. The

Republicans are the only people who can stop this. And from the beginning of this session, in the endless fundraisers I've gotten from Jeff Halfridge and emails from Christine Drazin and all these people, we're here to fight. We're gonna fight, fight, fight. Yeah, but being there and fight, fight, fight on something like this, which will be passed by the majority Democrats, you're not fighting. Exactly. You have a tool to fight and getting up on the floor and making a speech is not that tool. But I fully intend, you know, when this bill is scheduled to contact the leadership of the respective Republican caucuses and say, look, here's the deal. This this like so many other bills that are being promoted this bill is a vicious attack on the people

you represent you have the ability to stop it if you do not stop it there will never be a reason for anyone to vote for a Republican again and if your only interest is your future political career and your office yeah and we're speaking of David Brock Smith we're speaking of David Brock Smith. We're speaking of David Brock Smith as an example. It's I think back to well I worked forever to become a senator. It's like well I don't care. You know? Anderson, any of these people who will not stand. I mean look what there's so currently we've got we've got so many bills that are big like so right now we've got James Manning one of the stupidest people who've ever been in

the legislature, with resolutions to protect Ukraine. Not really an Oregon problem. David Brock Smith with a bill to require that the whole legislature change, so instead of having 30 senators, we have 36 senators, one from each county. Well, that sounds like a great idea, doesn't it? That means the rural counties would be represented. But years ago, the Supreme Court said unequivocally, that is unconstitutional.

They struck it down. They struck it down. It's what's a Sims v. Reynolds, right? Sims v. Reynolds, that notion has come up over and over again, and over and over again, legislative council drafts the bill because the cost of four, five, $10,000 because Brock Smith asked for it.

They know it's unconstitutional. They know it has no chance. But we talk about the money that's being dumped down the toilet by the Democrats and the NGOs and everything, and the Republicans are doing the same thing. We've got 500 bills that have no chance of ever being heard, but Oregonians are paying for it. Meanwhile, the stuff that's actually happening, you know, the homelessness... And by the way, 3075 will move. You're pretty sure it will get moved and get a hearing? I cannot see any possible way this bill does not move. Now, does it pass?

That is entirely up to Drazen and Bonham and the caucuses, because they won't. I mean, Drazen will never tell her caucus to walk out, because Drazen's a Democrat. If you look at her voting record, she is a far-left Democrat. Bonham has walked out. He can't run again. But can he get Brock Smith and Anderson and others to do it? Because their main interest, and we've demonstrated Brock Smith's main interest is Brock Smith, you know, funneling money into nonprofits that pay him.

So ultimately, if this bill passes, the Republicans have the ability to stop this atrocity. Will they do it? Obviously, I'm not optimistic. Yeah, because I'm not going to put up with the Republican caucus doing what they did a couple of years ago, holding up the fake paper check that, you know, this is for the lawsuit, you know, against this. At one point, they were demanding that the bills all be read in their entirety to slow down the process. Okay, that's a great policy.

That's something you could do. But then when the Democrats came along and said to Knope and Drazen, we'll give you two million bucks, give every House member two million bucks, we'll give every Senator four million bucks, guess what? The protest ended. You know, it was like... Yeah, so even though we're looking at this in the standard way when we're looking at this vicious anti-second amendment bill, House Bill 3075,

we know that the Democrats are the ones that want this, which also means that the only people who can protect us from this, from these intrusions, are the Republicans. And they're the only ones because calling Jeff Golden is not going to make him say no on this bill. Well, precisely. And I've seen emails that Bonham has sent to members of ours complaining about me saying, well, Starrett's not helping us, he should be going after the Democrats. Well, that's absurd. Yeah, because this is their religion to disarm us, just like to get us out of our property

and do all the rest of it. I don't want to hear any Republican talk about that, well, you need to be getting in touch with the Democrats. I know the way the Democrats are going to vote on this. We all know that because they're Democrats. They want to take your house, they want to take your car, they want to take your property, they want to jack up your taxes while telling you they're making life more affordable so that they can buy needles for junkies and spend more money on tarps and stuff.

Meanwhile in Portland, nobody knows where the money went. Everybody's pointing fingers at each other. What are we doing? We're going to have resolutions to protect Ukraine. I think we actually have a top fear. But you're putting down the marker though. Remember if 3075 is passed, it's not because of the Democrats, because the Democrats are going to vote for it anyway.

We know that. Voting no means nothing. It means absolutely nothing. As a matter of fact, I can't remember if it was on your show, I believe it was, where Christine Goodwin, who was running for the Senate seat where they viciously attacked Noah Robinson, specifically said a no vote by a Republican has no meaning. Don't tell me you voted no and that you stood up for my rights. If you're not monkey wrenching and walking out and ending the legislative session and

eliminating the ability for business to take place, then you're not doing your job. And then of course then the Republicans come back and say, well, but then they're going to come back in and get rid of the quorum requirement. Yeah, I know they're trying to do that right now. Okay. Well, exactly. They're going to do that no matter what these people do.

That was their excuse for not fighting ballot measure 113. Oh, if we do it before, actually before that, before the reason they didn't walk out was because, oh, if we walk out, there'll be a ballot measure against us. So they didn't walk out and there was a ballot measure against them. If they say we can't walk out because they'll change the quorum, if they don't walk out, they'll still change the quorum. Exactly. So use the tool that's in you. Use the tool while you still have it. Okay? Exactly. Buy us some time until the feds have an opportunity to correct some of the insanity. Yeah, because Trump is not coming here to fix it right now. There

are bigger fish for him to fry right now at the national level. Eventually, yeah, there could be a Pam Bondi coming in here and cutting some heads off, you know, legislatively or legally. So give us the time for that to take place, you know? I mean, if you say, well, a year from now or five years from now, I won't have this tool, so I'm not going to use it now, I'm sorry. But you know, we spent decades contributing to Republican candidates and then have them turn around and say, we should not be allowed in the building, that we're a rogue organization or that we're the stuff

that crackpot Brian Iverson accuses of while happily accepting our checks and then asking for more money. The fact is that this is what is available to them now and if they don't want to do it, we have no use for them. A Republican who aids the Democrats is a Democrat. House Bill 3075 is as...wasn't it Ronald Reagan who talked about that speech? Was it a time of choosing? This is the time of choosing. This is a time of choosing for the Republicans, the Republicans that are in the state legislature. It's up to them.

Ronnie also said that we would never speak evil of another Republican. I'm sorry I won't do that because you know the warmongers in the US Senate and the backsliders in the Oregon legislature who call themselves Republicans, the Charlie Conrads, the Iversons, the Brock Smiths, those people have to be called out, period. And you know, we're just going to keep doing it. Yeah, and if you're not going to monkey wrench with the legislative process here on 3075, then you're not really using all the tools available to you. And it is that serious. This bill is as serious as a heart attack, Kevin, and that's why I had you on. Talk about this, okay? Well, thank you. I appreciate appreciate it Bill. House Bill 3075 is what you want to plug into your OLIS watching so that way you're kept up on it and also sign up for the alerts over at Oregon Firearms Federation, oregonfirearms.org. Be well Kevin. Thank you. Thanks Bill. It's 840 at KMED 993KBXG. Glad that you are here. That's pretty serious a conversation there with Kevin Starrett, but House Bill 37-5 is serious as a heart attack. This is

big stuff. And taking an unconstitutional bill and just passing it again as legislation, taking an unconstitutional ballot measure, right? That kind of thing. So that's where we find ourselves. And when you talk with your legislators, and maybe they're Republicans, like I said, Jeff Golden, Pam Marsh, they were likely going to vote for this. This is something that they would probably have wet dreams over, you know, the ability just to essentially disarm their fellow Oregonians. Oh, by the way, it doesn't apply to the two police officers, you know, that sort of thing. Well, you know, police and military, you know, that's different because we have elevated, elevated classes of people in this. It's quite fascinating.

The deal is going to be to get the minority in the Republicans. Who are the Republicans? Republicans are in the minority, but they can still control quorum and stop them from doing this. And so when you hear if your Republican representative or state senator ends up saying, well, I can't do this because you know, measure 113, you know that this is a person who is not, you have to just make sure and tell them, listen, this is the only tool you have. Denying the quorum and throwing the monkey wrench in it. Well, but they're going to come back and get rid of quorum.

Yeah, they probably will. But you have it right now. You have it right now. Well, I might not be allowed to run for reelection. And then I would say, so? What is the purpose of you being a state representative or a state senator? The fact that, you know, this is a job for life for you,

or are you here to defend your people? It's that serious, okay? Some emails of the day, emails of the day sponsored by Dr. Steve Nelson and Central Point Family Dentistry, centralpointfamilydentistry.com. By the way, great people that are over there. If you don't have dental insurance, they have a dental plan there that works a lot like dental insurance.

Better benefits, lower costs. I think you'll find it quite interesting. Works well for you. Okay? Centralpointfamilydentistry.com. It's over on Freeman Way next to the Mazatlan Mexican restaurant. Brad writes me, Bill, this morning, hey Bill, 45% of Attorney General candidate Dan Rayfield's money came from out-of-state sources like this New Jersey Teacher's Union. This is another reason why the left is so scared

of Donald Trump. He's targeting a major source of their money and influence when he proposes eliminating the US Department of Education." Very good point on that, Brad. Dale writes me this morning about the EAS. I was talking about that with the Jackson County Emergency Manager and saying, Bill, yes, I was one of those to curse at KMED during the big fire. I carried a portable radio for three days waiting for information, stuck in traffic or in the fairgrounds. No information came. I couldn't believe someone at the station didn't grab the microphone and let us know. Well, one of the things about that, Dale, is that I'm the person at the radio station and I can't be here 24 hours and go out there and fix stuff and try to keep it on. And so that the whole idea for emergency evacuation notes was supposed to come from Jackson County

for emergency evacuation notes was supposed to come from Jackson County via the EAS. I can't be in two places at once. I just can't do that. All right? As a matter of fact, if I remember on Almeta, I was under evacuation orders that night too. So there were a lot of things, you know, I think people need to understand. The reason why I think the EAS was important to use on something like that is that this isn't 1962. It's not 1962 any longer and it's not like the days in which you had 40 people working at each radio station. It's not that way anymore. Television that way too. Newspaper, it's all that way. Things are thinner. Remember, I'm the guy.

I'm it. And I wonder if people haven't quite totally grok that, which was why I looked at my job at that point, even though as I was under emergency evacuation, was that I was having to go and try to get stuff back on the air so people could hear it if the county was going to get information. Well, their old emergency manager didn't put out anything. And I also think they didn't really know where to send people because the flames were so wild and so just outrageous.

It's just one of those things. We've learned a lot from that. My concern though is I don't know if it's really wise to throw everything into the cellular network because I remember how spotty cellular service got because towers were burning down too. And charter internet burned down in sections of Southern Oregon too. And people ran out of that. Multiple ways of getting the information out, especially when you have serious, serious... No, I understand you just have one neighborhood emergency, maybe you don't put it

on the EAS. But when you're having these big ones, I think it would behoove us to use those tools, okay? Or you get official county information, police information, you know, on there right away. All right, 770-5633-770-KMMED we can talk more here in just a bit. Introducing sweet February favorites at Artisan Bakery Cafe try their cherry almond. 10 before 9 7705633 a little bit of open phone time left on conspiracy theory Thursday. No conspiracy gold is still sitting there above 2900 or so and if you're looking to get some scrap gold, scrap silver sold, and just not have it sitting around getting wasted,

don't let the opportunity pass you by. Head over to Jay Austin and Company Gold and Silver Buyers in Ashland, 1632 Ashland Street, 6th and G in downtown Grants Pass. Big friend of the show, one of my oldest sponsors and serious supporters of Talk Radio and your ability to learn the news, learn what's going on and also join in the conversation. Those are the kind of people that they are. Now you might be one of those things and saying, I don't want to sell. I'm kind of holding on for dear life right now because I'm thinking that maybe it's war around the world and the gold's coming here and maybe they're not going to be able to get the budget under control. I don't know. Well, you can buy two, one way

or the other. It's pure capitalism, great people, and if you're looking to, you know, keep that store of value to protect your wealth, Jay Austin, the people to talk to. Ashlyn Grants Pass, FortuneReserve.com. Let me go to, I think we got Greg. Greg, give me a quick one on the conspiracy of trying to keep us out, get us off the rural lands. Go ahead. Well, you know, people are either disingenuous, ignorant, or just flat out lying when they say that there's no conspiracy to move people into town. So back in the 90s, I had the occasion to contact a lawyer, a very good one, named with Manville Heisel, over a land issue. And here's what he told me.

He said, they don't want people living out in the country. They don't have enough control over, they wanna move them into town or they have more control. And he said this, this is the important part. He said, if they did it all at once, there'd be a great outcry and they couldn't do it, but they can do it one at a time. One at a time and whether it's, okay, yeah,

whether it's through zoning, whether it's through the inability for you to insure your property. It's all kind of connected is where you're going, right? Yeah. Okay. All right. Greg gets a very good point and that attorney you had was very wise. He's right.

So, there's no denying this. So, when you have people talk to you about their legislation, say, well, this is not designed to get you off the land. It doesn't matter who wasn't designed by you, it's what it's doing. So, what's the difference? We talked with Brad. Brad, you wanted to talk about Trump's attack again on the money fountain of public employee unions. Go ahead.

Bill, you're absolutely right. You know, the answer is 1979. And the question is, when was the United States Department of Education created? That was 1979. 200 years, we won two world wars, Vietnam, Korea War, all kinds of things before this gigantic monster was created by Jimmy Carter in 1979.

What Trump wants to do is return control back to the states, back to where the students actually live. And the reason it terrifies the left is, is this is one of the major sources of their revenue is this gigantic, amorphous, money-hungry organization known as the National Department of Education. They are absolutely scared to death. Not only do they use it to leverage their influence of our students

and education policy, but it is literally at the heart of their money-making machine. That's also why it's, I mean, returning control to the state of Oregon will not necessarily help our students though, but it will certainly help other students in other states that are more sensible to at least start staunching the bleeding. It will help us in this way. What it's going to do, Bill, is it's going to turn off gigantic amounts of out-of-state money that have been funding progressive leftist candidates in our state and giving our genuine local candidates a much better chance of being elected to seats that they would otherwise win without the influence of all this out-of-state money. Very good. I hope you're right about that,

Brad. 7705633, good call. Let me go to the next line here. Conspiracy Theory Thursday. Who's this? It's Joel from the gate. Joel, go. Okay. Some of the biggest scams ever is the Federal Reserve. It's a play on words just like Planned Parenthood and Black Lives Matter. It's exactly opposite to what they claim to be. They fleeced America for the last hundred years and God knows they've done a good job of it. Would you be in favor of Rand Paul or Ron Paul preferably auditing it as there's been talk about this? Yeah.

And the Treasury Department should actually handle all the bulk of the situation. All right. Thanks for your call there. Let me grab one more. Morning. Hi, who's this? Hey Bill, Deployment Patrick here. Good morning.

DP, take it away. Hey, thinking about this thing of alerting people to emergency situations, and you've expressed concern, I think rightly, some people are out there in the woods and they don't care about their outside world. They don't even have, maybe they don't have a cell phone or maybe it doesn't work. Maybe they don't care, but maybe they would care if they knew it was coming. What's your thought on talking about a helicopter with a huge loudspeaker that could fly a grid and let people know, or even a fixed wing airplane which might be able to fly as slowly as 60 miles an hour and just blasting to everybody and then they're neighbors and

yes it's kind of low-tech it's interesting I don't know how much noise or how much audio power it would take to actually have an airplane or a helicopter with speakers pointing down I wonder how capable that would be. The power would be a concern. Yeah, yeah. You'd need pretty big audio power, big speakers. You know, it's probably something that would help out there in those rural lands. You kind of got me intrigued about it. I'd have to think more about it, but it's something different other than yet something else on the cell phone. Okay? How about that?

Alright, thank you for the call, Patrick. I appreciate it.