The Pima County Democratic Party says that Ethan Orr “sided with the gun Lobby over Tucson. Disappointment doesn’t even begin to describe” how they feel about the freshman State representative. The Party issued a statement expressing their “disappointment and concern on the passing of HB2455.
HB 2455, which had been requested by Arizona Citizens Defense League, clarified that firearms voluntarily surrendered to a state or local entity cannot be destroyed and must be sold. The legislation was signed by the Governor on April 29.
According to the democrats, “This bill acted only to eliminate citizens from voluntarily surrendering firearms to city, county or state entities for safe destruction. We feel this bill directly targeted Tucson, the great work of our city council, and our successful gun buyback programs. What is worse, District 9 Representative Ethan Orr turned his back on gun safety and the City of Tucson by voting for this bill. He chose to side with the gun lobby and the Phoenix Republicans over his own community, even though he represents the very district where the Tucson shootings occurred.”
One democrat blogger wrote to Orr asking for an explanation of his vote. “Ethan Orr (R, LD-9) is my representative, so I emailed him criticizing his Yes vote on HB 2455 which forbids a city — like, say, Tucson — from destroying guns,” wrote David Safier. “The first paragraph is all about what a sensible guy he is, cosponsoring a bill with his Democratic LD-9 Rep Victoria Steele to put more money into mental health training — a good bill that never made it to a vote. He’s for expanding funding for school resource officers, meaning basically, more armed guards in schools, and — I’m not sure exactly what this means — “I’m currently working to change the allocation formulas to favor schools in the Tucson area.”
Safier continues, “We get to guns in the second paragraph. He says buyback programs are marginally effective at best, though I have no idea what that has to do with allowing a city to destroy guns it purchases in a buyback program. He then says he thinks nonprofits should organize buyback programs, though if they’re ineffective, why bother, and if it’s OK for them to destroy guns, why shouldn’t the city have that option as well? He also writes, if the city buys back guns, it makes sense to sell them to a legitimate dealer to generate money for the police. Well, that’s a fine idea if that’s what the city wants to do, but that doesn’t explain the need for a bill mandating the city resell the guns. This is classic Orr, semi-logical doublespeak that sounds like it puts us on the same side but means almost nothing.”
One former Republican supporter of Orr’s said, “Ethan has talked out of both sides of his mouth so often it is a wonder he can remember who he is pandering to from week to week.”