Oregon Governor Preparing to Sign Gun Confiscation Law

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,953
    Marylandstan
    https://www.usacarry.com/forums/pol...rnor-preparing-sign-gun-confiscation-law.html

    Law would allow gun confiscation without due process
    .
    Oregon Senate Bill 719 will allow legally-owned guns to be confiscated from their owners, simply by filing a hearsay complaint against the gun owner. Confiscation would occur before the gun owner is permitted a hearing on the matter, and the seized guns would only be returned if the gun owner successfully appeals the confiscation order.
    .
    Predictably, all but 4 democratic senators voted in favor of the bill, while every republican senator but one voted against the bill.
    .
    The sole republican voting for the bill, Sen. Brian Boquist (R-Dallas, Oregon), claims the law will “reduce veteran suicides”. Despite such noble claims, Oregon judges would be permitted to issue the order based on any number of unrelated events or hearsay allegations, such as a past drunk driving arrest, unsubstantiated allegations of drug use, or even engaging in a constitutionally-protected activity such as purchasing a gun within the past 180 days. Essentially, if the petitioner has a sufficiently convincing ‘story’, or the court is already sympathetic to anti-gun rhetoric, they would be permitted to issue an order to legally seize someone’s guns.
    .
    Paul Phillips, President of Oregon Gun Owners, noted the hypocrisy and underlying purpose of the bill. The bill, he says, will do little to prevent ‘suicides’. What it will actually do, under the guise of ‘suicide prevention’, is deprive Oregon gun owners of their legal rights under the second amendment. Gun confiscations, he says, will be “based on hearsay evidence alone, and the firearm owner is not [even] privy to a fair trial.”
    .
    Under the bill, any person would be allowed to file a petition with the court for an “extreme risk protection order” against anyone else they happen to be related to, or living with. A hearing would occur within one day of the petition being filed.
    .
    In addition, an Oregon police officer would be permitted to petition for an order against anyone they deem to be a danger to themselves or others. In other words, for the first time in Oregon history, a state agency will have been granted authority from the state to remove a citizen’s property and deprive them of a constitutional right, without permitting that citizen either advance notification or due process under the law.
    .
    If the petition is granted, a confiscation order would be immediately issued and officers would be dispatched to seize the guns. The subject of the order has no right to contest the order before their guns are confiscated. Their only option will be to initiate a costly, lengthy appeal process after the order has been issued; after their guns have been confiscated, and hope they are successful before their guns have been destroyed.
    .
    Seizure may occur based on hearsay alone
     

    Engine4

    Curmudgeon
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 30, 2012
    6,992
    Their only option will be to initiate a costly, lengthy appeal process after the order has been issued; after their guns have been confiscated, and hope they are successful before their guns have been destroyed.

    "Their only option will be to" fight back!

    Bullet box option.....
     

    5cary

    On the spreading edge of the butter knife.
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 30, 2007
    3,662
    Sykesville, MD
    I'm going to play Captain Obvious here...

    How will this ever pass constitutional muster?
     

    PharaohF4

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2010
    2,472
    but they are decriminalizing hard drugs like Heroin and Meth.

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/07/oregon-poised-to-decriminalize-meth-cocaine-and-heroin/


    The Oregon legislature passed two bills Thursday decriminalizing small amounts of six hard drugs, including cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and ecstasy.

    The first of the two bills now headed to the governor’s desk, HB 2355, decriminalizes possession of the drugs so long as the offender has neither a felony nor more than two prior drug convictions on record, according to the Lund Report. The second, HB 3078, reduces drug-related property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors.

    Republican State Sen. Jackie Winters claimed the war on drugs as it currently exists amounts to “institutional racism” due to how more frequently minorities are charged with drug crimes than whites.
     

    fidelity

    piled higher and deeper
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 15, 2012
    22,400
    Frederick County
    If the Oregon governor signs this crap into law, I hope the Civil Rights division of the DOJ goes after them.

    Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    34,001
    Oregon is just as wacky as California. Probably from the Californians who moved there to escape from the cesspool they themselves created.

    Look at their two senators, Wyden and Merkel. Looney tunes.
     

    iH8DemLibz

    When All Else Fails.
    Apr 1, 2013
    25,396
    Libtardistan
    The really bad part about giving them the bullets first/ammo box is that innocent police officers will be in front of those bullets. Hopefully, many of them will refuse to carry out any unconstitutional gun grabbing orders.

    And since the Oregon legislature felt the need to pass this law, they themselves should don tactical gear and go house to house demanding the firearms.

    Let them eat lead.
     

    Moon

    M-O-O-N, that spells...
    Jan 4, 2013
    2,367
    In Orbit
    I'm going to play Captain Obvious here...

    How will this ever pass constitutional muster?

    I suppose Oregon would claim that the numerous asset forfeiture laws that allow confiscation of property without due process set the precedent.

    I'm surprised it took this long for the anti-gun people to adopt a tactic of the anti-drug people.
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,517
    SoMD / West PA
    The really bad part about giving them the bullets first/ammo box is that innocent police officers will be in front of those bullets. Hopefully, many of them will refuse to carry out any unconstitutional gun grabbing orders.

    And since the Oregon legislature felt the need to pass this law, they themselves should don tactical gear and go house to house demanding the firearms.

    Let them eat lead.

    Connecticut passed the registration/confiscation law, and then blinked after realizing seizing arms in someone's home is not the smartest thing to do.


    Hopefully nothing will happen, and everyone comes to their senses.

    Those who do carry out the confiscation because they were following orders; well, the made their decision on where they stand...
     

    Brychan

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 24, 2009
    8,423
    Baltimore
    I'm sure the AG, and some other general assembly members even have a list of those who need their firearms confiscated.
     

    slybarman

    low speed high drag 9-5er
    Feb 10, 2013
    3,074
    I wonder what they would do if the word "gun" was replaced with "dog". The state can take your dog without due process if anybody alleges you aren't nice to it. I bet the citizens would freak the F out.
     

    5cary

    On the spreading edge of the butter knife.
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 30, 2007
    3,662
    Sykesville, MD
    I suppose Oregon would claim that the numerous asset forfeiture laws that allow confiscation of property without due process set the precedent.

    I'm surprised it took this long for the anti-gun people to adopt a tactic of the anti-drug people.

    Laws that allow asset forfeiture are built of possession of contraband or otherwise illegal activity. In this case, the guns would be legally owned and the only an "i gotta bad feelz" will be needed.

    I see where there are parallels, but I don't think it's the same.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,323
    Messages
    7,277,218
    Members
    33,436
    Latest member
    DominicM

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom