Oregon 46 Oregonians' guns seized in name of safety under new law

[Joe Link]

46 Oregonians' guns seized in name of safety under new law

Read More

 

[Basedgreaser]

Alot to think over in this article

 

[SUPER X]

Now it's a privalige and not a right.

 

[Kruel J]

Well, if they people truly brandished guns and made threats to shoot people then I say they don't represent responsible gun owners very well.

Shooting themselves? That's their choice.

 

[whitney]

46 Oregonians' guns seized in name of safety under new law

Within the cited article is another link worth reading.
Shots Not Fired: A new Oregon law takes guns from people who may do harm
I would be interesting to gather the statistics with regard to the use of these "red flag" laws.

~Whitney

 

[MasterChief]

"The Oregonian/OregonLive noted that the new law does not require people subject to gun removal orders be referred to mental health professionals..."

So what is the real reason....confiscation.

@usausausa has it correct.....diminish your rights to privileges.

 

[JRuby]

Society cannot allow for those that do not conform to exist as they represent a danger to society and those that have the keys. This is only the beginning of what the future norm will be and the message is that those who believe in rights and self protection are as out of date as chamber plots. I will not be disarmed as long as I have a say in the matter even if it makes me a criminal.

 

[WoodsPlinker]

Yeah because legal action has worked so well for the rape, murder, and drugs in our prison system that it never ever happens between inmates.

Their actions are pointless.

 

[Basedgreaser]

Donestic abuse cases can be verrrry flimsy.
However if it can be substantied that you made legitimate threats to harm someone, well thats another tough call.

The true intent of words is difficult to prove at best, what is the criteria for a real threat? I dont trust any agency or court to determine that effectively they may get it right when it counts sometimes- sometimes the key word

 

[DuneHopper]

I see nothing in this article that holds water or weight. The justice system is required by law to show clear evidence of a crime.
If under the law, clear evidence was given, well there ya have it.

I truly hate the news heading...
guns seized in name of safety under new law

Ya well, drugs are seized from drug bust, why? Because a law was broken, if you are using the firearm unlawfully you play stupid games get stupid prizes. The media only has what is given to them to grandstand.... I wont take articles in this media serious.

 

[Coloradocat]

Little by little ,one by one.it might take 50 years but they won't rest until they get it done.
Coming to your house and taking them by force will get messy.
If they pass laws to take from this group ,because they are lawbreakers ,we all let it pass.
Then they make another law to take it from someone else... It's not me so it's ok.
WHO IS NEXT?

 

[Pete F]

It is still not constitutional because there is no "due process." We are depending on someone else's opinion to confiscate the person's guns. Can you really draw any conclusions on whether the law is just, or legal? Just because law enforcement classifies it one way (suicide) to justify their actions and the Oregonian buys in, doesn't make it right. It may however make some great biased statistics.

 

[HuckleberryFun]

In some ways similar to the British legal system's ASBO
(Anti Social Behavior Order) in which civil restraining orders can be imposed for everything from suspicion of crimes to mere rudeness.
If it *seems* you might be a problem then just nip you in the bud.
It sure looks like that's the direction we are going, and not just in regard to firearms but across the board.

Anti-social behaviour order - Wikipedia

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

The Oregonian/OregonLive noted that the new law does not require people subject to gun removal orders be referred to mental health professionals

As I have always said, all they care about is taking the guns. After that, they could give a $#!^ if the person kills themself with a rope, a car or off a bridge. There is no follow up.

Accused principal bought gun before death, causing lockdown

 

[bgdawgrr]

So, what do you have to do to get your guns back?

 

[SUPER X]

"The Oregonian/OregonLive noted that the new law does not require people subject to gun removal orders be referred to mental health professionals..."

So what is the real reason....confiscation.

@usausausa has it correct.....diminish your rights to privileges.

So, what do you have to do to get your guns back?

So, what do you have to do to get your guns back?

Be very wealthy and vote for the left

 

[Coloradocat]

You will never get them back nor will you be allowed to buy another.
Anti gun mind control is working...And the sportsmen and gun enthusiast numbers are getting smaller every year. The antis play the political game pretty good .We need to play it better if we are going to stand a chance.

 

[nwslopoke]

What I want to see is how many guns were confiscated in years before due process was removed. This makes people belive it never happened. It also doesn't take into account family members who took other family members guns for safety which is illegal now thanks to Kate. Thanks Kate.

 

[coop44]

Wtf?
Judge McKnight should take some remedial math courses.three quarters of seizures were due to domestic violence ,and one third were suicide risks according to her as stated in the article. Funny 75% plus 33% = 108%. Wtf?

 

[JRuby]

It is still not constitutional because there is no "due process." We are depending on someone else's opinion to confiscate the person's guns. Can you really draw any conclusions on whether the law is just, or legal? Just because law enforcement classifies it one way (suicide) to justify their actions and the Oregonian buys in, doesn't make it right. It may however make some great biased statistics.

The difference between something being constitutional or not is a 5-4 vote by the supreme court regardless of how we see it.