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

[BAC19]

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.

There is a LOT of room for interpretation in their approach - If there is factual evidence fine, but if you're determining who or who is not angry or may or may not be a threat it's a very fine line and subject to bias as you said by someone else's opinion. People who want to get a gun will find a way to get one whether you take it away or not. Their logic is maddening.

 

[nwslopoke]

The Gun Grabbers need people to believe if there are no guns, suicide and women's abuse will disappear as if windows, bridges, rope and pills don't exist. Ask Japan and Australia about that. As far as abuse, look no farther than the nearest prison. I mean state run gun free zone.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=241123316583932

 

[nwslopoke]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=241123316583932

Did that gun make you look guilty? Gun shaming just became a reality.

 

[Flymph]

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.

Yeah, just tip whoever has to clean it up... too bad people aren't a little more considerate about the mess they leave behind.

Wife beaters are such tough guys they don't need any guns, so who cares!

 

[titsonritz]

I feel so much safer now.

 

[RicInOR]

more:
Oregon's New Red Flag Law: State Confiscates Nearly 50 Gun Owners' Guns



I also note that CA has such a law, and it didn't stop the shooter last week.
Why California's "red flag" law didn't stop the Thousand Oaks shooter

 

[nwslopoke]

more:
Oregon's New Red Flag Law: State Confiscates Nearly 50 Gun

I also note that CA has such a law, and it didn't stop the shooter last week.
Why California's "red flag" law didn't stop the Thousand Oaks shooter

As the writer stated, "some" of the people who's guns were taken committed crimes yet they were not arrested. Perhaps since accusing a citizen of a crime is so much easier than proving they commited a crime, Multnomah country has figured out a loophole in the legal system. They do everything except actually jailing you. Now they remove your rights but you are still able to work, pay fines and be taxed.

No proof or witness accountability. They tell you the process is extremely fair. All is well until that one person figures out they have nothing to lose and goes all .02 cents for a rabbit.

 

[bsa1917hunter]

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.

I agree buddy. It could end up taking away guns from people that never committed a crime, but pissed off the wrong person at one time in their life. Doesn't matter when or why. Someone in your past could say you are a "red flag" risk and there goes your gun rights. Would we be like the man in Maryland that got shot to death by cops early in the morning, when they came in to "confiscate" his weapons. It makes me wonder how many "fights will ensue" between lawful and legal gun owners and police officers? A lot of us say we will fight to hold on to our rights and in reality, the man in Maryland tried defending his rights and was put to death right on the spot for doing so. Who's going to be next? You, me or anyone here that gets a little pizzed when our rights are infringed upon. There's a right way about going about this and a wrong way. All these new "red flag" laws is discriminating against us (gun owners) as a group. Will the NRA jump in and fight for our rights? Times are uncertain and it's a bit disturbing...

 

[Johnny Tremain]

I pity the fools that come and try and take what is mine.

"Got body bags..... Your going to need them" Col Troutman

 

[arakboss]

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.

If they had brandished a firearm and made threats to shoot people offensively, previous law would allowed the guns to be confiscated, right? I don't think the new law was necessary. But that is where we are....

 

[arakboss]

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.

China is on leading edge of this, with their new social rating program. Scary stuff.

 

[arakboss]

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.

Yep it's one persons word against another person who doesn't even get a word.

 

[awshoot]

In the picture in the article I see many scopes -- it's pretty easy to spend more on a scope than for the rifle. Aside from the problematic issue of red flag laws to begin with, all of the scopes should be returned because optics aren't firearms.

 

[arakboss]

In the picture in the article I see many scopes -- it's pretty easy to spend more on a scope than for the rifle. Aside from the problematic issue of red flag laws to begin with, all of the scopes should be returned because optics aren't firearms.

100% agree

 

[nwslopoke]

That is a thought. If there is no compensation, all non firearm parts should either not be confiscated or allowed to be stored separately. Since the lower part of an AR is the firearm that should be the part taken. If the person was able to source another lower he'd be able to source another gun all the same.

The courts and legislators trick of renaming things they don't have power over like firearms and make it something they can control like assault weapons or murder, is not murder when it's a medical procedure is getting old. They've fooled enough people where it's ok to ask out loud, if the constitution is even relevant in modern times.

These same pod eaters have already been tricked out of their clothes and dignity riding naked through Portland for some unknown cause. Those old like me may remember the intro to TV show 'The Outer Limits'. This is a test. This is only a test.

 

[arakboss]

That is a thought. If there is no compensation, all non firearm parts should either not be confiscated or allowed to ve stored separately. Since the lower part of an AR is the firearm that should be the part taken. If the person was able to source another lower he'd be able to source another gun all the same.

The courts and legislators trick of renaming things they don't have power over like firearms and make it something they can control like assault weapons or murder, is not murder when it's a medical procedure is getting old. They've fooled enough people where it's ok to ask out loud, if the constitution is even relevant in modern times.

These same pod eaters have already been tricked out of their clothes and dignity riding naked through Portland for some unknown cause. Those old like me may remember the intro to TV show 'The Outer Limits'. This is a test. This is only a test.

Good reason to store uppers separate from lowers

 

[cigars]

"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.

The real reason ultimately is absolute state control over individual rights.

 

[PaulB47]

Nothing to do with saving lives, other than the propaganda value of claiming that is so. It's all about creeping confiscation, the camel's nose in the tent.

When they come for your guns, it is an act of war. Doesn't matter if the lines are formed or not; YOUR battle is about to begin. Make sure the attempt is not cost-free on the gun-grabber side.

 

[JadeFox]

How sad we have to think about this. I read about the deal in Maryland. Sounds like the citizen may have been wound a little too tight. If you really intend to stand your ground against a mob of trained killers (police) save a body bag for yourself. I think keeping uppers and lowers separate is a good idea. It is only a matter of time before a disgruntled neighbor or previous partner learns how easy this law is. It is my opinion....for whatever it is worth, that firearms seizure will become more common as people discover how easy it is to use. There is no defense because there is no need for evidence or fact. There is no due process. Womens' issues and suicide prevention is a ruse. Batterers don't need guns. DV fatalities are more often from assault or strangulation. People intent on suicide always have a way. The anti's have painted a pretty diabolical picture of law abiding gun owners. If we stand up against these laws we are labeled and vilified as unstable and dangerous gun owners and they use us as further justification. It is all sick. I am leaving.