Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Oregon: Gun Bills See Action in Salem

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by U201491, Apr 9, 2015.

  1. U201491

    U201491 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,857
    Likes Received:
    10,560
    header-logo-nra-ila.png

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150407/oregon-gun-bills-see-action-in-salem

    APPEARS IN Legal & Legislation
    Oregon: Gun Bills See Action in Salem
    Tuesday, April 07, 2015




    _0034_or.jpg
    More
    Tomorrow, April 8th at 8:30 a.m., the Senate Committee on Judiciary will be hearing several bills pertaining to firearms, including Senate Bill 299 and Senate Bill 636.

    Senate Bill 299, introduced by state Senator Ted Ferriolo (R-30), would expand the states in which Oregonians may lawfully obtain long guns for transport into Oregon, from neighboring states, to all other states, so long as the long gun is purchased or obtained in person.

    Senate Bill 636, sponsored by state Senator Tim Knopp, would reduce the minimum required age of concealed handgun license applicants to 18 years of age if the applicant is a service member.

    Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed Senate Bill 941 with minor amendments. This gun control bill seeks to expand background checks to private transfers. SB 941 is expected to maintain an expedited course through the legislative process. It is important that you please continue contacting your state Senator in opposition to this bill.

    House Bill 3093, introduced by state Representative Cliff Bentz (R-60), was heard in the House Committee on Judiciary yesterday afternoon. HB 3093 would provide individuals licensed to carry concealed in another state with the same protections provided to those licensed to carry concealed in Oregon, as long as the other state has no less stringent handgun competency requirements than Oregon.

    Your NRA-ILA will continue to keep you updated when more information becomes available.
     
  2. Uberdillo

    Uberdillo Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    128
    I don't see anyone talking about SB 525. Updated: Prohibits the following persons from possessing firearms and provides subsequent penalties
    • with restraining orders against them
    • who are convicted of domestic violence
    • or convicted of a misdemeanor involving the use of physical force.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2015
  3. Deebow

    Deebow Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    462
    Likes Received:
    815
    I am in favor of all of them except 941. Although the first one is hinky enough to put me on the fence.
     
  4. PiratePast40

    PiratePast40 Willamette Valley Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,097
    Likes Received:
    2,079
    According to Senator Courtneys office, the senate vote on 941 will be either Monday or Tuesday next week.
     
  5. PiratePast40

    PiratePast40 Willamette Valley Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,097
    Likes Received:
    2,079
    I don't see where it gives the power to confiscate firearms. In reality, after the judges decision, or if you know that it's coming, just have someone else keep your guns until the restraining order is lifted.

    However, the procedure to appeal that particular part of the decision is not spelled out.
     
    Dyjital likes this.
  6. Uberdillo

    Uberdillo Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    128
    Thanks for the correction. Do you have any more to add about the lack of procedure for appeal in this particular bill and whether there's likely a provision for that elsewhere?

    What purpose does it serve to introduce penalties like this that appear to be redundant with 18 U.S. Code § 922 (g)(9) which already defines such persons as prohibited and penalizes them to begin with?