JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
2,670
Reactions
3,464
SALEM, Ore. - Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum on Friday launched a new downloadable resource for Oregonians who are concerned about a family or household member who is in possession of a gun or other weapon.

Oregon's new "Red Flag Law," also called the Extreme Risk Protection Order law, allows a judge to issue an order that permits the court to take weapons away from people who are deemed a risk to themselves or others.

In conjunction with National Crime Victims' Rights Week (April 8-14), the Oregon Department of Justice released the new one-page handout to educate Oregonians about the new law. This downloadable one-pager highlights how the new law works, lists those who can request an order, and details the timelines for hearings, and how long the order is effective.

"Oregon's 'Red Flag Law' is one of the few tools we have to reasonably quickly remove a gun or weapon from somebody who is at risk," Rosenblum said in a news release.

"When we realized that not that many Oregonians seem to realize this law is an option, we decided to create a resource for Oregonians that was simple and easy to understand," she said.

"This law is not complicated, but its effects could be significant. I hope that by making people aware of the law and breaking down the steps involved in the 'Red Flag Law' process, we are able to help save lives," Rosenblum added

The attorney general noted that Oregon has become one of five states in the nation to have this type of law. The law is nicknamed "Red Flag Law" for when a person exhibits a 'red flag' or other indicator that they may cause harm to themselves, or others.

"Many of us are asking right now how we can better keep Oregonians safe and keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people. While there is still a lot of work to do, Oregon has made significant gains to strengthen our gun safety laws," Rosenblum said.

"his is the first in a series of one-pagers on these new laws. It is my hope that all Oregonians know about these laws so we can get guns and other weapons out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them," she said.

As part of honoring Crime Victims Week, the attorney general met with student leaders at the University of Oregon campus to discuss gun safety. She also toured two state-of-the-art domestic violence programs — the Center for Hope and Safety in Salem, and the Gateway Center in Portland.

In addition, she announced a name change of the Oregon Department of Justice Crime Victim Services Division to recognize the many victims of crime who consider themselves survivors. Going forward, it will be called the Crime Victim and Survivor Services Division.

Click here to download a copy of the one-pager: https://www.doj.state.or.us/redflaglaw
 
is there any provision for negative repercussions on the person making a FALSE "red flag" claim?

If not then a gun owner could make a claim against an anti-gun person and have the police tear their house apart looking for a non-existent gun anti-gun person has "hidden" after they make a threat, real or imagined.:s0149:

Then just sit back and watch the mayhem :s0093:


Edited to add what I figured was the unsaid but obvious...
... "Just askin', we're not like them so we wouldn't actually do that".:rolleyes:
 
Last Edited:
is there any provision for negative repercussions on the person making a FALSE "red flag" claim?

Yes. It is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by a maximum of one year's imprisonment, a $6,250 fine, or both to file a false report in order to harass someone. How that is established remains to be seen.
 
f not then a gun owner could make a claim against an anti-gun person and have the police tear their house apart looking for a non-existent gun anti-gun person has "hidden" after they make a threat, real or imagined.:s0149:

I'm not supporting this, but it does seem that it's at least limited to direct family or LEO to make a claim:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A law enforcement officer • Family member • Spouse • Intimate partner • Parent • Child • Sibling • Any person living in the household of the person they are concerned about can request an Order from the court.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Might exclude a psycho ex-wife or girlfriend...maybe...
 
I wonder just what the exact steps of this "Law" require? I would imagine a judge hearing this must have guidelines to follow before appoving action, RIGHT? Or, can the Cops preempt a judges order in the name of "Extreme risk protection" and then take it before a judge? Would the judge then act fairly after the fact? Just whay sort of chain of evidence must there be for this to even go before a judge? And can the Cops or others simply shop a judge?

Nope, don't see this being constitutionally egal, it bypasses due prosess of law, and puts the burden of proof of inncence on the defendant, not the way our Justice system is suposed to work! :eek::eek::eek:
 
I'm not supporting this, but it does seem that it's at least limited to direct family or LEO to make a claim:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A law enforcement officer • Family member • Spouse • Intimate partner • Parent • Child • Sibling • Any person living in the household of the person they are concerned about can request an Order from the court.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Might exclude a psycho ex-wife or girlfriend...maybe...

"Intimate partner" can be just about anyone making a claim, since you never get to know who the person is who filed the claim. For example, you could claim to be @Stomper 's ex gay lover and now feel threatened. He can't even say "Dude, I never even met @Bxc53 , let alone slept with him".


I wonder just what the exact steps of this "Law" require? I would imagine a judge hearing this must have guidelines to follow before appoving action, RIGHT? Or, can the Cops preempt a judges order in the name of "Extreme risk protection" and then take it before a judge? Would the judge then act fairly after the fact? Just whay sort of chain of evidence must there be for this to even go before a judge? And can the Cops or others simply shop a judge?

Nope, don't see this being constitutionally egal, it bypasses due prosess of law, and puts the burden of proof of inncence on the defendant, not the way our Justice system is suposed to work! :eek::eek::eek:

No judge will EVER find against a claim. If a Judge found against a claim and then the person actually did go on a shooting spree that judge would be be in very hot water, so they will take the safe route... for them personally
 
The definition of "intimate partner" that I found in the Oregon statutes is:

"Intimate partner" means, with respect to a person, the person's spouse, the person's former spouse, a parent of the person's child or another person who has cohabited or is cohabiting with the person in a relationship akin to a spouse.
So someone you dated briefly, but didn't live with, wouldn't count. However, the insane ex-spouse would.
 
I see nothing that anyone could not have done before. I was at two of these red flag hearings and did not hear one testimony where a gun was used.Just a lot of what if's. The Governor did use an example where the State issued a Restraining Order. That woman was murdered Christmas Day by her ex husband.

There are 3 options I've seen in the past that have worked. We can't say them publicly any more.
 
Last Edited:
Of the 2-3 cases I've heard about this being used in WA, all parties we're thankful that someone turned them in as they said they we're a risk to themselves and others. I'm sure someone will get caught in the crossfire but it certainly does impress one to be on his/her best behavior.
 
Dude wait, Stomper's gay??
I mean that's cool n all, to each his own, just didn't seem the type:s0136:

Nah, not really, there's just that one story about that time in a fox hole.... no, wait, just picki'n on him since he has the highest number of messages and likes in NWFA history, but to illustrate the point that anybody can CLAIM to be an intimate partner and since you will never know the name of your accuser let alone be accused to your face as consistent with all other matters pretty much anything goes.
 
Meanwhile, 37,641 innocent folks were killed in traffic accidents in 2016 alone. Close to 3,755,268 since records began. No move to ban cars. No red flag record-keeping on bad drivers. Can you imagine the bunched-up undergarments if 37K were shot in 2017? I mean, Chicago and DC were close, but still...
 
Meanwhile, 37,641 innocent folks were killed in traffic accidents in 2016 alone. Close to 3,755,268 since records began. No move to ban cars. No red flag record-keeping on bad drivers. Can you imagine the bunched-up undergarments if 37K were shot in 2017? I mean, Chicago and DC were close, but still...

Your thinking, STOP that! Any rational person can see common sense for what it is, it takes a special kind of powermad 5000 to ignore the facts you posted, and enact something as grose a violation as this is! Quite confusing facts with the narrative! LOL:D
Meanwhile in ch!tcago another shooting and another death because we cannot wrap our heads around simple truth and simple facts, we got get all draconian on the innocent and coddle Obummers people!

Not picking on ya!:)
 
"Intimate partner" can be just about anyone making a claim, since you never get to know who the person is who filed the claim. For example, you could claim to be @Stomper 's ex gay lover and now feel threatened. He can't even say "Dude, I never even met @Bxc53 , let alone slept with him".




No judge will EVER find against a claim. If a Judge found against a claim and then the person actually did go on a shooting spree that judge would be be in very hot water, so they will take the safe route... for them personally



Go read your screen name in a mirror, and carry out what it says.... spanky!


:s0124:







:D
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top