Oregon killing "Due Process"???

[Alan12013]

This conversation illustrates the importance of choosing the right judges in the jurisdiction we live. He is the lynchpin in this entire conversation and the definition of due process. How many of you even know the names of the judges that represent you let alone there positions on various issues? A bad law is only made worse by a bad judge. So few people even show up to vote today (particularly in smaller elections) and so few study down the ballot far enough to know anything about the judges we vote for it doesn't take much to elect or defeat any of them. Even appointed judges can be selected by the representives we vote into office. This kid that shot up the Florida high school should have had a psych exam and his guns taken away. There was plenty of warning that the authorities ignored. They should share in the responsibility for the actions he took. If some judge had stepped in and delt with the situation properly, many guys here would defame the judge........wrongfully so......it isn't like he was unknown and came out of the blue. I have my share of crazy past girlfriends and one really crazy ex wife so understand those issues as well as anyone but it was always a judge that protected me when I needed it. It should have been a judge (and law enforcement) that protected the kids in Parkland.........A representative republic like we live in requires participation in every conceivable way........way too many of us leave it up to other people to deal with the issues and challenges of society then complain when things don't go our way.

Even politicians do not study the constantly evolving common law. Enter NGOs / Watchdog groups. More of us need to become affiliated with these organizations who have intellectuals who study this stuff for fun out of intellectual curiosity then have the means to disseminate information to other likewise concerned individuals. Perhaps we should research any active groups like that in Oregon to promote. I haven't looked into it for this topic but think I might if I get the time. I'm sure the heritage institute helped trump out a lot with various appointments, not too sure about Gorsuch though...

 

[caarecengi]

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

So they can confiscate kitchen implements and toolboxes also?

 

[kschmadeka]

More reasons out of many already existing to stay single and have no family. Gov't is all about loading them up with weapons to use against you.

 

[caarecengi]

The person being accused is never allowed to know who filed the order . How can the be held liable if they are never revealed

THAT sounds like a violation of the 4th amendment where you are entitled to confront the witnesses against you.
Of course, the ACLU defends all the amendments to the Constitution except the 2nd one

 

[3MTA3]

THAT sounds like a violation of the 4th amendment where you are entitled to confront the witnesses against you.
Of course, the ACLU defends all the amendments to the Constitution except the 2nd one

They are selective about which aspects of the other amendments they do or do not stand up for. Hear the news that they are fighting FaceBook and YouTube over freedom of speech for conservative and firearm related suppression of free speech? Nope, that's because they aren't.

 

[SUPER X]

THAT sounds like a violation of the 4th amendment where you are entitled to confront the witnesses against you.
Of course, the ACLU defends all the amendments to the Constitution except the 2nd one

It is a blatant violation of 4th amendment rights . The false allegations are going to be plentiful when living is protected by law

 

[2A-Jay]

I may be wrong, but in reading this law, there are several references referring to the right of the Respondent to request a hearing to terminate this ERPO in which the Petitioner must I appear in person or by Video in which the Respondent would be able to identify the petitioner. This is enumerated in a few sections.