Posted on 11/16/2018 5:22:13 AM PST by deandg99
At least 46 Oregonians have been ordered to surrender their guns under a new type of court order intended to stop suicides and mass shootings, law enforcement and court officials testified to state lawmakers Wednesday.
Ten of the cases affect people in Multnomah County, where authorities have seized more than 50 guns from people found to pose a danger to themselves or others, Mike Reese, the county sheriff, told a joint meeting of the Senate and House judiciary committees. Washington County follows with at least eight cases, then Josephine County, with at least seven, according to documents submitted to the committees.
In a June news story Shots Not Fired, The Oregonian/OregonLive reported on the first several dozen gun seizure orders issued under the new law. The newsrooms analysis showed judges ordered guns seized mostly from people affected by substance abuse, anger or mental health problems. Research presented to lawmakers Wednesday indicates that trend has continued.
(Excerpt) Read more at dcclothesline.com ...
RIP due process
...seized more than 50 guns from people found to pose a danger to themselves or others...
Of course they didn’t take guns from violent career criminals, since their intention is to take guns from non-violent citizens so the violent ones can waltz right in and take what is “rightfully” theirs from their “oppressors.”
The communists “found” a lot of people to be mentally insane back in the day as well.
An influx of true Patriots into Red-states will protect those states from a Blue invasion and fortify a base of operations to take back our country. Theoretically.
I would bet there are a lot of gun owners who pose no threat to anyone - unless and until someone tries to take away their rights. Seems like this “law” is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is going to incite people to make dangerous decisions and statements.
“Define found.
Defined by whom???? Not surprising, no due process by the courts on the LEFT COAST! LORD, I am so glad that I don’t live on either COASTS.
So, a crazy ex-girlfriend says you own an “AR-47” and you are going to shoot up a mall, and you are, by definition, “found” to be dangerous. ;)
I honestly think that is what they are suggesting.
I call BS.
They’re probably conservatives.
I’m of two minds about this. On the one hand the possibilities for abuse are obvious. On the other hand I personally know of a case where this became necessary. The husband of my wife’s friend had a large firearm collection. His worsening dementia made him a clear threat to himself and others and his collection was finally confiscated.
In Maryland, there have been 118 cases. This was reported when one of the confiscations ended up with a dead gun owner courtesy of the police.
On it’s face, the concept of red flag laws is sound, but there is absolutely no way in the world to assure that the complaints are real and not a set up, with guns being confiscated from totally innocent people.
It’s a serious infringement of a Constitutional right.
But, on the other hand, it’s a really cool and fun way to use all the neat SWAT gear. Cause, you know, you wouldn’t want to just go knock on the door and present the warrant.
Maybe the answer here is to “agree and amplify.”
Instead of whining about the law, use it against them. Red flag judges, cops, bureaucrats, anyone involved in the process. Make them own it.
Confiscated? Stolen. At minimum a dealer should have been contacted to purchase the collection.
Slowly but surely cancer consumes its host.
Wasn’t there a movie where they “knew” you were about to commit a crime and they arrested you first?
I don’t disagree with these types of laws as long as there is due process in a reasonable amount of time.
Good idea. Use Alinkssky’s tactics against them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.