Oregon’s Latest Anti-Gun Law?
Russ Chastain 10.30.17
According to a recent article on Liberty One News, the state of Oregon has passed a law (effective January 1, 2018) which “allows all officials in the state of Oregon to order the removal of guns from the possession of free individuals. The gun owner isn’t given a hearing until after.” But is this law as scary as this article makes it sound? Well…
The law is based on Oregon State 2017 Senate Bill 719, which “Creates process for obtaining extreme risk protection order prohibiting person from possessing deadly weapon when court finds that person presents risk in near future, including imminent risk, of suicide or causing injury to another person.”
What it says is that any law enforcement officer, or any family member or household member, can file a petition asking the court to take away your right to own or even possess a firearm. The person petitioning doesn’t have to show up in person, but can request the order “by electronic video transmission.” And the petitioner has the burden of proof.
This sounds sorta okay at the surface. If someone believes there is a danger from someone–and they can prove it–the government will steal the dangerous person’s guns and his or her right to replace them, until that person is proven to not be a threat.
But something tells me the petitioner won’t actually be proving that the person is a threat; instead that the person fits one of the many qualifications allowing this sort of gun-grabbing:
(3) The petition for an extreme risk protection order must be supported by a written affidavit signed by the petitioner under oath, or an oral statement taken under oath by the petitioner or any other witness the petitioner may produce.
(4) In determining whether to issue an extreme risk protection order, the court shall consider the following:
(a) A history of suicide threats or attempts or acts of violence by the respondent directed against another person;
(b) A history of use, attempted use or threatened use of physical force by the respondent against another person;
(c) A previous conviction for:
(A) A misdemeanor involving violence as defined in ORS 166.470;
(B) A stalking offense under ORS 163.732 or 163.750, or a similar offense in another jurisdiction;
(C) An offense constituting domestic violence as defined in ORS 135.230;
(D) Driving under the influence of intoxicants under ORS 813.010 or 813.011; or
(E) An offense involving cruelty or abuse of animals;
(d) Evidence of recent unlawful use of controlled substances;
(e) Previous unlawful and reckless use, display or brandishing of a deadly weapon by the respondent;
(f) A previous violation by the respondent of a court order issued pursuant to ORS 107.716 or 107.718;
(g) Evidence of an acquisition or attempted acquisition within the previous 180 days by the respondent of a deadly weapon; and
(h) Any additional information the court finds to be reliable, including a statement by the respondent.
Here’s how the order will read:
To the subject of this protection order: An extreme risk protection order has been issued by the court and is now in effect. You are required to surrender all deadly weapons in your custody, control or possession. You may not have in your custody or control, purchase, possess, receive, or attempt to purchase or receive, deadly weapons while this order is in effect. You must, within 24 hours, surrender all deadly weapons in your custody, control or possession to (insert name of local law enforcement agency), a gun dealer or a third party who may lawfully possess the deadly weapons. You must, within 24 hours, surrender to (insert name of local law enforcement agency) any concealed handgun license issued to you. You may request a hearing to contest this order. If you do not request a hearing, the extreme risk protection order against you will be in effect for one year unless terminated by the court. You have the right to request one hearing to terminate this order during the 12 months that this order is in effect starting from the date of this order. You may seek the advice of an attorney as to any matter connected with this order.
So your rights can be snuffed without due process. If you wish to protest, you must first give up all of your guns and then you can only request ONE hearing to fight it, and it must be requested within 30 days of being served.
You would have the option to surrender your guns to a gun dealer or friend instead of to the government.
As soon as the order is issued by the court, served to the subject (respondent), and the government is notified that the order has been served, this happens:
Upon receipt of a copy of the order and notice of completion of service by a member of a law enforcement agency, the county sheriff shall immediately enter the order into the Law Enforcement Data System maintained by the Department of State Police and request that the order be entered into the databases of the National Crime Information Center of the United States Department of Justice. If the order was served on the respondent by a person other than a member of a law enforcement agency, the county sheriff shall enter the order into the Law Enforcement Data System, and shall request that the information be entered into the databases of the National Crime Information Center, upon receipt of a true copy of proof of service. The sheriff shall provide the petitioner with a true copy of the proof of service. Entry into the Law Enforcement Data System constitutes notice to all law enforcement agencies of the existence of the order. Law enforcement agencies shall establish procedures adequate to ensure that an officer at the scene of an alleged violation of the order may be informed of the existence and terms of the order. The order is fully enforceable in any county in this state.
So without any real proof or due process, your rights are erased and your name is recorded in numerous government databases.
If you do request a hearing within the 30 days, the court must schedule it within 21 days of your request, and they are not allowed to charge you a fee for it. Of course, you are going to have to dig up some dough somewhere if you wish to hire a lawyer to advise or represent you.
Oh, and during the hearing, the court gets to decide whether the guns you were forced to surrender will be returned to you or not.
Well, that’s the gist of it.
The article makes this statement:
The 14th amendment of the United States Constitution conflicts with the new Oregon law. The law refuses to give citizens due process and then steals their second amendment rights. This must be struck down immediately.
Do you agree?