Oregon Governor Preparing to Sign Gun Confiscation Law

Oregon Governor Preparing to Sign Gun Confiscation Law

Oregon Governor Preparing to Sign Gun Confiscation Law

.

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown is preparing to sign a bill allowing gun confiscation based solely on someone’s hearsay complaint.

.

Law would allow gun confiscation without due process

.

Oregon Senate Bill 719 will allow legally-owned guns to be confiscated from their owners, simply by filing a hearsay complaint against the gun owner. Confiscation would occur before the gun owner is permitted a hearing on the matter, and the seized guns would only be returned if the gun owner successfully appeals the confiscation order.

.

Predictably, all but 4 democratic senators voted in favor of the bill, while every republican senator but one voted against the bill.

.

The sole republican voting for the bill, Sen. Brian Boquist (R-Dallas, Oregon), claims the law will “reduce veteran suicides”. Despite such noble claims, Oregon judges would be permitted to issue the order based on any number of unrelated events or hearsay allegations, such as a past drunk driving arrest, unsubstantiated allegations of drug use, or even engaging in a constitutionally-protected activity such as purchasing a gun within the past 180 days. Essentially, if the petitioner has a sufficiently convincing ‘story’, or the court is already sympathetic to anti-gun rhetoric, they would be permitted to issue an order to legally seize someone’s guns.

.

Paul Phillips, President of Oregon Gun Owners, noted the hypocrisy and underlying purpose of the bill. The bill, he says, will do little to prevent ‘suicides’. What it will actually do, under the guise of ‘suicide prevention’, is deprive Oregon gun owners of their legal rights under the second amendment. Gun confiscations, he says, will be “based on hearsay evidence alone, and the firearm owner is not [even] privy to a fair trial.”

.

Under the bill, any person would be allowed to file a petition with the court for an “extreme risk protection order” against anyone else they happen to be related to, or living with. A hearing would occur within one day of the petition being filed.

.

In addition, an Oregon police officer would be permitted to petition for an order against anyone they deem to be a danger to themselves or others. In other words, for the first time in Oregon history, a state agency will have been granted authority from the state to remove a citizen’s property and deprive them of a constitutional right, without permitting that citizen either advance notification or due process under the law.

.

If the petition is granted, a confiscation order would be immediately issued and officers would be dispatched to seize the guns. The subject of the order has no right to contest the order before their guns are confiscated. Their only option will be to initiate a costly, lengthy appeal process after the order has been issued; after their guns have been confiscated, and hope they are successful before their guns have been destroyed.

.

Seizure may occur based on hearsay alone

.

If signed into law, Oregon judges would be permitted to order someone’s guns to be confiscated based solely on someone else’s hearsay complaint. No actual evidence must be presented other than the petitioner’s verbal allegation of some possible future harm or some non-substantiated fear. While filing a “false” report would be a misdemeanor, proving a false report would be next to impossible since all a petitioner needs to do is claim to be “afraid” or “worried” about the gun owner being in possession of a gun.

.

The petitioner does not need to provide any actual evidence, such as a mental health evaluation, to satisfy the requirements for confiscation. They need only have a convincing story and a sympathetic judge. The lack of any evidentiary requirements, and the broad non-specific description of potential petitioners, opens the door for a host of abuses and unjustified seizures, which is undoubtedly the underlying intent of the bill.

.

An angry roommate could enact revenge against a fellow resident, separating them from a cherished hunting rifle, simply by filing a petition alleging, “I think he is depressed and may commit suicide.” Similarly, a jilted spouse can approach a judge with a convincing story, and then watch smiling as the police confiscate her husband’s prized handgun collection before serving him with the divorce papers.

.

Once their guns have been confiscated, the gun owner must then convince the judge to return them. This will be no small feat considering Oregon has some of the most rabidly anti-gun jurists in the nation. Oregon Judge Kenneth Walker, for example, famously said in court last year, “No one would have guns. Not police. Not security. We should eliminate all of them.”

.

Read More: https://2anews.us/due-process/2017/0…fiscation-law/

.

My Thoughts:

.

This isn’t going to turn out well.


Source: USA Carry

Leave a Comment