Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
GeePeeDoHolic
Joined
·
6,414 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,904 Posts
Oregon is a weird state anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,956 Posts
On April 18, 2017, Breitbart News reported that Boquist (RINO)was pushing this confiscation bill, and he emailed Breitbart News to suggest the bill simply puts forward a law that is popular in other gun-control states. For example, Boquist informed Breitbart News that a similar law “passed the voters in Washington by 70%.â€
Now laws get proposed and passed based on popularity? No regards as to whether it's moral, ethical or (horrors) constitutional?
 

·
Just a Man
Joined
·
6,065 Posts
Yes, Republican Sponsored -

Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2017/07/re...ed-to-anti-gun-oregon-governor/#ixzz4mFnMCoCs
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

USA â€" -(Ammoland.com)- “Today the Oregon House approved one of the most dangerous, hateful and mean spirited pieces of legislation ever introduced,†Oregon Firearms Federation alerted members Thursday. “SB 719 A, the product of Republican Senator Brian Boquist’s collusion with the most militant anti-gunners in the legislature, will now allow the police to come to your home and confiscate your firearms and ‘deadly weapons’ with no accusation or conviction of a crime. There is NO question this bill will cost people’s lives.â€

Boquist’s turning away from gun owner rights advocates who previously supported him weakens their already politically precarious position in “progressiveâ€-dominated Oregon. A former U.S. Army Special Forces officer, he previously enjoyed excellent ratings and support from gun owner rights groups. The catalyst for his conversion was the suicide by gunshot of his Navy veteran stepson.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
701 Posts
Lose basic rights based on LE statement or anonymous complainer. What could possibly go wrong?
 

·
American
Joined
·
3,289 Posts
Headed to the Federal Courts in a heartbeat IMHO:

Both the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibit governmental deprivations of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment serves three distinct functions in modern constitutional doctrine: "First, it incorporates against the various States specific protections defined in the Bill of Rights. Second, it contains a substantive component, sometimes referred to as 'substantive due process.' Third, it is a guarantee of fair procedure, sometimes referred to as 'procedural due process.'..." Daniels v. Williams (1986).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,360 Posts
Now laws get proposed and passed based on popularity? No regards as to whether it's moral, ethical or (horrors) constitutional?
ROFL :rotfl:
 

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
15,160 Posts
Now laws get proposed and passed based on popularity? No regards as to whether it's moral, ethical or (horrors) constitutional?
Only those that disarm and/or help control the population.

Nemo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
701 Posts
How much due process can you afford?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedDawnTheMusical

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,532 Posts
The devil is in the details.
As a general principle, people who are antisocial, irrational, angry, paranoid, etc. should have their guns seized and made to answer their accusers and explain-away, if they can, what evidence there is that prompted the government to invoke that "extreme risk protection" law.

The Second Amendment ain't for everybody. I think more people should lose their 2A rights over mental issues, even while I support restoring 2A rights for many convicted criminals, even felons (non violent felons in particular, whose crimes were long ago).
 

·
Swollen Member
Joined
·
11,969 Posts
'As a general principle, people who are antisocial'....'should have their guns seized'
'As a general principle, people who are irrational'....'should have their guns seized'
'As a general principle, people who are angry'....'should have their guns seized'
'As a general principle, people who are paranoid'....'should have their guns seized'
Authoritarian overdose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,956 Posts
gunsmoker said:
'As a general principle, people who are antisocial'....'should have their guns seized'

'As a general principle, people who are irrational'....'should have their guns seized'

'As a general principle, people who are angry'....'should have their guns seized'

'As a general principle, people who are paranoid'....'should have their guns seized'
Sounds like Democrats! :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,269 Posts
The devil is in the details.
As a general principle, people who are antisocial, irrational, angry, paranoid, etc. should have their guns seized and made to answer their accusers and explain-away, if they can, what evidence there is that prompted the government to invoke that "extreme risk protection" law.

The Second Amendment ain't for everybody. I think more people should lose their 2A rights over mental issues, even while I support restoring 2A rights for many convicted criminals, even felons (non violent felons in particular, whose crimes were long ago).
Oh so you're now against innocent until proven guilty?
 

·
NRA Instructor
Joined
·
3,391 Posts
If they have reasonable suspicion based on actual evidence to believe a person is a danger to themselves or others then get a warrant to seize their firearms. If you have 4 or 5 people informing and some social media evidence then take it to a judge. That is due process. If you have one person who makes the claim and no other evidence except their word then maybe go talk to them but otherwise leave them and their firearms alone. The person complaining may just be anti gun making trouble for some legitimate gun owner.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top