Oregon Senate Bill 719 creates an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO), which when issued by a judge, forces the subject of the order to hand over not only all firearms, but his concealed carry permit if he has one.
The order can result from an ex parte proceeding in which the gun owner is not required to be present to participate in the hearing in which the judge makes a decision to confiscate the firearms.
Opponents argue that the proceeding could rely on hearsay evidence and that it keeps the subject from confronting his or her accuser.
When questioned by Breitbart News in April, Boquist denied the bill is confiscatory. He noted it’s similar to a law “passed the voters in Washington [state] by 70%.” At the time, Oregon was considering three separate gun control measures in the face of fierce opposition across the state.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) opposes these measures in general because they deny the gun owner any due process of law before confiscating the firearm.
Based on a California law enacted in 2014, SB 719A would create a so-called “Extreme Risk Protection Order” (ERPO) that could be obtained by a law enforcement officer, family member, or household member in an ex parte hearing to deprive someone of their Second Amendment rights without due process of the law.”
Proponents argue the law is designed to protect people in risky domestic situations or get the weapons out of the hands of people who might pose a threat to themselves or others.
Boquist and the law’s defenders are adamant that the law and ones like it are not designed for confiscation. But the bill’s language is quite explicit:
Requires court to order respondent to surrender deadly weapons and concealed handgun license within 24 hours of service of initial order, and immediately upon service of continued or renewed order. Provides for law enforcement officer serving order to request immediate surrender of deadly weapons and concealed handgun license and authorizes law enforcement officer to take possession of surrendered items.”
Opponents note that the “immediate surrender” part of the law, without any due process, is the exact meaning of “confiscation.”
No doubt, the debate in Oregon and other states will continue as other jurisdictions see this type of law as a backdoor way to get more guns out of the hands of individuals who own them lawfully and have the appropriate permit to have them in those states that do not allow constitutional carry.
Source: Breitbart
Image: Oregon State
Three counties in Oregon decide what’s up for the rest of the entire state. Believe me, most Oregonians own guns. If$#%&!@*hit the fan in Oregon, the libtards would have a huge problem.$#%&!@*the browns! In Oregon and California!!!! Worst governors in history!
How long will that last?
Had our founders been as these Oregonians, there would be no America today.