Forum Post: Law Student Schools Uninformed Law Officer on Gun Rights (Video)
Posted 11 years ago on Feb. 24, 2013, 2:32 a.m. EST by kendallone
(-28)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Law Student Schools Uninformed Law Officer on Gun Rights (Video)
[Removed]
Wether it's about open carry or refusing to show your id t+ese types of videos are way too common. Nowadays it seems like the police harass people for things that are legal without even bothering to see if the law is on their side. It makes me proud of my countrymen whenever I see americans stick by their rights and make the cops walk away. My question is in cases like this is there a way to make sure the cop faces punishment. At the very least the cop shows he doesn't know the law and should not be in charge of enforcing the law he does not know.
Oregon is the latest state to draft legislation that puts major restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. House Bill 3200’s summary states the “crime of unlawful possession or transfer of assault weapon or large capacity magazine” is punishable “by maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment, $250,000 fine, or both.”
The entire first part of the bill tries to define an assault weapon. The definition will hinge upon one or more of the items in a list of cosmetic additions. Some examples include, “a shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the non trigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel.” Somehow that cosmetic addition makes a gun an assault weapon.
There has been much chatter about governments confiscating guns, and this law would give the Oregon government that power. Typically, such a law is not retroactive, but this one is applicable to those legally in possession of such “assault” weapons.
Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall, within 120 days after the effective date of this 2013 Act, without being subject to prosecution:
(b) Sell the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to a firearms dealer licensed under 18 U.S.C. 923 for lawful sale or transfer under subsection (2) of this section;
That section four (4) is scarier than the previous section. If a citizen wants to register the gun, they need to agree to some eyebrow-raising conditions. These include the following:
(4) A person may not register more than one assault weapon and three large capacity magazines under this section. Additional assault weapons and large capacity magazines must be disposed of in the manner specified in section (3) of this 2013 Act.
(5) A registered owner of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine is required to:
(b) Allow an inspector from the department to inspect the storage of assault weapons and large capacity magazines to ensure compliance with this subsection;
But the law violates another amendment. By Oregon's logic, in order to keep your 2nd Amendment rights, you must give up your 4th Amendment rights. If a citizen wants to have guns in his house, he has to agree to forfeit his right to privacy and allow an "inspector" into his house.
It appears Oregon is giving reason for citizens to cling to their guns and their right to privacy. The question is which state is next?
As usual Democrats are over reaching and now given enough rope they proceed to hang themselves in their imperious proclamations of gun and Constitutional rights grabbing.