Oregon Dems push for Warrantless Searches

[Chaplain Scott]

Oregon Dems introduce bill banning modern guns and authorizing warrantless search
Oregon Dems introduce bill banning most modern guns and authorizing warrantless searches of homes
Thomas Lifson
February 23, 2013


......Two days after Senate Democrats claimed they would not seek a ban on modern firearms and feeding devices, Democrats in the Oregon House introduced just that.

Seven Senators joined with eight House Reps to introduce a sweeping ban on virtually all modern firearms. Among the Senators is, of course, Ginny Burdick, who claimed on Wednesday "that she is backing off an attempt to push through a bill on gun clips that she drafted following the December shootings at the Clackamas Mall." (snip)

HB 3200 not only bans most modern guns and magazines, it allows warrantless searches of your home, requires background checks and registration for a firearm you already own and as-of-yet undefined storage requirements. We say "a firearm" because even if you comply with the restrictions in this bill you may still only own one.

Read more: Blog: Oregon Dems introduce bill banning most modern guns and authorizing warrantless searches of homes
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

It likely would not pass the Courts, but it is very, very sobering that we have so many Legislators across the country who are willing to propose/vote for bills that are in violation of the Constitution--its like there is a plague of maddness sweeping across the country.

ON EDIT: I'm not sure that this is actually legit--I tried going to the Oregon legislative website and looked up HB 3200 and couldn't find anything, so, for now, take this with a grain of salt--I will look/research further in the meantime.......

On second EDIT: Yep--its true, here is the link to the official Bill: http://www.leg.state.or.us/13reg/mea...3200.intro.pdf

[MR2]

I wonder how long it would take for fifteen counts of treason to work its way through the Oregon court system?

[Utah Bob]

I think it was Washington that had section in a a bill the other day to allow the sheriffs to "inspect" homes where ARs were kept.
They pulled it when they got caught. Said it was a "mistake".
Damn right it was!

[Sohei]

Originally Posted by Utah Bob

...They pulled it when they got caught. Said it was a "mistake".

It's only a mistake when they get caught. Their form of plausible deniability.

[Utah Bob]

Just like the current Colorado legislation and rural counties.
But the turds in the punchbowl control both houses and the Governor.

I guess I'll just grow some legal dope and retire to the bunker.

[SF18C]

We need to get a "Shake my friggen head" smiley

[The Reaper]

Sure.

Let's apply it to everyone with medical marijuana as well, or a fast car.

TR

[Hambone933]

How long will it take before the Americans who do care about their Constitutional rights begin pushing back at their governments. As our VP stated,the average American doesn't car about their Constitutional rights. What really scares me, is the number of Law Enforcement agencies that will fall in line, when and if the government orders gun bans.

[Utah Bob]

Originally Posted by Hambone933

How long will it take before the Americans who do care about their Constitutional rights begin pushing back at their governments. As our VP stated,the average American doesn't car about their Constitutional rights. What really scares me, is the number of Law Enforcement agencies that will fall in line, when and if the government orders gun bans.

Sheriffs departments across the country have stated they would not enforce it. The Feds do not have enough people to do it. FBI, DHS, DOA and all the other alphabet agencies don't have enough boots on the ground to do it.

[Hambone933]

I am in agreement with you Utah Bob. But, here in NC, this week alone we had people that were voluntarily giving up there arms for a few bucks at a local police dept. with only a few people that will not give in to the pressure what are the odds of the government attempting to coerce states into taking those few, holdouts, arms from them, by witholding federal funds?

[Utah Bob]

Originally Posted by Hambone933

I am in agreement with you Utah Bob. But, here in NC, this week alone we had people that were voluntarily giving up there arms for a few bucks at a local police dept. with only a few people that will not give in to the pressure what are the odds of the government attempting to coerce states into taking those few, holdouts, arms from them, by witholding federal funds?

How excatly would that coercion work?

[Hambone933]

I'll use NC, if the budget that's proposed is dependent upon x number of federal dollars every year. Say for transportation and road maintenance, then without the millions promised, NC or any state would have a rather large budget shortfall. With a government looking to disarm or at least map every, so called, assault rifle. Those states would need to comply or find some way to produce that lost revenue.

[airbornediver]

Originally Posted by Hambone933

How long will it take before the Americans who do care about their Constitutional rights begin pushing back at their governments. As our VP stated,the average American doesn't car about their Constitutional rights. What really scares me, is the number of Law Enforcement agencies that will fall in line, when and if the government orders gun bans.

They won't because the majority of Americans are intellectually stupid. Hate to say it but it is a fact.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Hambone933

I'll use NC, if the budget that's proposed is dependent upon x number of federal dollars every year. Say for transportation and road maintenance, then without the millions promised, NC or any state would have a rather large budget shortfall. With a government looking to disarm or at least map every, so called, assault rifle. Those states would need to comply or find some way to produce that lost revenue.

No question there is a reckoning coming, and states will wake up (or not) and realize there is a price for whore-dom. Or, they'll roll over again. They are already being shown the crafted message re sequestration. Noting that, in its style, this was a CC: to the states, but the TO: line is the people in a given program. This may impact the number of replacement batteries in the Obamaphone Life Cycle Management Program.

[mark46th]

Funny how the liberals scream about invasion of privacy when it concerns their sacred cows but when it comes to the Second Amendment, they turn into illegal search and siezure monsters.