What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

New law has taken effect in Oregon, requiring “unattended” guns to be locked in the home

basquebromance

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
71,039
Reaction score
13,375
Points
2,220

As the bill was being considered, opponents of gun lock requirements testified of having loved ones who had needed a gun for self-defense, but who were unable to access their firearm because it was locked. Lawmakers didn't care.
 

JGalt

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
40,202
Reaction score
30,024
Points
3,635
Well this brings up an interesting challenge. I'm assuming that a firearm you're carrying or wearing wouldn't be construed as "unattended", right? So how many firearms could a person wear at a time, given enough holsters and slings? I'm guessing maybe 87 or so.
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
91,324
Reaction score
30,823
Points
2,250
Heller already addressed this.
 

Wild Bill Kelsoe

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
2,237
Reaction score
1,780
Points
1,908
I'm all about security, but there doesn't need to be a law mandating it.
 

Otis Mayfield

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
837
Reaction score
803
Points
873
Legislators have brought guns into the Oregon State Capitol for personal protection. Protesters have carried semi-automatic rifles onto the grounds and into the building.

Later this year, doing so will be outlawed under a bill signed Tuesday by Gov. Kate Brown that was earlier passed by the Legislature, with Democrats in favor and minority Republicans opposed. The new law also mandates the safe storage of guns.

"Today, I am signing SB 554 with the hope that we can take another step forward to help spare more Oregon families from the grief of losing a loved one to gun violence," Brown said on Twitter.

The bill was named for Cindy Yuille and Steve Forsyth, who were slain in a shooting at a Portland-area shopping mall in 2012 by a man who stole a friend's AR-15 rifle. A third person was seriously wounded.

Among those who testified in favor of the measure was Paul Kemp, Forsyth’s brother-in-law.

“I will never forget the screams I heard when we had to tell my teenage nephew that his father had been killed at the mall,” Kemp said.



Is this the same law?


I said "mass shootings" were driving gun control.

Looks like killing a few people at random will get gun legislation passed too.
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
91,324
Reaction score
30,823
Points
2,250
Legislators have brought guns into the Oregon State Capitol for personal protection. Protesters have carried semi-automatic rifles onto the grounds and into the building.

Later this year, doing so will be outlawed under a bill signed Tuesday by Gov. Kate Brown that was earlier passed by the Legislature, with Democrats in favor and minority Republicans opposed. The new law also mandates the safe storage of guns.

"Today, I am signing SB 554 with the hope that we can take another step forward to help spare more Oregon families from the grief of losing a loved one to gun violence," Brown said on Twitter.

The bill was named for Cindy Yuille and Steve Forsyth, who were slain in a shooting at a Portland-area shopping mall in 2012 by a man who stole a friend's AR-15 rifle. A third person was seriously wounded.

Among those who testified in favor of the measure was Paul Kemp, Forsyth’s brother-in-law.

“I will never forget the screams I heard when we had to tell my teenage nephew that his father had been killed at the mall,” Kemp said.



Is this the same law?


I said "mass shootings" were driving gun control.

Looks like killing a few people at random will get gun legislation passed too.


It is a stupid law......simply designed to make morons feel better.....the AR-15 was stolen...which means if it was in a safe in the guys home the guy would have committed murder to get it or broken into the safe..

What they want to do is increase the cost for owning guns.....safes are not cheap...poor people who can barely afford their own gun, but need the gun the most since democrats keep releasing violent, murderous criminals into their neighborhoods over and over again, have little resources to begin with...

this is simply a way to attack poor people owning guns....
 

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
27,169
Reaction score
3,433
Points
290
Location
Where I can see you, but you can't see me
As the bill was being considered, opponents of gun lock requirements testified of having loved ones who had needed a gun for self-defense, but who were unable to access their firearm because it was locked. Lawmakers didn't care.
Per the USSC:

The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment ..... Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.

A legal requirement to lock up your guns violates the constitution.
 
Last edited:

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
91,324
Reaction score
30,823
Points
2,250
Per the USSC:

The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment ..... Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.

A legal requirement to lock up your guns violates the constitution.


Yep...this law is unConstitutional the moment they signed it....as per Heller....
 

Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
34,523
Reaction score
18,522
Points
1,915
Location
Tejas
Yep...this law is unConstitutional the moment they signed it....as per Heller....
And McDonald v. Chicago. Heller was only about D.C. McDonald applied it to the states through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$20.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top