Help support alternative media by visiting our advertisers

Selkirk Mountain Real Estate

Oregon Wants To Ban All Self Defense

Senate Bill 554 will leave you completely defenseless

Oregon Wants To Ban All Self Defense

Oregon Wants To Ban All Self Defense

by Shari Dovale

Oregon Marxists are attacking the Second Amendment AGAIN. They have another citizen-control bill (AKA Gun Control) in the Senate scheduled for a remote hearing on February 22nd. But this one goes so much further than their usual. This bill wants to take away all of your rights to protect yourself, and leave you completely defenseless.

Senate Bill 554 would make you a felon without even realizing it.

limiting or precluding the use of the affirmative defense … concerning the possession of firearms in public buildings … by persons licensed to carry a concealed handgun

Even possessing an unloaded firearm can get you a Class “C” felony.

The bill redefines “public buildings” to include the private residence of any state official, and the grounds adjacent to each building. It also includes the passenger terminal, and grounds adjacent, of a commercial service airport.

Their definition of weapon is not just firearms, but any item used for self protection, including slingshots, baseball bats and pepper spray.

Oregon Firearms Federation has weighed in on this destruction of the Second Amendment:

This bill will make you a felon if you travel near an airport and have a firearm, even if you are a concealed handgun license holder.

There are no exceptions and you do NOT have to enter the terminal or even leave your car.

If you pick up a friend or family member and just drive near the terminal or parking lots you can be sent to prison.

But wait, there’s more. The bill will also make you a felon if you go near any loosely defined “public building” that has declared itself a self defense free zone.

We are not making this up. The bill also doubles the cost of a concealed handgun license, but you really won’t need one if this bill passes because it won’t be good in too many places.

Everyone should be paying attention to this bill. If they get away with it in Oregon, they will march it straight through the other states!

Wake up folks, and smell the Communism!

 

The views, opinions, or positions expressed by the authors and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions of Redoubt News. Social Media, including Facebook, has greatly diminished distribution of our content to our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting Main Stream Media sources. This is called ‘Shadow-banning’. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you. Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: paypal.me/RedoubtNews

15 Comments on Oregon Wants To Ban All Self Defense

  1. Shari look at what they have created with the CV and vaccine shams and illegal aliens here in Oregon ? Now they can legislate incognito with zero feed back in total privacy and control and how many illegal voters ? Ask Mike Nearman who told me illegal voters are not at all any problem ?

    I live in a good county on the east side but do not trust but a few REPs in Oregon and zero DEMs or the governors massive crew of lawyer henchmen, so I am leaving this year. Even many of the supposed patriots and so called conservatives here in Oregon are not at all what they claim to be mostly just from their own ignorance, so I have had enough and ready to move on to greener pastures with some credibility and hope ! I am willing to let these fools argue among themselves until they all have heart attacks shortly !
    http://www.downtoearththinking.com/dtet-is-seeking-new-digs–.html

  2. There are devices other than a firearm that are just as deadly but not classed as Firearms.
    I have my personal protection devices ready and NONE of them are firearms but just as deadly.

    • They mentioned that the bill will prohibit pretty much anything that can be used as a weapon. Maybe we can keep a sharp stick?

      • Right, just contemplate gun bans, what that means is the Matchlocks the Pilgrims landed with in 1604 would be outlawed.

  3. The problem is…the criminal element already extant in our state won’t abide by this B.S. either. Defensive weapons can also be used offensively and the whole thing could be replaced by a Big Sign: NO FIREARMS OR OTHER WEAPONS ON PENALTY OF FINE OR ARREST. Oregon has criminals in it and they will keep doing criminal stuff and The Government will have to keep shooting them. Sad, but there it is. No utopia. People are a-holes.

    • The problem is …. nobody has SUED for being harmed because the government denied them the MEANS of defense.
      ————-
      If they deny you the means of Self Defense they assume onto themselves YOUR 24/7/365 protection and 100% compensation and reparations for any injury or damage done to you by crime….
      You have been harmed? THEY PAY 100%
      ———————————-
      Following the “Common Sense” train of logic Obama&Co. is attempting to use to justify to remove the 2nd Amendment ….. “Common Sense” says most crimes are committed by “Black males”, therefore according to Obama&Co, since “Black Males” commit most crimes ALL Black males should be incarcerated ….. since Obama&Co. are throwing out Amendments, the 13th should be thrown out.
      —————————————-

      ———–
      If they won’t protect their own police stations how likely they will protect YOU?
      The government has NO obligation to protect you.
      Self Defense is Your duty and if your MEANS of self defense are taken ……
      Cops carry guns to protect themselves, not you.
      The US Supreme Court has REPEATEDLY confirmed that the police have NO, ZERO, ZIP, Constitutional obligation to protect you. The police can stand right there and watch you be beaten to death and they have NO responsibility to lift a finger to help you. Just ask Reginald Denny.
      ” “On Tuesday, June 4, the village council awarded a contract to the —— County Sheriff’s Office for the supply of public safety services,”” PUBLIC Safety Services. ………………. NOT INDIVIDUAL Safety Services …… PUBLIC.
      https://resistancetononsense.wordpress.com/2018/06/29/our-preexisting-irrevolkable-right-of-self-defense/ Among the numerous decisions/rulings, Warren v. District of Columbia basically sums it up ruling that a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.“ In other words, police have NO OBLIGATION to protect anyone. Another seminal case establishing the general rule that police have no duty under federal law to protect citizens is DeShaney v. Winnebago County. Other cases include but aren’t limited to Castle Rock v. Gonzales, Davidson v. City of Westminster, Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department, Hartzler v. City of San Jose, Linda Riss v. City of New York, Susman v. City of Los Angeles, Zinermon v. Burch and South v. Maryland such that it’s established ‘law’ that, quite simply, judicial remedies are not available for the police’s failure to protect any Citizen. In other words, if someone is injured or killed because they expected but did not receive police protection they’re simply shit-out-of-luck as the saying goes because the courts, including the highest court in the land, have ruled again and again, that law enforcement has no legal or moral responsibility to protect ANY individual Citizen. So, let’s put all this law enforcement “To Protect & Serve” fantasy land BS in the trash can where it belongs.
      The only time they do have to protect you is if you are in their custody. So whom is the party they “Serve and Protect” if not the individual ? Your corporate masters , you bunch of slaves.
      https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/police-blew-up-an-innocent-mans-house-in-search-of-an-armed-shoplifter-too-bad-court-rules/ar-AAJzs8t Police blew up an innocent man’s house in search of an armed shoplifter. Too bad, court rules.

      • I have noticed from a while back, most of the Code Enforcers vehicles AKA “police” cars, no longer have that motto on the rear quarter panels or above the state/city seal on the vehicle doors “To Protect and Serve”. Most of the Simps do not understand, as you have proficiently pointed out with actual cases, “police” have no legal obligation to protect you the private citizen unless you the private citizen are in their custody. Thanks for the case references.

  4. The one right in the Bill of Rights that says “shall not be infringed” is the one RIGHT Xiden is going after.
    Find one government in all of history that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.
    Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
    Oppressive Governments ALWAYS ban the People’S RIGHT to arms.
    The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.
    The only reason for the Second Amendment is to clearly spell-out the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of INDIVIDUALS to keep & bear ARMS
    The only reason for the BILL(list) of RIGHTS was to codify INDIVIDUALS’ GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
    Has there ever been a government that was not chock full of it’s “rights” up to and including declaring itself to be the Lord God Almighty?! (Rome, Egypt, Israel,etc)
    Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches? Try shutting up any Politician. But THEY would LOVE to shut YOU up, hence the FIRST Amendment.
    Anyone who tells you the 2nd Amendment applies to the Army or State Militia, is telling you they think you are STUPID.
    There has NEVER been a government that felt it had to codify it’s army’s/soldier’s “RIGHT” to “Keep and BEAR ARMS” because there has NEVER been a government that refused to allow It’s own soldiers to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!
    The Second Amendment was written for the People, like the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights. This was confirmed by the SCOTUS in the DC vs Heller decision, where they stated that the “People” in the Second Amendment were the same “People” that are mentioned in the First and Fourth Amendment.
    The 2nd Amendment clearly codifies the “right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms”, and certainly not “the Militia”.
    Why would “the Militia”, a type of army manned by citizen-soldiers as opposed to full-time “regulars”, need a constitutional amendment to guarantee they have the right “to keep and bear arms”?
    Is there any specific statement anywhere in the Constitution that the army Congress is empowered to raise has the “right to keep and bear arms”? Of course not. …………. That is assumed.

    If I can VOTE without ID because “one the of most basic and sacred rights guaranteed by the Constitution: the right to vote” Then I can BUY A GUN without ID because THAT is “one the of most basic and sacred rights guaranteed by the Constitution” TOO! If POLL TAXES and LITERACY TESTS are Infringements on the right to vote everything proposed is an infringement on the 2nd Amendment
    the 2nd amendment,, specifies that the RIGHT to bear arms is the right of the people,, NOT the militia,,,, it is the people who will make up the militia,, but the right is not the right of a “well regulated militia” it is the right of the people, We the people were BORN WITH UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, meaning they come from GOD.

    … the Bolshevik-Left insists there is NO GOD so they can deny all your GOD given RIGHTS.

    Your Rights do not come from the Constitution. Your Rights come from Our Creator, and the Constitution was written to SUPERVISE, REGULATE, and CONTROL government actors. As it relates to firearms, the Heller “decision” was completely unnecessary, and likely a smokescreen to make it APPEAR that the USG retained some rights to regulate some firearms. Check out the relevant part of US v. Cruikshank:
    “[The Right to Keep and Bear Arms] is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed;… This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government,…”.

  5. Yeh Oregon is gone and the REPs in Oregon let it all happen just as thee did in DC ! Can’t say I did not warn you all , Chris you dumb ask !

    This is what happens when you align with the wrong people in ignorance !

Comments are closed.