question about home defense

[anhdoan307]

I'm a resident of Portland OR and an AR 15 owner. I'm currently stationed in camp Pendleton CA. my question is if someone tries to break into my house and endanger my family, can my dad pick up my AR 15 to protect the family? because i'm the one who bought the rifle not him.

 

[FatFugg]

Ya.

 

[Mark W]

Yes

 

[GixxerPete]

In OR you're fine. In WA, if the asinine should happen to 594 pass, your dad picking up that rifle without getting a background check first would be a misdemeanor. Then when he gave it back, it would be a felony, for both of you.

But that will 100% for sure stop mass shootings and all other gun-related crime from ever happening again, so it's totally worth it. :tard:

 

[sunofnun]

ya.. what pete said.

 

[Grnrngr]

Even with 594, I think the govt would have a hard time proving it wasn't dad's rifle to begin with. Even tho you bought it, it could have been as a gift to him at that time. But yeah, no such BS in OR.

 

[sunofnun]

Even with 594, I think the govt would have a hard time proving it wasn't dad's rifle to begin with. Even tho you bought it, it could have been as a gift to him at that time. But yeah, no such BS in OR.

thats a good point.

 

[RK600]

In OR you're fine. In WA, if the asinine should happen to 594 pass, your dad picking up that rifle without getting a background check first would be a misdemeanor. Then when he gave it back, it would be a felony, for both of you.

But that will 100% for sure stop mass shootings and all other gun-related crime from ever happening again, so it's totally worth it. :tard:

Wrong. The law specifically makes an exemption for immediate family members.

 

[PacTac]

Here is the law for use of deadly physical force..There does have to be a reasonable belief of serious physical injury or death by the actor with these as well. Don't mistake that with being "scared". No law in Oregon that would prohibit your father in law from using your rifle to protect your family or himself. I cover a lot of this in depth in my CHL classes and during force on force training classes we also do debrief on justification for the tactic employed.


161.219¹
Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person
Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209 (Use of physical force in defense of a person), a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or
(2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or
(3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]