Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be NO legislation which would abrogate them.
- Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436
I think this cop knew this guy was carrying a semi-auto, but wanted to leverage an Unconstitutional State law incorrectly and harass him by forcing a function test. I think this guy has mentioned on another video that this is a H&K .22LR (
http://www.hk22rimfire.com/index.php?page=mp5-a5 ) The LEO has had ****** training if he can’t tell a real MP5 and a fake HK $475 knock-off. The selector markings are flaming red/white on both sides and show semi-auto only pictograms. A 5 second glance, standing 7 meters away, while talking with the guy would have shown this to be a semi-auto only. Yes, the LEO presented a professional tone to carry out a perceived authority, but I think it was done in a Statist fashion to try to put a normal guy in his place. Many Liberal Fascists don't like this guy walking around promoting freedom and 2nd Amendment rights, and I bet a fair chunk of change that a lot of brainstorming went into how they could harass this guy and get him to move to a different community.
I agree with the other posting members who believe this Oregon ordinance regarding full-auto arms would basically give LEOs free reign to stop, detain, seize, search, harass, etc...Anyone carrying firearms would then be subjected to search/seizures to ensure compliance with some poorly written Unconstitutional ordinance.
Please note that it is also illegal to drive without a driver’s license on Oregon public roads, but LEOs cannot stop people to check for a driver’s license when they drive down the street safely. US v Deberry states that firearms where legally able to carry, cannot by themselves be considered RAS/probable cause for a stop. If you have the Federal paper work, they are LEGAL, if you don’t then they are illegal in Oregon. Pretty simple, especially since they guy can’t produce something for which paperwork does not exist, e.g. no Federal stamp for semi-autos…