As an Oregonian, I do my best to keep my fellow citizens here and across the country abreast of what is going on in my own backyard in terms of gun legislation. Unfortunately most of the time this is being talked about for Oregon it typically means we’re under threat of being further burdened with more unnecessary and toothless laws that only hurt the law-abiding, and do next to nothing, if anything to actually curb the source of the problem. The subject of today’s latest move against the law-abiding: SB 243.
More TTAG News Articles:
- Supreme Court Refuses To Block Illinois Assault Weapon Ban
- Colt/Georgia Partnership Targets Safe, Responsible Gun Ownership
- SCOTUS Won’t Consider Challenge To California’s Public Property Gun Show Ban
With that in mind, the Oregon Firearms Federation (OFF) has sounded the alarm on Senate Bill 243, a deeply restrictive anti-gun measure advancing through the Oregon legislature with alarming speed. According to OFF’s latest alert, SB 243 is slated for a public hearing on May 12 at 1 PM and a work session on May 14 at 1 PM in the Senate Committee on Rules. This bill, described as “pure harassment” by OFF, piles new burdens on law-abiding gun owners while emboldening criminals, further eroding Second Amendment protections in the state. How exactly?
SB 243 introduces a trio of punitive measures aimed squarely at Oregon’s firearm community. First, it imposes an additional mandatory waiting period for gun purchases, compounding the already significant delays created by Measure 114, Oregon’s contentious 2022 ballot initiative that mandated background checks and permitting systems.
Measure 114’s implementation remains mired in legal battles and pending legislation, yet SB 243 seeks to layer on further obstacles, potentially leaving law-abiding citizens waiting indefinitely to exercise their constitutional rights. OFF characterizes this waiting period as a clear manifestation of the “mindless hatred” Oregon Democrats harbor toward gun owners. Personally, I think it has more to do with blatant ignorance rather than outright malice.
Second, the bill bans so-called “rapid fire activators,” a vaguely defined term that could encompass a range of firearm accessories, potentially criminalizing common modifications used by responsible gun owners (competition triggers).
When it comes to triggers, most states typically don’t place bans on specific items like that, but these items can actually land you in jail sometimes even if you’ve done nothing to violate the law. Finally, SB 243 dramatically expands “gun-free zones,” areas where concealed carry is prohibited, effectively disarming law-abiding citizens and creating safe havens for criminals who, by definition, ignore such restrictions.
These zones, OFF argues, ensure that “criminals can be assured they will not meet any armed resistance,” undermining public safety while punishing those who follow the law. Perhaps wiser heads will read the writing on the wall and take appropriate precautions.
The Oregon Firearms Federation is urging Second Amendment supporters to take immediate action. Oregon gun owners can register to testify either in person or remotely for the May 12 hearing through the Oregon Legislature’s website here by clicking the “Register to Testify” link. Written testimony can also be submitted here to ensure those channels are at least being used and will be sent through our system – convoluted and ineffectual as it may be at times.
OFF cautions that last-minute amendments could alter the bill’s provisions, a tactic they claim anti-gun Democrats use to suppress public input. Advocates are advised to monitor the “Meeting Materials” tab on the committee page for updates on amendments, as critical information is often withheld until the eleventh hour, giving an unfair advantage to those whose only goal is to push the bill through.
OFF’s alert paints a grim picture of the political landscape in Oregon. The organization notes that those in power, particularly Democrats, appear increasingly dismissive of public opposition, pushing anti-gun legislation with little regard for the will of their constituents.
Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers have yet to demonstrate meaningful resistance, with OFF lamenting their apparent focus on “advertising” these abuses rather than fighting them. This lack of bipartisan pushback underscores the urgency for grassroots action to protect Oregonians’ rights. Oregonians by and large despite their political affiliation tend to lean on the gun-friendly side of things despite my State’s reputation for the opposite. Most of Oregon is a vast expanse of beautiful forests, plains, wetlands, and mountains, a lot of which Oregonians can still freely shoot in
If we want to look at the broader context of SB 243’s effects we’ll only see a state already grappling with the fallout of Measure 114, which has created confusion and delays for gun buyers while failing to address actual crime. Many law-abiding Oregonians don’t even know if they can still buy certain guns because of the confusion.
Critics (like myself) argue that bills like SB 243 do nothing to enhance public safety and instead target law-abiding citizens, leaving them vulnerable. OFF emphasizes that getting testimony on the record is critical, even if the political climate feels hostile, as it at least creates a documented opposition to these measures instead of leaving no evidence that there was any opposition to it at all.
For a detailed breakdown of SB 243 and updates, read OFF’s full alert here. To support the Oregon Firearms Federation’s efforts to defend Second Amendment rights, consider contributing here. As Oregon’s gun owners face mounting challenges, staying informed and engaged is more important than ever. Make your voice heard before it’s too late.
RE: “Personally, I think it has more to do with blatant ignorance rather than outright malice.”
It is indeed blatant ignorance to be so naive to think it is not outright malice. The last thing someone supposedly on point defending the 2A should do is throw Gun Control any kind of a rope.
Each Oregon Gun Owner who shows up should stand and speak what they wish in Defense of the Second Amendment and conclude by saying, “History Confirms Gun Control is the best pal Racism and Genocide ever had.” Fact Check it.
Until The Truth About Gun Control is told repeatedly and enough people are on the same page the sneaky blatant malice History Confirms is inherent with Gun Control will continue full steam ahead.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=4hH4mvlfOVI&si=0lUfrKYePrvHE6Sd
The bill bans “Rapid fire activator” includes, but is not limited to, a bump stock, forced reset trigger, trigger crank, hellfire trigger, binary trigger system, burst trigger system, switch, auto sear or a copy or similar device, regardless of the producer or manufacturer.”
The expansion of gun free zones is to include the grounds of public buildings as described, and allows municipalities to enact their own public buildings ban.
Both OR & WA have gone full retard. Never go full retard!
They are following the lead of the People’s Democratic Socialist Republic of Kalifornia, and hoping for reunification with China after ratifying the claims made the recently discovered “ancient map”.
“Both OR & WA have gone full” Kommiefonian -blame much of the crazy in Wa & Or on transplanted California socialists/progs.
Personally, I think it has more to do with blatant ignorance rather than outright malice….
…OFF cautions that last-minute amendments could alter the bill’s provisions, a tactic they claim anti-gun Democrats use to suppress public input…
Sounds pretty malice-y to me.
Anywho, reduce carry, lay burdens on FFLs, go after various “actuators”… various parts of the new standard package.
Yes, it is intended to keep evidence against the ban out of the legislative record and to limit or eliminate opposition. California has tried this stunt a time or two, as has NYS.
…intended to keep evidence against the ban out of the legislative record and to limit or eliminate opposition…
Can you expand on this a bit?
I can’t pay attention to all the various legislatures and around here their go-to tactic is simply to ignore testimony they don’t like while bringing in, usually small amounts of, astroturfed testimony in favor of the bill under consideration. They then only listen to the people they want to listen to. Alterations to the bill are not, generally, tactical in terms of limiting opposition but rather about bringing other Dems on board.
It’s called “gut and stuff”. They introduce a trojan horse version something like “this bill directs the state police to research firearms deaths” so that the “firearms” topic is established. Then after they have public hearings and testimony on that (which nobody cares about because the bill does nothing) they introduce an amendment that says “everything before this is replaced with this new text with actual gun rights restrictions”.
Of all the slimy things that Dems do in Oregon it’s probably the slimiest and most clearly corrupt. It’s their go-to approach.
Interesting. Our Democrats don’t tend to do that, they follow something more akin the Trump model of the “big ask”.
They set out a platter of ideas that are all completely batshit crazy, let them be called completely batshit crazy and then walk them back a bit to merely batshit crazy, get someone to testify in favor, ignore all testimony against, pass the bill and call it a compromise.
But then we have a lot of rules about committee assignments if a Bill touches on [topic], and those committees actually sometimes do their jobs, so the mechanism you describe would be much harder to get away with. Not impossible, but a bigger hill to climb.
This is what happens when lumberjacks hang up their axes and go to work for Google.
Another Commie run state ruled by Schiff eaters!