Oregon SB978

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

Oregon SB978

Post by Bruenor »

What a crazy bit of legislation.. always good to keep an eye on what's happening out west.

https://www.oregonfirearms.org/sb-978-t ... i-gun-bill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
We told you about SB 978 yesterday and assured you that this harmless looking bill was going to be gut and stuffed with draconian anti-gun language, and it has.

Here is a link to the “Dash 1″ amendment to the bill. And of course we use the word amendment quite loosely.

The “amendment” is 44 pages long. The “bill” was a few paragraphs.
some highlights
Allow gun stores to refuse to sell firearms and ammunition to young adults (As Bi-mart, Walmart and Fred Meyers have done in violation of the law.)

Exonerate gun dealers who violated our anti-discrimination laws, even if they did it before this bill was passed. (Get out of jail free card for corporations that broke the law.)

Require that your self defense firearms be locked up. Under this bill you can be prosecuted even if you did lock up your guns with a cable lock if someone has “access” to a device to defeat the lock. Which of course, is anyone who has access to almost any tool.

Hold gun owners responsible for two years for guns they “transferred” unless they could prove the transferred gun had a trigger or cable lock. (This is one of the most inane ideas we have ever seen.)

Hold gun owners responsible for crimes committed with guns that were stolen from them.

Treat “80 % lowers” as complete guns requiring background checks and registration. If the lower is transferred and has no serial number, the police need a “detailed description: or the lower.

Ban “undetectable firearms.”

Ban “untraceable firearms”

Increase CHL fees.

Allows cities, counties, metropolitan service districts, airports, schools, colleges and universities to ban CHL holders from “public buildings.” Please note. The bill does NOT say buildings owned by those entities. It says “public buildings.” Under this bill a school in John Day could forbid you from carrying your firearm in a public building in Troutdale.

Ban CHL holders from airports. No, not just the terminal. But the parking lots and grounds “adjacent” to parking lots. Picking up your spouse at the airport? Go to jail.
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
WhyNot
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 1224
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:23 am
Location: NW Ohio

Re: Oregon SB978

Post by WhyNot »

THEY FORGOT ONE ADD-ON. VERY IMPORTANT.

Add a mandatory requirement, all gun owners must wear a visible yellow star on exterior garment, either arm band or on lapel, whenever in public.
Acquisitions thus far:

-Slingshot
-Butter knife
-Soda straw and peas
-Sharpened pencil
-Newspaper roll
--water balloon (*diversionary*)

Yeah, I'm that good
Post Reply