A perspective from Oregon’s mid-Willamette Valley

As of Dec. 8, buying a gun looks impossible

Written November 26th, 2022 by Hasso Hering

At the Albany Bi-Mart, only five pistols remained in this display case on Saturday afternoon, a sign of a surge in gun buying before it becomes hard or impossible.

Unless a court intervenes before Measure 114 takes effect on Dec. 8, it looks like after that date private citizens will no longer be allowed to buy a firearm in Oregon for a good long while. But the promoters of the initiative didn’t mention that.

The measure was sold as a “common sense” safety law. It requires a police permit before you can buy a firearm, and to get a permit you have to prove you know how to use a gun. What’s wrong with that?

Well, the law also says that to get a permit to buy a gun, you have to prove completion of a firearms training course that is “offered by law enforcement, a community college, or a private or public institution or organization or firearms training school utilizing instructors certified by a law enforcement agency…”

Local police and sheriffs do not “certify” instructors for the general public. Nor do they offer public firearms training. Linn-Benton Community College doesn’t offer such training either. Maybe some private gun ranges or self-defense instructors do, but they are not “certified by a law enforcement agency.”

The State Police say they are working on administrative rules to carry out the new statute. But whenever the rules are adopted, they presumably can’t change the plain wording of the law.

So, the training courses required to get a gun-buying permit do not exist. Will they ever? Maybe eventually, but only after individual law enforcement agencies decide they have the time and money and want to take the risk to train and then certify public firearms instructors.

This is not likely to happen. And if it does, it would take a year or more to get going. And then would-be gun buyers would have to apply for the training and wait to get in — maybe another few months or a year.

In the meantime, gun sales to the general public in Oregon will have to stop. Any remaining federally licensed retailers of firearms will go out of business. That will make a temporary ban on gun sales permanent.

That, presumably, is what the promoters of Measure 114 had in mind. But that’s not what they said. (hh)

35 responses to “As of Dec. 8, buying a gun looks impossible”

  1. Ed Boyd says:

    You are 100% correct, Hasso – legitimate firearms sales to law abiding citizens will cease as of December 8, 2022, and many, many independent businesses in this state will go out of business.

    But, that was the goal all along. Pretty clear from the start

  2. Gordon L. Shadle says:

    Measure 114 is a symptom of a much larger failure – institutional breakdown.

    1. Overreaching government at every level
    2. The criminal justice system
    3. Schools
    4. The mental health care system
    5. Most consequently, the family

    It is delusional to believe that Measure 114 will do anything to solve Oregon’s “gun problem”.

    President Biden said the only gun you need for self protection is a shotgun. Delusion is very much in fashion right now.

  3. Abe Cee says:

    And we all know that criminals will adhere to the rules and laws before they acquire a gun, right?

  4. Hartman says:

    Looks like the weapons fans got snookered. Or maybe…just maybe…the people of Oregon decided they’d had enough. With some good luck, this new Measure will survive the myriad court challenges certain to follow. In the meantime, gun-loving entrepreneurs might consider opening up a “Law Enforcement Approved” gun training course. A good way to earn a decent living as potential gun-buyers will be required to take said courses. Heck, Measure 114 is a Jobs Creator engine. Plus, it doesn’t seem too much a stretch to require some basic training. We make drivers get tested, and they must be insured before being allowed on the street. We do this because cars are, or can be, dangerous to one’s health. Certainly this same logic ought to apply to devices that can snuff out lives simply by depressing a trigger.

    • Gordon L. Shadle says:

      “…the people of Oregon decided they’d had enough.”

      What is the problem they’ve had enough of, exactly?

      According to the CDC the rate of gun deaths (a statistic that accounts for a growing population) is BELOW the levels of earlier years.

      Compare the current rate of gun deaths (13.6 per 100,000 people) to the rate in 1974 (16.3 per 100,000 people).

      And of the current gun deaths, 54% were suicides. Will Measure 114 make any difference here, or will it just change the method?

      It would be more honest for Oregonians who have “had enough” to advocate for something that would make a real difference – repeal of the 2nd Amendment.

      But that isn’t even being debated. Why?

      • Steve says:

        If you repeal the 2nd amendment, will it keep guns out of the hands of criminals?
        I don’t think so.

    • red says:

      i hate to break it to you but you are more likely to die from tripping. 42000 people die each year in the us from tripping and falling. are you planning on requiring walking classes and a license to walk in your own house?

  5. Robert Collins says:

    The ultimate goal of registration is confiscation. When Hitler and the Nazis took over Germany they inherited a gun registry that had been compiled during the years of the Weimar Republic following WWI. They used that registry to confiscate the guns from all undesirables; Jews, communists, anyone opposed to the regime. If you were a good Nazi, however, you could have all the guns you wanted.

    Measure 114 would set up a registry of new gun buyers. This we do not want.

    And how can a permit be required to exercise a right guaranteed by the Second Amendmen?. Would anyone say you need a permit to go to church or give a speech?

    • James says:

      FFL’s are requires to keep 20 years of hard copies. If you think osp isn’t going to get those your crazy they will have 20 years of private firearms sold. Furthermore osp has continually refused to prove they destroy the background check records on or before the deadline.

  6. Bud Roen says:

    Maybe now – finally – those enforcement agencies will have to make the time and spend the money to certify solid education and permitting of guns. Then they’d become an active, important part of a multi-faceted solution to gun violence.

  7. Lexis says:

    This is what WA state has required for years. The gun shops did not go out of business, people still bought guns legally.

    The sky is not falling

    • Carl Moore says:


      Washington State does not require a live-fire training conducted by law enforcement certified trainers simply to purchase a firearm. (training that does not exist by the way) No state in the Union requires a pre-approval to exercise a Constitutional Right. By the logic of 114, the State could require a license to attend a church, or to join a Union.

      The requirement that a buyer obtain a permit that does not exist means ALL legal gun sales in the State will cease on December 8. This is a death sentence for many retailers.

      Ballot measure 114 was sold to the voters under false pretenses, plain and simple. The Attorney General of Oregon allowed a description on the ballot that was wildly misleading, the State also published misleading information in the Voter’s Pamphlet, couple this with the decision by the Secretary of State to enact 114 months before the State Constitution says a ballot measure should go into effect and the bias of the State government becomes clear.

      114 will be struck down in the courts, eventually. Until that happens, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights have been declared null and void in the State of Oregon.

  8. Patricia Eich says:

    I believe a ban on gun sales is exactly the true intention of the backers of this bill. Also, at least one of the persons on the committee knows nothing about firearms. I suspect many people who voted yes did not read the full text of the measure to understand what the results would be. Ed is correct in saying this will put many independent businesses out of business. When/if any training is made available I would guess the only place to puchase a firearm by then is through on-line dealers. However, the final transfer must still go through a person with an FFL. In addition it will be expensive and unaffordable for many to jump through all the hoops and pay the fees before one can obtain a permit. Also how would a person who does not currently own a firearm take a safety class. You have to show proficienty with a firearm so how would one do that without practice. By the wording of this measure you cannot borrow a firearm from another person, that would be an illegal transfer.
    It’s also a slap in the face to long time owners of firearms who have spent money to take classes for a concealed carry permit; many hours at a range (which also costs money) or belong to organized groups who teach gun safety and have regular firearms training.

  9. H. R. Richner says:

    The black market is very happy with this promotion of its stock. Tax free profits will soar.

  10. Ed says:

    “Oregon Constitution
    Bill of Rights
    Article I.
    Section 27. Right to bear arms; military subordinate to civil power. The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power[.] ”

    Can’t “bear arms” if you cannot buy or obtain them. Measure 114 is unconstitutional. Period.

  11. Birdieken says:

    The only thing standing between 51% taking the rights away from the 49% is the Constitution.

  12. sonamata says:

    Seems there’s wide bipartisan agreement on the *principle* that states shouldn’t enact targeted, onerous laws to effectively ban constitutionally legal activities. Odd that it’s still a well-refined, popular, successful tactic, no?

  13. Merrilee Alexander says:

    You can thank Rev Mark Knudsen of NE Portland for this commie bill.

    • Xyzzy says:

      Poorly planned or ill-intentioned gun control bills have nothing to do with economic systems that ensure that all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

  14. Steve says:

    To get a CCW in Oregon you have to get fingerprinted, pass the background, and take class by a NRA certified instructor. The class requires classroom and live fire. Why can’t law enforcement just certify those instructors??

    • M. Prince says:

      Incorrect. In OR certification class is a single session, lecture only with no livefire required, and is concerned solely with the legalities of self-defense and firearm types allowed.

  15. Jeff says:

    Insurance is for repairs done to cars that get damaged by other drivers

  16. Jeff says:

    If there is injury to a person medical bills get paid from insurance

  17. khs says:

    Anyone who wants to own a gun could wait a couple of weeks until training is available. It’s not a big deal. In the Army we didn’t get the gun the first day, had to do lots of training.

  18. Gene says:

    I have a shot gun, a 22 rifle and a 40 cal pistol. That’s all I need. Register them? Not in my lifetime. Plus, I have all the ammo that I could possibly use for legal purposes.

    • centrist says:

      The initiative doesn’t “reach back” to arms already possessed.
      The burden lands on subsequent purchasers.

  19. David Force says:

    Voters in Multnomah County strongly supported Measure 114. The Multnomah County Sheriff indicates his office is working through the details involved in getting the measure implemented as quickly as possible. So, that county will have a model that can be looked to for guidance for those sections of the measure that survive court review or if that review takes an extended period of time to complete.

    MultCo Sheriff Reese on Oregon gun reform Measure 114: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttZqURPbS_M

  20. centrist says:

    The well of ignorance is deep, dark, spiced with presumption and anger.
    Most likely next step is a stay on implementation until the mechanisms are in place.
    BTW, the LEOs declaring they won’t enforce this initiative are on the cusp of violating the oath of office.

  21. Tamme Young says:

    114 is poorly written and measures to make it workable are costly. Diverting resources that could be used for more dire needs. I don’t oppose changes in gun regulations but as a gun owner I feel it needs to have collaboration with law enforcement, businesses that sell fire arms, medical personal and regular business owners. I wish folks would put this kind of gras root efforts into “fixing” the lack of mental health resources in the community.

  22. Nonya Business says:

    This will mainly affect BIPOC communities that do not have the money to go through the required training. This measure was meant to hinder those communities.

  23. Lundy says:

    Not that this would be terribly convenient for people in western Oregon, but what’s to stop someone from buying whatever guns they want in Idaho, where, I presume, there are far fewer hoops?

  24. Donna K. Becker says:

    Interestingly, but probably insignificant, is the fact that Prop 114 passed with a margin of 50.7% of the Oregon vote. As of yesterday, 42,000 people were on a waiting list for background checks–2.3% of the votes cast.

  25. SC says:

    This is all just another way to degrade the constitution overall. Once we allow the left an inch they will take a mile. The constitution protects us ALL in that we are American citizens with rights that continue to make this a wonderful country. Why do we have a flood of continuing immigration? Because this country is for the people not the government. The constitution is the insurance to continue to be a FREE country.


HH Today: A perspective from Oregon’s mid-Willamette Valley
Albany Albany City Council Albany council Albany downtown Albany Fire Department Albany housing Albany parks Albany Planning Commission Albany police Albany Post Office Albany Public Works Albany riverfront Albany schools Albany Station Albany streets Albany traffic Albany urban renewal apartments ARA Benton County bicycling bike lanes Bowman Park Bryant Park Calapooia River CARA climate change COVID-19 Cox Creek Crocker Lane cumberland church cycling Dave Clark Path DEQ downtown Albany Edgewater Village Ellsworth Street bridge Highway 20 homeless housing Interstate 5 land use Linn County Millersburg Monteith Riverpark North Albany ODOT Oregon coast Oregon legislature Pacific Power Portland & Western Queen Avenue Republic Services Riverside Drive Santiam Canal Scott Lepman Talking Water Gardens The Banks Tom Cordier Union Pacific urban renewal Water Avenue Waterfront Project Waverly Lake Willamette River

Copyright 2024. All Rights Reserved. Hasso Hering.
Website Serviced by Santiam Communications
Hasso Hering