» Gun bill would force difficult choice


A perspective from Oregon’s mid-Willamette Valley

Gun bill would force difficult choice

Written March 3rd, 2019 by Hasso Hering

Signs outside the gun show at the Linn County Expo Center on Saturday.

This weekend’s gun show in Albany was held while a dozen bills pending in the legislature would add to Oregon’s restrictions on the ownership and legal use of firearms. Outside the show, OregonPushBack called attention to the bills. On its website, the group vows that “We Will Not Comply.” That would be easier said than done.

The most drastic of the anti-gun bills is SB 501. Most of its provisions would affect companies selling guns and ammunition. Among other things, they could not sell a gun without seeing the buyer’s permit to buy one. They could not sell anyone more than 20 rounds of ammunition per month, and only after a criminal background check.

You can assume that if the bill passes, gun stores will comply. They’d be out of business if they didn’t and got caught.

Individual gun owners would be put in a jam mainly by the bill’s prohibition of ammunition magazines holding more than five rounds, which covers pretty much all magazines for semiautomatic weapons. The bill would give owners 180 days to get rid of the illegal magazines. They could sell them out of state, hand them to the police, or destroy them. They could also permanently alter them, but it’s doubtful that the average owner has the skills or equipment to accomplish this.

The ban on common magazines would make the guns themselves useless — except, of course, in the hands of criminals who ignore that law like they ignore others. The question raised by SB 501, then, is whether previously lawful Oregon gun owners would risk misdemeanor convictions and one-year jail terms by keeping magazines they could never legitimately use, at the range or anywhere else.

SB 501 is pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee, and as of March 2 no hearings were scheduled. We will see whether the bill stays buried or whether, by moving it, our legislators are willing to put citizens in a very difficult spot. (hh)

The magazine restriction would make useless guns like these, on display in Albany Saturday.



Posted in: Commentary

21 responses to “Gun bill would force difficult choice”

  1. Ted says:

    Socialists run rampant in the halls of Oregon government.

    • Delfina H Hoxie says:

      Ted, The bill has nothing to do with Socialism, it has to do with lives! However, I agree that guns with only 5 rounds are not easy to find. Whomever wrote this law doesn’t know anything about guns.

      • Mike says:

        So when will criminals be willing to follow the laws as well. Are bodyguards for the governor going to follow it as well?

    • Guns make me a real man says:

      Based on the friendship he has with the “great guy” Kim Jong-Un, it wouldn’t surprise me to hear that the president is going to take the means of production tomorrow.

      It would be amazing to see the warriors of the 2nd amendment to fight to free the land against the tyranny of the corrupted GOP and their crony capitalism. Oh, wait? Is that going to happen any time soon?

  2. S. Whittle says:

    The 5-Round magazine limit is a fabulous idea. From an economic perspective, such forward-thinking legislation will allow manufacturers to create an entire new line of
    5-shot lethality for Oregonians. It will drive-up demand for gun-training as formerly sloppy shooters will no longer be able to spray bullets indiscriminately. With only 5-rounds, you’d best be hitting who you’re aiming at.

    A golden age of Gun Shows will flourish as the so-called Nickel Magazines are introduced. There is a nearly endless market for magazine-modification so that clips formerly capable of many more than 5-shots comply with the new regulatory regime. Great for small businesses seeking a niche in the burgeoning gun marketplace.

    All in all, this legislation looks like a win-win for Oregonians. Albany and Linn County should get behind this. Call the Boshart-Davis person and tell her to get on board.

  3. Mike Patrick says:

    S Whittle, who are you and why are you supporting this crap?

    • S. Whittle says:

      I am a simple person, but a believer in the old adage that if the Legislature hands us a lemon, we owe to our parents, and their parents as well, to make the best of the situation as presented and squeeze out some lemonade. I hardly think it necessary that you revert to excretory references to describe the economic opportunity this legislation presents.

      • Teeters says:

        You’re a joke. This bill sucks five round magazine‘s and can buy only 20 rounds what part of infringe does Oregon Not understand.

    • Ginnyj says:

      Sarcasm is lost on some folks …

  4. centrist says:

    I generally don’t chime in on arms-control discussions. This bill needs to stay in the dark and never reach committee.
    The 20 round per month purchase limit pretty much promotes development of a marginally-competent shooting population. I met an olympic-caliber competitor who expended 100 rounds per day in multi-position slowfire practice to hold proficiency.

  5. Wayne Stott says:

    Whomever is writing these phony Oregon state laws knows nothing about the second amendment …. it protects the first amendment. Any firearm that I own has NEVER harmed anyone. Never……. Senators do not touch my firearms. Senators do not interfere with my 2nd amendment right to buy sell or trade my firearms.
    It’s time to interfere with the mentally incompetent.
    Join the NRA

  6. Ken says:

    Speaking of gun shop owners complying or being put out of business – whatever happened to gun shop owner in Albany who was arrested by the FBI last year?

  7. Ken walter says:

    The only thing missing in common sense gun legislation is common sense.

  8. thomas cordier says:

    The is a replay of “Animal Farm”

    • Ray Kopczynski says:

      That used to be required reading when I was in HS. Is it anymore?

    • J. Hanschlatter says:

      Exactly. One is reminded of the delightful interpretation of the character Snowball as portrayed by Kelsey Grammer, a well-known Conservative -with a Capital C – in the colorful animated rendition of Animal Farm circa 1999. Only, instead of the societal slip into brutal communistic dictatorship, we are witnessing a rapid descent into cultish worship of a criminal TV personality cum authoritarian president. Animal Farm indeed. You are spot on!

  9. D says:

    Shall not be infringed upon

  10. A . Sundberg says:

    I would need a background check to receive what the founding fathers said ” shall NOT be infringed ” ?
    What other ” rights ” are they going to require you forfeit because you dont fall within the realm of what “they” deem worthy?
    Are we governed? Or are we subjects ?


Cycle around town!
Copyright 2019. All Rights Reserved. Hasso Hering.
Website Serviced by Santiam Communications
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!