Oregon's New Anti-gun Bill

[Ranb]

A gun registration bill was introduced in Oregon.
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB501/Introduced

It has typical bkgd check stuff like we recently got in WA. It also defines hi-cap mags as greater than 5 rounds.

Then it has a 20 round per month purchase limitation. This is completely stupid.

SECTION 7.
(1) Notwithstanding the fact that ORS 166.412, 166.435 and
166.438 require a gun dealer or other person transferring a firearm to request
a criminal background check only when transferring a firearm, a gun dealer or other person transferring ammunition shall comply with the requirements of ORS 166.412, 166.435 and 166.438 before transferring any ammunition to another person.
(2) A person may not receive more than 20 rounds of ammunition in any 30-day time period.
(3)(a) Any person transferring ammunition shall maintain a record of all ammunition transferred by the person to ensure that a person does not receive more than 20 rounds of ammunition in any 30-day time period.
(b) The Department of State Police is not required to maintain a record of ammunition transfers under this section to ensure compliance with subsection (2) of this section.
(4) This section does not apply to ammunition purchased and used at
a target shooting range.

I could not find a definition of ammunition in the Oregon code, so I'm not sure how this affect people who load their own ammunition. I suppose gun stores next to the state line will be doing brisk business if this bill passes.

Ranb

 

[Norman Alexander]

Now how are the dope farmers going to police their plot?

 

[Lurch]

At first glance, the only "completely stupid" aspect here is that not *all* States work together to enact the same legislation.

 

[lionking]

A good start.

 

[Stacyhs]

I live in Oregon and I think it's great. Why would someone need more than 20 rounds in a month, especially when it doesn't apply to ammunition at a target range?

 

[thaiboxerken]

I live in Oregon and I think it's great. Why would someone need more than 20 rounds in a month, especially when it doesn't apply to ammunition at a target range?

In case you have to defend yourself against masses of people by yourself.

 

[Border Reiver]

I live in Oregon and I think it's great. Why would someone need more than 20 rounds in a month, especially when it doesn't apply to ammunition at a target range?

Sometimes you get a good deal on bullets that are sold in larger quantities (thinking specifically about surplus military ammo that is often sold in much larger quantities). Sometimes its just sold in larger sizes (.22LR is generally sold in boxes of 50/100/200 rounds up here).

I personally think that firearms need to be regulated like motor vehicles:

a. a background check;
b. Pass a test by a state authority;
c. proper insurance if the weapon ever leaves your property;
d. Different licensing levels for different weapon types.

We don't put limits on how much fuel a person can put in their vehicle in a month, I don't see why limiting ammo purchases should be a thing either. But if a person is known to be buying large quantities, just like fuel, then they just might need to have their storage facilities checked.

 

[Ranb]

I live in Oregon and I think it's great. Why would someone need more than 20 rounds in a month, especially when it doesn't apply to ammunition at a target range?

The great majority of target ranges I've gone to don't sell ammo. If a person wants to spend a few hours at a range that doesn't sell ammo for their gun, they will will have to stockpile it, load their own or obtain it out of state.

 

[Belz...]

We don't put limits on how much fuel a person can put in their vehicle in a month, I don't see why limiting ammo purchases should be a thing either.

Well, you rarely throw fuel at people to kill them.

I don't actually disagree with you, just pointing out an obvious difference and why the analogy fails a bit.

In any case, more often than not it seems that gun laws are more reactive and emotive than effective.

 

[Bikewer]

When I was more active, it was nothing to shoot up a couple of thousand rounds per week. Most of this I reloaded... Load all week, shoot it all up on the weekend. I usually tossed in a “brick” of .22 rimfire ammo as well.

This is pretty much standard for serious target shooters and competitive shooters of all types.

 

[surrogate]

I personally think that firearms need to be regulated like motor vehicles:

a. a background check;
b. Pass a test by a state authority;
c. proper insurance if the weapon ever leaves your property;
d. Different licensing levels for different weapon types.

I agree with this, but would add -

e. Yearly inspection/registration to show that each firearm is still in the owner's possession.

 

[theprestige]

To be good at something, you have to practice it. Telling a gun owner they can only shoot 20 rounds a month would be like telling a guitarist they can only play 20 chords a month.

 

[Belz...]

Nonsense, they can still practice with the gun empty!

 

[Border Reiver]

Well, you rarely throw fuel at people to kill them.

I don't actually disagree with you, just pointing out an obvious difference and why the analogy fails a bit.

In any case, more often than not it seems that gun laws are more reactive and emotive than effective.

But you can use fuel as an accelerant to burn people or things - its the unlawful misuse of an otherwise lawfully possessed item that's the problem.

And yeah, laws like this are generally reactive - something bad happened and now we overreact to prevent it from happening again.

 

[Upchurch]

The great majority of target ranges I've gone to don't sell ammo.

If the law sticks, I bet that'll change.

 

[plague311]

But you can use fuel as an accelerant to burn people or things - its the unlawful misuse of an otherwise lawfully possessed item that's the problem.

And yeah, laws like this are generally reactive - something bad happened and now we overreact to prevent it from happening again.

We haven't done **** about it for the last how many years while watching hundreds of innocent people getting shot? What, exactly, is overreacting about this? Oh no, a slight inconvenience to weapon holders. How will they ever recover from this?

 

[Tormac]

Ranb

I am just curious.

Does the 20rnd a month rule cover just centerfire, or does it cover rim fire as well? Would one have to wait over two months to buy a fifty rnd box of .22lr?

Does it mention limiting the amount of primers, powder, or lead one can purchase in a month. Could make reloading more popular

 

[plague311]

Ranb

I am just curious.

Does the 20rnd a month rule cover just centerfire, or does it cover rim fire as well? Would one have to wait over two months to buy a fifty rnd box of .22lr?

Does it mention limiting the amount of primers, powder, or lead one can purchase in a month. Could make reloading more popular

Why doesn't the law say "purchase" instead of "receive"? Is there more clarification on that part? It seems to be fairly specific phrasing.

 

[Tormac]

Why doesn't the law say "purchase" instead of "receive"? Is there more clarification on that part? It seems to be fairly specific phrasing.

I assume the law wants to prevent a friend that lives in Ohio from giving an Oregonian a thousand rounds of ammunition as a care package.

That could be the reason for the difference between "receive" and "purchase".

But I am just guessing.

 

[Metullus]

The great majority of target ranges I've gone to don't sell ammo.

The great majority of places I shoot are not target ranges...