Oregon is on the West Coast. That fact alone should tell you pretty much how the state feels about guns and gun control. We don’t call it the Left Coast just because of the way we view the map, after all.
However, there are still a lot of ways that Oregon isn’t as awful as it could be when it comes to your Second Amendment rights.
An interfaith gun control group, however, certainly wants to change that and have unveiled where they’re directing their efforts.
Interfaith gun-control group Lift Every Voice Oregon has revealed three proposals for the upcoming legislative session, which have been opened to the public for feedback.
Pastor Mark Knutson of Augustana Lutheran Church, a member of LEVO, told The Oregonian “There’s not a student in Oregon that has not had to deal with the threat of mass shootings. We have to be concerned about life.”
The first proposed measure, Initiative Petition 60, is the most comprehensive. Under IP 60, the sale of semiautomatic assault-style firearms would be to limited to gun dealers, and purchases would require proof of training and mandatory criminal background checks, with a five-day waiting period. Furthermore, the measure would raise the minimum purchasing age for semiautomatic firearms to 21, and ban the sale and manufacture of magazines that hold more than ten rounds, excluding the military or law enforcement.
The other two proposals are basically IP 60 broken up. One is just the portion of the measure pertaining to rifles and the other is the magazine restriction.
Knutson said the group will settle on just one proposal and move forward.
While this isn’t good for gun owners, it’s important to remember that a magazine restriction proposed in the legislature last year didn’t go anywhere. That means a magazine restriction isn’t the slam dunk one might think.
On the other hand, that proposal limited firearms to just five rounds, a limit that would have impacted even revolvers and made a complicated mess of firearm laws in the state. That’s the most likely reason why that measure failed, a mistake that IP 60 and it’s magazine counterparts wouldn’t repeat.
So, what are the chances of this flying?
Honestly, much of it depends on the language. Obviously, die-hard pro-gun voices aren’t about to back this regardless of the language. The problem is whether anyone else will back it, and this is Oregon. They probably will unless there’s a particularly egregious bit of language in there.
That doesn’t mean it’s a done deal, though. It’s vital that gun rights activists in the state step up and debunk these baseless fears and expose these measures for what they really are: scare-mongering in the name of restricting human rights. It focuses on the weapon least likely to be used in a criminal action and feeds into the fear that the AR-15 and similar rifles represent some kind of horrible threat to life and property.
Nothing of the sort is true, of course, but that won’t stop anti-gunners like LEVO from pushing that tired old narrative.
What’s worse, though, is that it won’t stop some people from actually believing it.