The new edict prohibits possession of already-existing home-constructed firearms along with the raw materials needed to create them unless they have serial numbers that are recorded by Federal Firearm Licensees.
HB 2005 has the misleading title of the “gun violence prevention bill” even though it does nothing to address violent crime. The prevailing tactic among misguided state legislators and leaders in Washington is to target law-abiding gun owners under the guise of having done “something.”
Besides aiming at gun hobbyists, the new law raised the age to purchase certain firearms and granted the right to municipalities to decide whether firearms may be banned on public property.
State Rep. Mark Owens (R) chided his colleagues for adding a burdensome statutory layer for gun owners to comply with. “We keep passing more gun laws and expecting gun violence to decline. Gun violence is not declining.”
The Second Amendment advocate declared that “in classic Oregon fashion as of late, we deny the rights of honest, law-abiding citizens without actually tackling the real problems. The bill feels good and does nothing.”
One of the primary objections to HB 2005 expressed by critics is the destructive effect it will have on youth hunting and high school shooting sports in Oregon. In the middle of the new firearms regulations are specific threats aimed at preventing minors from accessing particular commonly owned firearms.
It does not matter that the young person is properly trained in gun safety and supervised by well-trained adults. Nor does it make a difference whether the youth is participating in legal hunting or sport shooting events.
The new legislation gives a very short list of permitted firearms, completely overlooking many commonly held firearms that are utilized by hunters and sport shooters alike.
Keely Hopkins of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation noted the organization serves “hundreds of thousands of youths and families that enjoy the safe and legal traditions of hunting with firearms in Oregon.” The new law, the organization maintains, adds “duplicative training requirements and increased costs” for families that will prevent many from enjoying the sport.
Hopkins added that “this will result in fewer new hunters enjoying this outdoor family activity and will diminish the positive impacts that hunting has on Oregon’s natural habitats and the fish and wildlife they support.”
Opposition was also voiced by Kerry Spurgin, President of the Oregon State Shooting Association. “House Bill 2005 will eliminate [the] traditional youth high-power competition program, using semi-auto rifles, in Oregon. “Students who participate in these shooting sports often go on to receive scholarships for college or opportunities to compete at the national level.”
Spurgin noted that high school trap and skeet programs will also be negatively affected by restrictions on common shotguns.
Supporters, however, lauded the measure as providing a layer of protection for Oregon against violent criminals. Rep. Lisa Reynolds (D) claimed the new law “offers an Oregon solution to an urgent, nationwide problem.” She said it “will make our communities safer while respecting the rights of responsible gun owners and giving high regard to Oregon’s inherited culture of hunting and recreation.”
Reynolds, a chief sponsor of HB 2005, called the measure “a modest, but meaningful and very practical commonsense bill.”
Of course, for those who vehemently oppose gun rights, any restrictions placed on law-abiding gun owners fall in the category of “commonsense” laws.
