Arguments in Opposition to Measure 114

Measure 114

Arguments in Opposition that will appear in the Oregon Voter’s Pamphlet

Don’t be fooled again.

Ballot Measure 114 will virtually eliminate your ability to protect yourself and your family.

Under Measure 114 you may not obtain a firearm for your protection without the permission of your local police chief or sheriff.

You will be required to take police-authorized training that almost no police will be able to provide.

You can be charged an unlimited fee for the training, (if you can find anyone to give it) and the required background check could literally take forever.

All your private information will be in a database that the measure requires to be published.

There is no limit on the information the police can demand in their background check and the “permit” does not even allow you to purchase a firearm. It only allows you to ask permission from the State Police a second time when you attempt your purchase. That process can literally take forever, again.

At a time when violent crime is skyrocketing and police are not responding, this measure will have a devastating effect on our poorest communities and put those in high crime areas in even greater jeopardy.


114 will make criminals out of law abiding Oregonians for the simple possession of items they may have lawfully owned for decades while dangerous and violent criminals are released onto our streets.
Get the facts before you vote. Visit stop114.com



(This information furnished by Kevin K Starrett, Stop 114 Committee.)

Argument in Opposition



Oregon Sheriffs Oppose Measure 114 as it violates current federal case law and the U.S. Constitution.

The United States (U.S.) 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (Oregon’s U.S. Federal District Court) struck down a nearly identical ban (to what is contained in this measure) on high-capacity magazines in the state of California. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court's findings is the California ban violated the U.S. Constitution. In Duncan v. Bonta, 979 F3d 1133 (2020), a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court held that the state of California’s ban on high-capacity magazines violated the U.S. Constitution's 2nd Amendment. The full U.S. 9th Circuit Court later overturned this opinion, and the U.S. Supreme Court then reversed the full U.S. 9th Circuit Court ruling and sent it back for to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court for reconsideration. The 2020 panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court's decision is currently the law, and this panel's ruling clearly states that a high-capacity magazine ban violates the U.S. Constitution's 2nd Amendment.

Regardless of whether you agree with the federal court decision or not, the United States remains a nation of laws, and the judicial branch of government has held that banning magazines over 10 rounds violates the U.S. Constitution's 2nd Amendment. If this measure is enacted, it will result in immediate litigation to declare the measure unconstitutional. Based upon the current law of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court, there is no question that it is in fact unconstitutional.

Oregon Sheriffs are sworn to uphold the laws and Constitution. Sheriffs cannot in good faith support a measure that a Federal Court has said violates the U.S. Constitution.

Please Join Oregon Sheriffs in voting no on Measure 114 as it is clear that this measure will violate federal case law and the U.S. Constitution.



(This information furnished by Jason Myers, Executive Director-Oregon State Sheriffs' Association.)

Argument in Opposition



MEASURE 114 IS MISLEADING AND EXTREME

The ballot title and official statement are false and misleading. They don't tell the truth about this proposed law, which, if passed will effectively prohibit the sale of firearms and ban common types of guns and magazines currently owned in Oregon.

Measure 114 is not what it appears to be. The true but hidden impacts would:

  • Allow cities and counties that are anti-gun to prevent anyone from ever getting a right to buy/transfer a firearm simply by not funding or providing the mandatory courses, live-fire classes and investigations required to obtain a purchase permit.

  • Allow police and sheriffs and the OSP to delay required background checks for months or years without any right to challenge or appeal the delay.

  • Remove the current protection that requires the police and sheriffs to conduct and complete background checks within less than a week.

  • Turn thousands of law-abiding Oregonians into criminals overnight because they own the most common firearms/magazines, while refusing to arrest or prosecute violent criminals who use firearms to commit crimes and who are routinely released by politicians who want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens.

  • Prevent minorities, inner city residents, farmers, ranchers, low-income or fixed-income Oregonians from exercising their right to keep and bear arms by setting up huge costs, delays, and financial hurdles making it practically impossible for them to ever buy firearms for hunting or self defense.

  • Put gun dealers out of business.

  • Force Oregonians to travel out-of-state to purchase firearms.

114 will NOT:

  • prevent violent crime or mass shootings because criminals will never comply with the law; only law abiding gun owners will be restricted.

  • prevent mass shootings because murderers or terrorists can use a dozen 10-round magazines to create the same destruction as four 30 round magazines, but why would they comply with magazine limits anyway?

Don't be fooled by the misleading and false advertising supporting 114

Protect YOUR 2nd Amendment Rights!

PLEASE VOTE NO!



(This information furnished by Paul Donheffner, Chairman, Legislative Committee, on behalf of the Oregon Hunters Association.)

Argument in Opposition



Responsible Oregonian's Recommend Vote No!

Ballot Measure 114 (BM114) is a flawed and unworkable attempt to limit firearms sales in Oregon based on the erroneous assumption that guns cause crime. BM114 seeks only to establish a costly bureaucratic nightmare to make firearms ownership difficult for some, and nearly impossible for many.

Obvious problems include:

  • BM114 will have no effect on criminals or our uncontrolled crime wave as they do not follow the current laws or document gun purchases. BM114 will however, make criminals of Oregon’s law-abiding citizens.

  • Background checks are required and supported now. Adding redundant permits, processes, training, tests, etc. will be an extraordinary burden on law enforcement requiring an estimated $400 million in tax dollars in the next 5 years for state-wide programs, staffing, and range constructions that are not now available.

  • The costs and complications will hinder, or block, our marginalized populations (age, gender, race, orientation, ...) the most, as they attempt to provide self-defense for themselves and their families.

  • BM114 is more likely to cost lives than save them, as it impedes efforts to prevent suicide and enables criminals to take advantage of unarmed victims.

  • BM114 violates personal privacy and the 2nd amendment. Recent Federal court rulings have judged restriction of commonly owned firearms and accessories as unconstitutional.

BM114 is an example of special interest groups misleading well-meaning Oregon Citizens with a gun control agenda instead of seeking to save lives.

The Oregon State Shooting Association (OSSA) and the Oregon Association of Shooting Ranges (OASR) support, our current background check and extreme protection (red flag) laws, as they prevent firearms possession by those with conditions that pose threats to themselves or others.

With key partners across Oregon, OSSA and OASR drive firearms safety, safe storage, children's safety, and suicide prevention in our communities. We develop and utilize safe ranges, education, training, with recreation and competitive programs.

Kerry Spurgin, President, Oregon State Shooting Association

George Pitts, Chairman, Oregon Association of Shooting Ranges



(This information furnished by Kerry Spurgin, President, Oregon State Shooting Association.)

Argument in Opposition



Measure 114 Threatens Your Civil Liberties

Measure 114 has many provisions that destroy our 2nd Amendment Rights. It creates an unprecedented and dangerous bureaucratic state system designed to impede and prevent law abiding citizens from purchasing firearms. This measure is deceptive and dangerous.

The "permit to purchase" requirement puts up new roadblocks that will be difficult if not impossible for law abiding citizens to navigate around. It creates an unnecessary trap, with classes that do not exist, live-fire training that will be impossible to find, and a lack of funding to implement.

In fact, there is nothing in 114 that compels law enforcement to issue permits if they are unable to find the funding or staffing to do so. No permit equals no gun sales to anyone. It's a perfect trap and designed on purpose.

Law enforcement in Oregon is woefully underfunded and understaffed. It can barely respond to anything but the most violent crimes. How can we expect it to gear up overnight to conduct classes, live-fire training, background checks, fingerprinting and issue permits? It won't happen! As a result citizens lose the right to purchase/transfer any firearms.

114 creates a state-run database of all gun owners, with no right of privacy or protection, revealing all your personal information. Victims of domestic violence will be at risk of their private information being made public along with their efforts to purchase a firearm for self defense.

Who honestly believes that a state database of gun owners can't or won't be used for the wrong reasons? The recent public release of all gun owner information in California proves that we have good reason to be fearful that this data can be hacked, stolen and used against its own citizens by the Government or criminals.

More BIG Government, redundant background checks and intrusive data collection aren't the answer to reducing gun violence.

Measure 114 IS A CLEAR THREAT TO OUR CIVIL LIBERTY.

PLEASE VOTE NO on 114



(This information furnished by Paul Donheffner, Chairman, Legislative Committee, on behalf of the Oregon Hunters Association.)

Argument in Opposition



Will Destroy Oregon's Hunting Heritage

The Oregon Hunters Association, with 26 chapters statewide and over 10,000 members urges all Oregonians to VOTE NO on this dangerous and misleading measure. We are law abiding citizens who hunt and own firearms for what we do, including sport shooting and self defense.

114 does nothing to reduce gun violence. The criminals and gangs that are shooting in the streets don't bother to get background checks or purchase legal firearms. 114 will make matters worse by diverting time and funding from law enforcement to a new "permit to purchase" scheme which only inhibits the ability of honest citizens to purchase firearms.

114 creates the most radical, extremist anti-civil rights law in the entire country and allows Oregon government to hold up firearms permits indefinitely, for months or years, without any right to challenge the delay, so law-abiding citizens will not be able to purchase/transfer firearms.

114 tramples our Constitutional right to own firearms. The complicated, expensive and impossible to comply with process for obtaining a "permit to purchase" reveals the real goal of 114 - to eliminate all gun sales in Oregon. We already require criminal background checks to purchase! Another redundant "permit background check" is completely unnecessary.

114 allows cities, counties and police departments to prevent all firearm sales. If they simply don't provide funding for staffing and the mandatory courses, live-fire testing, investigations, background checks required by measure there will be ZERO gun sales/transfers.

114 makes law abiding citizens into criminals for owning commonly used magazines, handguns and shotguns.

114 effectively ends the traditions of youth hunting and target shooting that Oregonians have enjoyed for generations.

This measure attempts to take away our right to buy firearms. Next year they want to ban all hunting and fishing in Oregon (IP3). We must stop this crazy stuff!

STOP out-of-state interest groups trying to control Oregonians!

Protect your Constitutional rights before we lose them!

Just VOTE NO on 114



(This information furnished by Paul Donheffner, Chairman, Legislative Committee, on behalf of the Oregon Hunters Association.)

Argument in Opposition



OREGON SHERIFFS AND CHIEFS OF POLICE OPPOSE MEASURE 114

This measure will divert local enforcement resources/first responders, by requiring local law enforcement agencies to create and fund a permit process out of local budgets. It will move scarce law enforcement resources away from protecting our communities to doing backgrounds and issuing permits. This shift in resources will put every Oregon community at greater risk for violence.

The Oregon Sheriffs’ Association (OSSA) was asked to provide a local cost estimate for this measure. After careful review we determined that the process to obtain a firearm purchase permit is nearly identical to the current Concealed Handgun License (CHL) process. We used thirty years of experience with CHL permits to develop a conservative cost estimate to implement this program statewide based on an average of 300,000 firearms transactions per year (estimated number from the Oregon State Police).

Local agencies would need to hire an estimated 275 employees to issue 300,000 permits a year at a cost of 28 million dollars annually. Local agencies would have to pay Oregon State Police nearly 14 million a year to do the required background checks. In all, we estimated that this measure would cost local agencies just over 49 million dollars annually, with expected permit fees covering only $19.5 million.

That leaves nearly 30 million dollars a year that local governments would be required to shift from other law enforcement priorities to fund these permit programs. This would be done at a time when Oregon has the lowest number of officers per 1000 population in the nation and crime rates are skyrocketing.

We have all seen the devastating effects that reducing law enforcement personnel has on crime rates and lawlessness in our communities, reducing law enforcement makes no sense.

DON’T DIVERT LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES/FIRST RESPONDERS !

PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 114-IT PUTS EVERY COMMUNITY IN OREGON AT RISK.



(This information furnished by Jason Myers, Executive Director-Oregon State Sheriffs' Association and Jim Ferraris Legislative Chair-Oregon Association of Chiefs of Police.)

Argument in Opposition



Gun violence is an urgent problem that needs effective action; however, Measure 114 has serious potential to harm some of our most vulnerable communities. It is important to consider POC (people of color) and people of marginalized genders who will be unfairly targeted by poorly written, misleading, and unclear laws, which is why we urge you to vote NO on this bill.

The ambiguous wording of this bill—which gives police the power to determine who can or cannot obtain a gun based on unclear criteria—leaves vulnerable groups reliant on the whims of law enforcement. The bill is written to mislead by calling these police officers "permit agents" but they are in fact either police chiefs or county sheriffs. Law enforcement should not be responsible for deciding who is allowed to be armed, especially when they have a long and recent history of oppressing marginalized groups.

These kinds of laws have been used to incarcerate and extend sentences for POC and gender nonconforming individuals. The magazine ban requires people in possession of standard magazines over 10 rounds to have an undefined form of proof that they possessed the magazines before the effective date of the bill. Additionally, a written exception for law enforcement agents will likely exclude their personal magazines from the ban. It is probable that the only people who will face the burden of proof will be those already targeted by police.

This bill as written serves to imprison and punish otherwise law-abiding vulnerable groups, all in the name of preventing gun violence. The police effectively get to decide who should be armed—a decision which may be prohibitively expensive to appeal—without any oversight.

Please vote No on Measure 114.

PDX SRA is the Portland chapter of the Socialist Rifle Association, a 501(c)(4) firearms education organization that seeks to empower those marginalized by a capitalist society.



(This information furnished by Charles E Rose, Jr, Portland Socialist Rifle Association.)

Argument in Opposition



This measure is not what it seems. It shows a dangerous ignorance of the reality that our complex public safety system includes more than just state police. The administrative, financial and data burden this measure creates overshadows the high-capacity magazine ban.

  • The measure fails to communicate that Oregon already has a “complete background check” on every gun purchase, flags for anyone purchasing multiple handguns and a system for education and fingerprints used for concealed carry holders.

  • This proposes to create ANOTHER overlapping system and force collaboration and data aggregation responsibility onto the already overburdened state police instead of enhancing the current system.

  • Sheriff estimates the fees collected will only cover half of the $40 million needed to enact this law. The remaining $20 MILLION IS UNFUNDED.

  • Security guards protect Oregon industry and businesses, the life blood of Oregon’s economy, yet are not even mentioned except in training. No provisions for expedited permits or magazine capacity for armed security guards, many who are former law enforcement and military, and ALL are background checked and trained under DPSST (Department of Public Safety Standards and Training, whose role is also omitted)

  • Shotguns, industry recommended defense tools for security and business owners that are less likely to travel through walls to unintended targets, fit the definition for being “banned” and are not called out as permitted.

  • Asks police to make subjective decisions in the permit process without psychological training or access to psychiatric records, which has been shown repeatedly to be used with bias. We should be closing the door on institutional racism, not reopening it.

The spirit of this law may make sense, but this is not the smart nor safe way to do it. As written, measure 114 is cost prohibitive, inefficient and cripples an already burdened public safety system when we need it most.

Greg Fishback
Chairman, Professional Security Association of Oregon, PSAOregon.org
Owner, Defensive Arts Center, DefensiveArts.org



(This information furnished by Greg N Fishback, Chairman, PSAO.)

Argument in Opposition



Measure 114 is a disaster for Oregon’s veteran communities.

Proponents of Measure 114 claim they want to prevent suicides, but their proposal will only make the situation worse. Their proposal includes a permit-to-purchase program and a ban on magazines that hold more than 10 bullets. These approaches don’t prevent deaths by suicide, domestic violence, or gang violence. The permit-to-purchase program will make all non-purchase transfers illegal: ending effective, evidence-based suicide prevention techniques.

Researchers agree: temporarily storing firearms outside of the home is the best way to reduce suicide by firearm. In veteran and suicide prevention circles, this often looks like putting a firearm in a locked case and giving it to a trusted friend. Measure 114 would make this illegal and would lead to the arrest and prosecution of those who continue to use these effective, evidence-based approaches to save lives.

In short, Measure 114 would turn you into a criminal for trying to save someone you love.

  • Veterans make up 8.7 percent of Oregon’s population, but account for nearly 23 percent of suicides among Oregon residents (Suicide Among Oregon Veterans, 2008–2012).

  • The veteran suicide rate in Oregon is already nearly 1.5 times the national average (Oregon Veteran Suicide Data Sheet, 2019).

  • Over the past 20 years, approximately 7,000 Americans have suffered combat-related deaths, but during the same period, there have been over 30,000 veteran and service member suicides. 70% used a firearm (High Suicide Rates among United States Service Members and Veterans of the Post 9/11 Wars).

  • 78% of firearm deaths in Oregon are suicides, not homicides (Oregon Health Authority Violent Death Data Dashboard).

Oregon’s veterans continue to suffer and die by suicide, sight unseen, and in numbers that should shock and shame us all. Measure 114 is a misguided proposal that will interrupt proven and effective methods to prevent tragedies. Oregon veterans deserve better. Vote NO on Measure 114.



(This information furnished by John Steinbaugh, Board Member, Forward Assist Veterans Org.)

Argument in Opposition



Rising Fascism Makes Community Defense Necessary

Between 2005-2010, I published a ‘zine called American Gun Culture Report. My writers were overwhelmingly folks of color, LGBTQ and others who owned firearms because they cared about community defense and knew the violent history of gun control being used to disarm persecuted populations.

Since those years, I have been contacted by countless individuals sharing stories about using guns to resolve dangerous situations. Typical were examples close to me. One friend pointed her shotgun at a man who broke into her house, scaring him away, and another friend recently drew his pistol on a knife wielding man attempting a gay bashing attack, holding him until police arrived. In none of these cases were shots fired and a firearm ended the confrontations peacefully.

Many people told me they kept such stories themselves, because there is such a harmful stigma connecting guns with conservative politics. There are easily available statistics about firearms being used for terrible acts, yet none documenting how often they save lives. However, just a brief look at American history demonstrates the important role armed defense has played, from the Appalachian Mining Wars to Mississippi Civil Rights struggle. In more recent times, I have provided firearms training out in rural parts of Oregon where immigrant communities exist under regular threat from Right wing groups and law enforcement is distrusted or simply unavailable.

But gun violence finally touched my life. Last February, a dear friend was shot and almost killed at the hands of a fascist mass shooter who opened fire on a peaceful police accountability protest at a Portland park. One woman died and several others were wounded before antifascist security used their AR-15 to quickly stop him. Were Measure 114 in effect, my friend and many others would surely be dead.

Before voting, please consider all the consequences.

Thank you for your time.

Ross Eliot

www.occupy2a.blog



(This information furnished by Ross Gustafson, Antifascists of Cascadia.)

Argument in Opposition



Measure 114 Harms Funding for Wildlife Conservation

One thing we take for granted are the taxes from buying guns and ammunition. Since 1937 the Pittman-Robertson Federal Wildlife Restoration Act has allowed sportsmen to impose an 11 percent excise tax on themselves to fund wildlife conservation.

When hunters buy firearms, these taxes come back to Oregon supporting wildlife projects. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife received $14.3 million in 2020 from sales of guns, ammunition and related equipment which supported wildlife conservation. 333,000 hunters and target shooters spent over $300M on hunting and shooting-related purchases, supporting federal and state taxes, and more than 4,000 jobs.

An uniformed voter reading the 114 ballot title last sentence might think: "Oh, this restricts magazine capacity to 10 rounds." Measure 114 goes way beyond a 10-round restriction. The real intent of Measure 114 is to stop gun sales. The unintended consequences hurt wildlife conservation.

Measure 114 adds roadblocks to an already cumbersome purchase process. It's a redundant background check which includes applications, photographs, fingerprints, FBI criminal background check, mandatory gun safety class, and live-fire test, which come with hidden fees.

WE ALREADY HAVE MANDATORY BACKGROUND CHECKS!

Measure 114 will not reduce gun violence! Criminals/gangs don't get background checks!

Worse, under Measure 114, there is nothing that compels police chiefs or sheriffs to implement a permit-to-purchase and live-fire training. If they don't have the staff or funding to process permit requests, all gun purchases/transfers stop.

Hunters support wildlife funding through groups like the Oregon Hunters Association, Ducks Unlimited and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation who raffle and auction firearms raising money for wildlife habitat and conservation efforts. 114 will end this fundraising. How many hunters will show up at a DU event if they don't have a chance to win a new waterfowl shotgun? Wildlife conservation loses again.

Measure 114 is dangerous and misleading!

Unintended consequences will severly reduce wildlife conservation funding in Oregon.

Support Wildlife, Vote NO on Measure 114.



(This information furnished by Paul Donheffner, Chairman, Legislative Committee, on behalf of the Oregon Hunters Association.)

Argument in Opposition



Oregon Hunters Stand United Against Measure 114

114 is a deceitful attempt to ban gun sales/transfers and make law abiding citizens into criminals. It's really two measures disguised as one: a ban on commonly used magazines, and a new permit- to- purchase scheme. Ballot measures are only supposed to have one subject. When did magazines and permit systems become one subject? If you vote to limit magazines, you are also approving the permits. This is false packaging.

Calling this the "Reduction of Gun Violence Act" is false and misleading. Gangs and criminals cause the majority of gun violence. 114 doesn't keep bad guys from getting guns or take them off the streets. It doesn't provide more needed law enforcement or hold criminals accountable.

Many firearms commonly sold today are capable of holding over 10 rounds. Everyday shotguns can accommodate more than 10 "mini" shot-shells, technically illegal. Many common handguns have a standard capacity over 10, and are therefore protected under the 2nd Amendment. 114 makes them illegal. Many hunters use larger magazines hunting varmints, for recreational shooting or self defense.

It will be impossible to prove you owned a larger magazine prior to passage without receipts, making law abiding gun owners into instant criminals.

Concealed handgun license holders with extensive background checks will still need a "permit to purchase". Military veterans and retired law enforcement with firearms training/experience don't get a pass. This makes no sense.

Hunter Education classes already teach firearms safety. They won't qualify. 114 sets back youth hunting and conservation fundraising forever.

The most dangerous part is creation of a permanent STATE DATABASE with all gun owner information. Big Government database of gun owners? Only mischief and bad things will result.

Learn what 114 REALLY does, and give a DAMN!

The Unintended Consequences will only hurt honest law-abiding citizens.

Don't be fooled by out-of-state interest groups.

We urge all Oregonians, their families and friends to join us:

Please Vote NO on 114



(This information furnished by Paul Donheffner, Chairman, Legislative Committee, on behalf of the Oregon Hunters Association.)

Argument in Opposition



Ballot measure 114 is the most dangerous and extreme attack on your rights in Oregon history.

While violent crime is skyrocketing and police are not responding, Measure 114 will make you even less safe.

114 will strip you of your right to acquire a firearm for self defense, ban standard ammunition magazines and most shotguns, cripple youth shooting sports, and cost law enforcement millions.

114 adds a second, redundant “background check” to the one already required by law.

Measure 114 will create a public database of the personal information of persons attempting to obtain a self defense firearm, even victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.

114 requires a police approved “live fire” training class but ignores the fact that there are virtually no facilities to hold such classes.

114 has no limit on what can be charged for the required classes and gives police virtually unlimited discretion to demand any information they want before granting you a “permit” that does not even allow you to purchase a firearm. It allows the State Police to conduct background checks with no time limit. Currently some people are waiting up to two years for the State Police to complete the background checks that are already required .

114 outlaws the most common ammunition feeding devices and could make you a criminal for being in possession of one that you may have lawfully owned for decades.

114 takes scarce resources away from overburdened and underfunded police and will certainly lead to costly lawsuits.

114 is a direct attack on the most vulnerable and least affluent Oregonians.

Vote no on 114



(This information furnished by Kevin K Starrett, Oregon Firearms Political Action Committee.)

Argument in Opposition



Responsible Oregonian gun owners urge a NO vote on Measure 114.

Despite where you stand on Second Amendment issues, consider this: Oregon already has some of the strongest gun laws in the country. The problem is they aren't enforced, and Measure 114 does nothing but create new bureaucratic barriers to responsible gun ownership. It does not address the problem: enforcement of existing laws and access to mental health services.

Measure 114 targets the wrong people. Elected leaders must step up to address the root causes of crime. Complicated issues like this should not be legislated from the ballot box.

Measure 114 is fundamentally flawed:

  • Contains references to non-existent statutes. This measure was written by out-of-state lawyers who do not understand Oregon. Major implementation problems are expected.

  • Violates Oregonians' privacy. Requires police to develop a database with no exemption from public disclosure, which puts domestic violence survivors and other vulnerable populations at risk.

  • Does nothing to increase access to mental health care.

  • Ignores the fact that criminals obtain guns on the illegal market.

  • Does not fund law enforcement. Instead, it gives law enforcement the impossible task of judging "psychological fitness" while the same advocates are working to defund the police.

  • Allows unlimited delays and fees that will make it harder for all Oregonians to own guns, with a disproportionate impact on marginalized communities.

  • Targets the wrong people. People who enjoy hunting and shooting will be loaded up with more costs and bureaucracy.

  • May prohibit United States military personnel and police from possessing common firearms while off duty.

Learn more at www.ogo.org



(This information furnished by Paul V Phillips, President, Oregon Gun Owners.)

Argument in Opposition



Measure 114 is Misleading, Redundant, Unnecessary and Unfunded

Oregon Hunters Join Law Enforcement Opposing this Bad Idea

Ballot initiatives like 114, written and funded by out-of-state special interests seldom work as promised. Oregonians don't need or want the UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES these measures actually bring.

"Reduction in Gun Violence Act" doesn't do what it says.

  • It doesn't keep gangs and criminals from getting guns.

  • It doesn't add actual law enforcement officers.

  • It doesn't fund mental health.

  • It doesn't hold violent criminals accountable.

It creates an unfunded permit-to-purchase scheme resulting in law-abiding citizens losing their 2nd Amendment Right to legally purchase. It prohibits commonly owned handguns, shotguns and rifles that come with standard magazines over 10. Gun owner database is public information! None of this reduces gun violence or improves public safety.

Oregon already has a mandatory background check system! It's not possible to legally purchase-transfer a firearm without a background check (350,000+ each year).

114 is unfunded. It will cost State and Local Governments over $114,000,000/biennium. More than 300 new permitting positions needed. The $65 fee only covers $39M/biennium, leaving a SHORTFALL of over $75,000,000 (2023-25). Supporters "forgot" to provide the necessary funding, leaving taxpayers with the bill. Oops!

The permit scheme is really a trap. None of the gun safety classes/live fire training exists, and live fire training/testing is unlikely, even with extra fees, another hidden tax. Ultimately, 114 is a sneaky attempt to ban gun sales. NO PERMITS=NO SALES. Unintended consequence? We say hidden trap!

Law enforcement statewide is strongly opposed to 114. The Oregon State Sheriffs Association and various other enforcement officials OPPOSE this burdensome, ill-conceived, unfunded measure. The money drained from state/local government is better spent on more enforcement officers, mental health, and prosecution of gangs/criminals using illegal weapons.

Please join OHA and Law Enforcement officials statewide in OPPOSING 114. Oregonians don't deserve the UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES hiding in this unfunded, misleading, unnecessary measure. Say NO to out-of-state funded measures!

JUST Vote NO!



(This information furnished by Paul Donheffner, Chairman, Legislative Committee, on behalf of the Oregon Hunters Association.)

Argument in Opposition



Vote No on Unconstitutional Ballot Measure 114

Measure 114 will NOT reduce “gun violence”

Measure 114 is an egregious attack on the Second Amendment, and strips future Oregonians of their rights forever. Measure 114 unconstitutionally restricts ammunition magazines over 10 rounds. Multiple studies show that the gun control measures proposed by Measure 114 do not reduce crime or mass shootings.

Measure 114 will BAN 10-round magazines

Measure 114 will ban the use, possession, manufacturing, and transfer of ammunition magazines over 10-rounds. Use of a currently owned magazine will only be lawful on private property, at a shooting range, and while engaged in hunting. When a magazine is transported off private property, the magazine must be removed from the firearm and stored separately. Therefore, a magazine over 10-rounds will not be available to exercise the right to self-defense “outside of the home.”

Measure 114 requires a permit-to-purchase any firearm

Measure 114 requires a permit-to-purchase (or transfer) a firearm. The permit must be issued by law enforcement. There is no exception for law enforcement or military purchase of firearms for personal use. A Concealed Handgun License does not qualify as a permit-to-purchase. A Hunter Safety Certification does not qualify as a permit-to-purchase. The permit must be renewed every 5 years for a fee.

Issuance of a permit requires completion of classroom and live-fire training offered only by law enforcement certified instructors. There is no limit to the amount that can be charged for trainings. Facilities and ranges for classes are extremely limited. The measure doesn’t require law enforcement agencies to actually offer the classes required to obtain the permit.

Measure 114 creates a government registry

Measure 114 requires law enforcement to maintain a registry of gun owner’s personal information contained in the permit application including - applicant’s legal name, current address and telephone number, date and place of birth, physical description, fingerprints, pictures, and ANY additional information determined necessary by law enforcement. This data is published annually.



(This information furnished by Rick Coufal.)

Argument in Opposition



Measure 114 Imposes Massive New Costs on State and

Local Governments. Fails to Provide Adequate Funding.

It's no wonder the Oregon State Sheriffs Association and Law Enforcement officials statewide OPPOSE 114. It's unfunded, redundant and drains their limited resources. Oregon ranks 49th in officers per 100,000 population! 114 does nothing to improve that, it makes it worse!

The "official" fiscal statement shows 114 imposes an expensive and unnecessary new permit scheme without funding to cover the costs.

  • Will require at least 31 new Oregon State Police positions. Sheriffs require at least 275 positions, none of them are budgeted.

  • For 2023-25 the State cost is $15.45 million. Local governments will require at least $98.7M, a combined cost over $114 Million!

  • The $65 fee only generates $19.5M/year, leaving a shortfall over $75M (2023-25) which falls on City Police and Sheriffs.

  • Additional costs of classes and live fire training a "hidden" tax on permit applicants.

If passed, OSP doesn't expect initial permit applications until January 2024 at the earliest, meaning citizens will be denied the right to purchase firearms for all of 2023 and beyond. With 300,000 applications estimated each year, the backlog will stretch forever.

Local law enforcement is already understaffed/underfunded. They can't hire today. 114 makes a bad situation worse. Filling and training over 300 permit positions will take years. This assumes the Legislature and Local Governments approve spending over $75M (2023-25) that isn't covered by fees. Taxpayers get the tab. Ouch!

If taxpayer money isn't provided, permits won't happen.

NO STAFFING equals NO PERMITS equals NO OREGON GUN SALES/TRANSFERS.

If the goal is to reduce gun violence, the taxpayer money 114 requires would be better spent hiring more police officers and funding mental health programs.

We already have mandatory background checks in Oregon! You can't purchase-transfer a firearm without one. Over 2 million background checks conducted in past 5 years!

Why waste taxpayer funding on this redundant permit-to-purchase scheme?

SUPPORT LAW ENFORCEMENT, JUST VOTE NO!



(This information furnished by Paul Donheffner, Chairman, Legislative Committee, on behalf of the Oregon Hunters Association.)

Related Posts:

Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance Withstands Legal Challenge in Columbia County Oregon — Rob Taylor Report

Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance on the 2022 May Ballot in Tillamook County — Rob Taylor Report

Commissioners of Sherman County Oregon Enact their own form of a Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance — Rob Taylor Report

Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance ~ Measure 6-181 ~ Vote YES! — Rob Taylor Report

Attorney Tyler Smith Discussing the SASO Court Victory 5PM Monday August 2, 2021 on KWRO — Rob Taylor Report

Interview with Attorney Tyler Smith ~ The SASO Legal Victory ~ August 02, 2021 — Rob Taylor Report

Wasco County Commissioners Consider Enacting a Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance (SASO) Similar to the One the Voters Regrettably Rejected in Coos County — Rob Taylor Report

Oregon Firearms Federation Director Kevin Starrett And the Erosion of the 2nd Amendment in Oregon 4PM Monday, October 18, 2021, on KWRO — Rob Taylor Report

Dr. John R. Lott Jr. Founder of the Crime Prevention & Research Center 3PM Monday August 16, 2021 on KWRO — Rob Taylor Report

Second Amendment Sanctuary on the Ballot in Four OR Counties Including Coos County — Rob Taylor Report

Second Amendment Sanctuary Material & Resources — Rob Taylor Report

The SASO a New Law for the New Year

Coos County Initiative Filed ~ Second Amendment Sanctuary Ordinance

Gun Rights Sanctuary Counties: Voters in Oregon Set Foundation for Eight

History of the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance

The Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance Wins the Election in Coos County

Second Amendment Sanctuary