With the waves Oregon’s recent ballot initiative, Measure 114, is making across the nation, it’s clear that it isn’t merely a local matter but one that could set a precedent for the entire nation’s gun rights. This legislation, touted by the NRA as the “nation’s most extreme” gun control law, was narrowly passed last November. However, while the corporate media, gun control groups, and Oregon’s Attorney General Elken Rosenblum might tell you otherwise, the law is still entangled in an ongoing legal battle.
Oregon’s Measure 114 details are critical to understanding its implications. This measure introduces a ban on ammo magazines with over 10-round capacity. If someone currently owns one of these magazines, their use will be restricted to private property, shooting ranges, or while hunting. To make it even more restrictive, transporting these magazines off private property demands that they be removed from firearms and stored separately. Such magazines cannot be relied upon for self-defense “outside of the home.”
LEGAL ALERT: An Oregon federal judge has upheld Measure 114's gun permit requirement and magazine ban, saying that they "are not commonly used for self-defense, and are therefore not protected by the Second Amendment." You can read the opinion here: https://t.co/RxrNOTkPHb
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) July 14, 2023
The measure doesn’t stop there. It aims to put the exercise of Second Amendment rights under government oversight. Measure 114 mandates a state permit to purchase or transfer firearms. This permit, which does not include exceptions for law enforcement or military for personal use, would need renewal every five years, accompanied by a fee. Obtaining this permit necessitates classroom and live-fire training exclusively provided by law enforcement-certified instructors, which could become a significant bottleneck, given there’s no requirement for law enforcement agencies to offer these classes. However, only they are allowed to provide them.
Adding to concerns, Measure 114 intends to institute a government registry comprising gun owners’ personal information. This would include their legal name, address, telephone number, date of birth, physical description, fingerprints, pictures, and even more as deemed necessary by law enforcement. This data would be made public annually, raising valid concerns over privacy and potential misuse.
Last month, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut found Measure 114 in line with the Constitution, ruling that the Second Amendment does not cover high-capacity magazines. While supporters, like Jess Marks, executive director of the Oregon Alliance for Gun Safety, commend the ruling as a “victory” for gun safety, others vehemently oppose it. The Oregon Firearms Federation labeled the ruling “simple nonsense,” expressing confidence it will be overturned.
Immergut’s ruling is being appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and legal experts believe the case could end up before the Supreme Court in due course.
