REFERRED TO RULES, PUBLIC HEARING ALERT

SUBMIT TESTIMONY HERE before 8am on 3/1

HB 4145A as amended modifies the definition of “proof of completion of a firearm safety course,” modifies the affirmative defense to unlawful possession or use of a large capacity magazine, modifies exceptions to the permit and large capacity magazine requirements, and declares legislative intent not to affect the pending case before the Oregon Supreme Court on Ballot Measure 114, which is still on hold in the Oregon Supreme Court.

Should the court decide that, yes, making it almost impossible to legally purchase a firearm is constitutional with a long history in American law, HB 4145, if passed, will be the new controlling language.

The main points:

• The requirement for the all‑but‑impossible‑to‑get permit will be moved to January 2028. This appears to be an admission that no one responsible for creating these new restrictions has them ready yet.
• The amount of time the authorities will have to issue said permits will double from 30 to 60 days.
• The fee for the permit will go from $65.00 to $150.00.

The most interesting part of the bill is the carve‑out for not only active law enforcement, but for off‑duty cops, as well as retired cops, probation officers, and parole officers.

See the following:

(15) A valid permit to purchase a firearm issued under ORS 166.505 is not required for a firearm or unfinished frame or receiver purchase from a gun dealer under this section if the purchaser is a peace officer as defined in ORS 133.005, a parole and probation officer as defined in ORS 181A.355, or a retired peace officer or parole and probation officer who is a qualified retired law‑enforcement officer as defined in 18 U.S.C. 926C

The carve‑out also applies to magazines that you will be forbidden from having.

Subsection (2) of this Subsection (2) of this section does not apply at any time to: ……

(d) A peace officer, a parole and probation officer, or a retired peace officer or parole and probation officer who is a qualified retired law‑enforcement officer, who acquires, possesses, or uses a large‑capacity magazine, regardless of whether the acquisition, possession, or use is related to activities within the scope of the person’s official duties or occurs while the person is off duty or after the person’s retirement.

This is just another slap in the face of Oregon’s gun owners.

The only reason off‑duty or former peace officers get to have what you are forbidden is because their lobbyists made a deal with the Democrats.

What possible excuse does a retired probation officer have to possess a device that the Democrats, the courts, and the left‑leaning groups who fund them say is only good for “killing lots of people as quickly as possible?”
Apparently it’s OK for retired and off‑duty police to have “weapons of war that have no place on our streets.”

As we are seeing across the country, the left has a well‑organized and well‑funded machine prepared to riot and disrupt legitimate police actions. The Democrats are determined to make sure those people are better equipped than you are allowed to be.
[Source: OFF newsletter]