Under a disaster of a bill recently introduced in Oregon, any revolver holding more than 5 rounds would be outlawed, including a model such as this Colt SAA, a design dating back to the 1870s.
Under a disaster of a bill recently introduced in Oregon, any revolver holding more than 5 rounds would be outlawed, including a model such as this Colt SAA, a design dating back to the 1870s. Colt

A proposed bill in Oregon would limit ammo purchases in the Beaver State to only 20 rounds a month, and outlaw magazines capable of holding more than five rounds. It would also raise the minimum age to purchase any firearm to 21 and require a permit to do so.

Most troubling for those who shoot at private ranges or duck hunt is the limit on the amount of ammo that can be purchased in a 30 day period. The Oregonian reports there is an exemption in the bill that permits shooters to buy as much as ammo as they’d like from authorized shooting ranges, but how many gun shops have a range on the back 40?

Even if your favored range does sell ammo, if you shoot less popular calibers you may still be out of luck. Most shotshells come in boxes of 25, so those will be all but barred from the state. High volume shooters, such as duck hunters or even those looking to control the pigeon population around the grain silo or milking parlor could find themselves between a rock and a hard place.

Magazine capacity would be limited to five rounds, again creating issues for most firearm owners, as very few magazines are available with 5-round capacities. Even some bolt guns have detachable box magazines that hold more than five rounds. Any magazines larger than that must be altered to only hold the allotted number of rounds, turned into law enforcement, or destroyed within 180 days of the bill’s passage.

All these regulations combined would make any kind of competitive shooting impossible.

Say Goodbye to Most Wheel Guns

According to the Statesman Journal, there would be no compensation for surrendered or destroyed mags.

There is a clause that exempts tubular magazines, such as those found on lever-actions and .22 caliber firearms, but there is no provision for revolvers, which means that Oregonians would have to surrender their six-shooters. A revolver literally from the mid- to late 1800s would be considered illegal.

When not in use, all firearms must be stored with a trigger or cable lock in place or in a locked container, meaning any firearm would be all but useless for home defense.

Additionally, gun owners must report the loss of a firearm within 24 hours.

Perhaps the most overreaching portion of the bill is the increased age requirement, moved to 21 from 18, and the requirement of a permit for all gun purchases.

The Statesman Journal says that permit could only be obtained by those over 21 from their county sheriff. To qualify, an individual must not have been convicted of a crime, must not have violated a restraining or stalking order; and not use illegal controlled substances.

Additionally, they must provide proof of completing a firearms safety course. The language used in the bill would still allow the sheriff to deny any application if they have “reasonable grounds to believe” the applicant is likely to be a danger to themselves or others. A person may only apply for one handgun permit and one rifle or shotgun permit within a 30-day period.

The bill, SB 501, was authored by a group of students and the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Rob Wagner and Rep. Andrea Salinas have admittedly not looked into the legal implications of the bill, but that didn’t stop them from drafting a horrid piece of legislation.

The Journal reports that Wagner “hasn’t looked much into its constitutionality.” Oregon Live says penalties for violating the proposed legislation are fines up to $6,250 and 364 days in jail.

Needless to say, this doesn’t sit well with gun owners in Oregon, and some politicians have voiced their contempt.

“The Oregon Constitution is clearer about the Second Amendment than the United States Constitution. We value and respect firearms in Oregon—and this is not a partisan issue,” Rep. Bill Post said in a statement published by the Statesman Journal. “The bill is culturally blind to the heritage of our state and Oregonians’ values.”