SB 348, SB 527 & HB2006 Relating to firearms OPPOSE


SB 348/SB 527/HB 2006 VOTE: NO

Official Bill Description for SB 348:

Directs Department of Justice to study ways to address unlawful possession of firearms, and to provide results of study to interim committees of Legislative Assembly no later than December 31, 2024.

Elected Republican Response as reported in the media:

Senate Bill 348 amends portions of the measure but if passed, the bill would essentially replace it. The text details a law similar to what was passed by Oregon voters in 2022, but there are some key differences. One is the minimum age to buy a gun in the state would rise from 18 to 21. The details of how the permitting process would work are also outlined. The bill would raise the cost to buy a permit from $65 to $150. The renewal permit would cost $110 and would be needed every five years. SB 348 also gets rid of the ability of a third-party civilian permitting agent to grant permits. Law enforcement agencies would the only ones to be allowed to issue permits on an objective basis.

Those who oppose SB 348 say it violates both Oregonian’s constitutional rights. Many reference New York State Rifle and Pistol Association vs. Bruen. This is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that changed how lower courts are supposed to interpret gun control laws in the country.

State Senator Dennis Linthicum said SB 348 is an overreach by the state government.

“It turns out that all of these features in this bill today are just hoops to get through to prove the state has done something when in truth the state hasn’t accomplished anything,” Sen. Linthicum said.

Oregon Republican Party Statements:


SB 348 – Directs Department of Justice to study ways to address unlawful possession of firearms, and to provide results of study to interim committees of Legislative Assembly no later than December 31, 2024. -1 Amendment basically enacts Ballot Measure 114. This bill is up for a work session and will not have any more public comment. Please use the links below to contact the legislators on the committee and ask them to vote no on this unconstitutional bill.


HB 2006 – Prohibits person under 21 years of age from possessing firearms with specified exceptions. Punishes by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both. Prohibits person from transferring certain firearms to recipient person knows, or reasonably should know, is under 21 years of age. Punishes by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both. Specifies exceptions.

This bill will have more amendments that have yet to be posted. It is up for a work session and will not have any more public comment. Please use the links below to contact the legislators on the committee and ask them to vote no on this


SB 527 – Allows gun dealer or person transferring firearms, firearm accessories, ammunition or ammunition components for purchase at gun show, or business engaged in repairing or servicing firearms to establish minimum age of 21 years for such purchases, repairs or services. Creates exemption from antidiscrimination statute for enforcement of policies that impose age-based restrictions on purchase of firearms, firearm accessories, ammunition or ammunition components or on repairing or servicing of firearms in place of public accommodation.

This bill is up for a work session and will not have any more public comment. I have introduced the -1 Amendment that guts the base bill and replaces the measure keeping the current age to purchase a firearm at 18 years old, and allowing hunting rifles to be purchased for hunting at age 16. I have also introduced the -2 Amendments that guts the bill and replaces the measure with required firearms safety to be taught in school to 12-15 year old students in Middle School. Because of the Relating to Clause of the base bill, amendments are limited to what “relates” to the base bill.

Link to bills on Oregon OLIS:

Dennis Linthicum
Oregon State Senate – District 28

SB 348-3 is a backdoor for defunding the police camouflaged with benevolence and caring. It would drain millions of dollars from state and local law enforcement budgets and hurl them toward an ineffectual wasteland of bureaucratic rules and regulations. SB 348-3 is constructed from an endless faith in bureaucracy. It is girded with misguided compassion overlayed with simplistic but ineffectual policy approaches. This bill will harm the public and weaken crime prevention efforts while allowing criminal minds to continue unabated.

The Oregon State Sheriffs’ Association estimated that complying with Measure 114, before all of the additional burdens were stuffed into SB 348-3, would have cost $40,000,000 ($40M) in the first year alone. Ongoing annual costs were estimated at $36,250,000 ($36.25M) annually. Plus, there is the ongoing hiring, training, and officer replacement costs, including PERS benefits, vacations and Family Leave costs. 

Fees coming into our local county sheriff’s offices could never cover the associated costs. This would produce gigantic black holes in most county budgets unless there were increases in local taxes or bond measures for public safety.

SB 348-3 will misdirect millions of law enforcement dollars toward the purposeful persecution of law-abiding citizens. This echoes the sentiment in the Declaration of Independence which opposed the authority’s need to “erect a multitude of new offices, and send hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their subsistence.”

The point is, this will bankrupt our local county sheriff’s offices, do nothing to stop gun violence, allow crime to explode in our neighborhoods and misdirect millions of law enforcement dollars toward no good end.

The statists in the legislature with their progressive hand-maidens, NGOs, activists, and non-profits, have long known that Ballot Measure 114 was unconstitutional.
This was easily seen when Harney County’s court issued a quick injunction and stay. The court’s injunction put an end to the entire juggernaut of disinformation and propaganda about the dangers of legal firearm ownership.
But now SB 348-3 as amended will be coming to the Judiciary committee, again. No doubt, it will be passed to the Senate Floor along a party line vote with three Democrats in favor and two Republicans opposed.
Even the proponents know that their entire scheme is unconstitutional and in the Dash -3 amendment we see their explicit acknowledgement that they know what they are doing is wrong.
The majority party(D) seems to exhibit a spit-in-your-face arrogance which spills from their long-standing love of single-party rule.
Dennis Linthicum
Oregon State Senate – District 28

The weak reasoning behind the clause in Section 23 is simple. It is an attempt to disguise this under-handed and diabolical gun-control scheme behind a muddle of legalese and jurisdictional authority. 

Since the drafters seem to realize this bill is unconstitutional, their goal is to keep all legal challenges out of all courts, except one. The Marion County Court would provide the home team advantage by being the circuit court where the capitol is located and where money is dispersed. 

This is just a naked attempt to thwart perfectly valid, warranted and legal challenges by camouflaging the illegal, unconstitutional, and deceitful nature of this bill behind the entitlement of a single jurisdictional authority. One jurisdiction to rule them all, and a jurisdiction that is most-likely beholden to the Democrat party.

This ought to remind readers of the mystic tyranny presented in Tolkein’s story, The Lord of the Rings. You might recall the quote, “‘One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them.” However, the second part of the quote is more poignant, “One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.” 

Obviously, SB 348-3 has only one malignant desire – totalitarian rule. This law would bind the law-abiding gun owners in Oregon to an endless chain of bureaucratic red tape, regulations, waiting periods, training requirements, and other ineffectual nonsense, while criminals will continue to ignore the law and wreak havoc on the law-abiding.

As we unravel this scheme, we see that those in power are set on their disingenuous message of “health and safety.” They continually promote the age-old talking points about reducing gun violence by saddling law-abiding citizens with errant regulations. It never seems to occur to them that law-breakers are called that for a reason – they do not obey our laws.

The claim is that their efforts represent a sincere desire, “to save lives and protect Oregon families from gun violence.” Yet, again, we can see this declaration is riddled with inconsistencies. For example, why was the phrase, this act, “may be known and cited as the Reduction of Gun Violence Act,” struck from the text?

Additionally, watching the evening news would help deflate this claim. Does anyone think that drug cartel members crossing our Southern border are following the rules for ensuring gun safety before settling in Oregon? Does anyone think the trans-shooter in Nashville, TN, cared one-wit about obedience to gun-free zones? 

In the companion omnibus bill, HB 2005, gun-free zones get expanded across the landscape. Yet, were either of the Nashville or Uvalde shooters afraid of the illegal nature of their efforts to unleash death on the most vulnerable – innocent school children?

Another part of the omnibus gun package is the banning of those scary “Ghost Guns.” In truth, there is no data to warrant any fear about a mass outpouring of custom plastic 3D printed weapons and the untraceable chaos they might bring. This is a long exaggerated and undeserved fear. Most gun violence is not coming from high-tech and highly sophisticated crooks who might have access to 3D printer technology.  Rather, the tools for criminal gun violence are obtained from common, illegal, and inexpensive local sources.

Registration and ballistic fingerprinting also do not work. Criminals can either grind-off any serial number identification, foul the inside of the barrel, or throw the weapon into the nearest lake or river. 

Additionally, crooks do not use their own IDs to purchase guns and they are more likely to steal guns than buy them. The criminal’s mottos are, 1) there is no honor among thieves and, 2) stealing is always less expensive.

Maryland and New York both disbanded their ballistic fingerprint registry after spending millions of law enforcement budget dollars trying to get meaningful results. To date — despite the fact that thousands of ballistic fingerprints have been registered with the state police — not one crime has yet been solved using this technology. 

Conservatives rightly noted that long-lead times for registration are a disservice to the public. The bill’s proponents also raised concerns about access and costs and they proposed a new solution. Three different individuals testified in favor of expanding “permitting agents” in SB 348-3. They proposed including community organizations, NGOs, and non-profits, instead of just law enforcement bodies. This would supposedly alleviate the fear of being denied a permit due to race, gender, sexual preferences or socio-economic status.

The claim is that entrusting the permit process to open door, non-threatening, community-based organizations could help minority and disenfranchised communities get their firearms in an equitable environment without having to face the even-hand of law enforcement.

SB 348-3 is constitutionally unsound, morally subversive, socially degrading, confused in its causes, disingenuous, economically destructive, and will endanger the health and safety of all Oregonians, regardless of race, gender, sexual preferences or socio-economic status.

Lastly … it won’t even appease the destructionists in the socialist left. 

They’ll only want more.