Oregon Firearm Storage, Control, Transfer, and Reporting Initiative (2018)

Oregon Firearm Storage, Control, Transfer, and Reporting Initiative
Election date November 6, 2018
Topic Firearms
Status Not on the ballot
Type State statute	Origin Citizens
List of Oregon measuresOregon Measure 102Oregon Measure 103Oregon Measure 104Oregon Measure 105Oregon Measure 106Oregon Measure 101 (January)Submit

The Oregon Firearm Storage, Control, Transfer, and Reporting Initiative (#44) was not on the ballot in Oregon as an initiated state statute on November 6, 2018.

The initiative was cleared for signature gathering on June 18, 2018, after the Oregon Supreme Court certified the ballot title without changes. The title had been challenged in court by the National Rifle Association and the Oregon Firearms Federation. On June 21, 2018, the proponents suspended their campaign to get the measure on the ballot after it had been held back from signature gathering by the legal challenge to its ballot language. Petitioners would have only had from June 18 to July 6, 2018, to collect 88,164 valid signatures to qualify. Proponents of the measure said they would file the measure again for the November 2020 ballot.

Measure design

This measure would have provided regulations regarding firearms and assigned classes of violations to each potential infraction. The measure would have required:

• firearms to be secured in a container with tamper-resistant locks and a trigger or cable lock engaged unless being carried by the owner;
• firearms to remain with a trigger or cable lock engaged or in a container with tamper-resistant locks when being transferred; and
• firearm owners to report lost or stolen firearms to a law enforcement agency in the jurisdiction in which the loss or theft occurred within 24 hours of discovering the loss or theft.

Oregonians for Safe Gun Storage, the group sponsoring the initiative, listed the dollar amount in fines that each infraction would have resulted in and equated it to comparable traffic fines:

• A person who does not properly secure a firearm could receive a fine of $165 to $500, equivalent to fines for driving 11 to 20 miles per hour over the speed limit.
• A person who fails to secure a firearm when the person knew or should have known that a child under the age of 18 could gain unauthorized access to the firearm could receive a fine of $440 to $2,000, equivalent to fines for driving more than 30 miles per hour over the speed limit.
• A person who transfers an unsecured firearm could receive a fine of $165 to $500, equivalent to fines for driving 11 to 20 miles per hour over the speed limit.
• A person who does not make a timely report could receive a fine of up $265 to $1,000, equivalent to fines for driving 21 to 30 miles per hour over the speed limit.

Each firearm in violation of these provisions would have constituted a separate violation. According to the measure, if a violation of these provisions resulted in injury to a person or property, the owner of the firearm would have been strictly liable for the injury for up to five years following the violation. However, this liability would not apply if the injury results from lawful self-defense or defense of another person.

The measure specified that by January 1, 2019, the attorney general would have needed to adopt temporary rules establishing specifications for trigger locks, cable locks, and containers with tamper-resistant locks. According to the measure, by January 1, 2020, the attorney general would have needed to adopt permanent rules establishing specifications for trigger locks, cable locks, and containers with tamper-resistant locks. On or after January 1, 2020, locks and containers would have needed to meet or exceed specifications set forth by the attorney general.

Text of measure

Full text

• The full text of the measure is available here.

Support

Oregonians for Safe Gun Storage led the campaign in support of this initiative. The group described itself as "galvanized by the continuing epidemic of gun violence." According to a statement from the group, the two chief petitioners, Jenna Yuille and Paul Kemp, both lost family members in the shooting at Clackamas Town Center in 2012. The group said that the individual responsible for the shooting gained unauthorized access to a gun that the owner had failed to safely store.

Arguments

• Jenna Yuille, a chief petitioner and Gun Owners for Responsible Ownership PAC leader said: “Establishing clear standards for responsible firearm storage will save lives. Unsafely stored firearms pose an immediate danger. People who gain unintended access often cause harm to themselves and others."
• Henry Wessinger, another chief petitioner said: “The majority of Oregon gun owners are responsible and already practice safe gun storage. It is past time to set standards and consequences for the minority of Oregon gun owners who create tragic situations for others because of their negligence.”

Opposition

Representative Bill Post (R-25) was opposed to this measure.

• Pendleton Police Chief Stuart Roberts said he understands the sentiment behind the proposal but said if it becomes law, it wouldn't prevent tragedies involving firearms. Roberts said, "I understand the intent, but the enforceability aspect of it is somewhat limited in scope, and in most instances, the travesty of it is that it will be after something has occurred. Unfortunately, it’s a very reactive approach to an ongoing, emerging issue. Quite frankly, I don’t know that you can legislate common sense."

• The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action called this initiative an "egregious attack on your freedoms" and said that the initiative "was filed to further restrict the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens." They further stated, "It is unreasonable for the law to impose a one-size-fits-all solution. This poorly thought out initiative is without any consideration for personal circumstances. This intrusive initiative invades people’s homes and forces them to render their firearms useless in a self-defense situation by locking them up."

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Oregon

The state process

In Oregon, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated state statute for the ballot is equal to 6 percent of the votes cast for governor in the most recent gubernatorial election. Signatures for Oregon initiatives must be submitted four months prior to the next regular general election. State law also requires paid signature gatherers to submit any signatures they gather every month.

Moreover, Oregon is one of several states that require a certain number of signatures to accompany an initiative petition application. The signatures of at least 1,000 electors are required to trigger a review by state officials, a period of public commentary, and the drafting of a ballot title. Prior to gathering these initial 1,000 signatures, petitioners must submit the text of the measure, a form disclosing their planned use of paid circulators, and a form designating up to three chief petitioners. The 1,000 preliminary signatures count toward the final total required.

The requirements to get an initiated state statute certified for the 2018 ballot:

• Signatures: 88,184 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures was July 6, 2018.

In Oregon, signatures are verified using a random sample method. If a first round of signatures is submitted at least 165 days before an election and contains raw, unverified signatures at least equal to the minimum requirement, but verification shows that not enough of the submitted signatures are valid, additional signatures can be submitted prior to the final deadline.

Details about this initiative

• Henry Wessinger, Vincenza Passalacqua, and Paul Kemp filed the initiative petition with the Oregon Secretary of State on April 2, 2018.
• Oregonians for Safe Gun Storage, the group sponsoring the initiative, submitted 1,790 signatures in early April 2018. If at least 1,000 of these initial signatures are verified, the initiative will receive a ballot title and be cleared for circulation.
• The initiative was cleared for signature gathering on June 18, 2018, after the Oregon Supreme Court certified the ballot title without changes. The title had been challenged in court by the National Rifle Association and the Oregon Firearms Federation.
• On June 21, 2018, the proponents suspended their campaign to get the measure on the ballot after it had been held back from signature gathering by a legal challenge to its ballot language. Petitioners would have only had from June 18 to July 6, 2018, to collect 88,164 valid signatures to qualify.

See also

2018 measures

• 2018 ballot measures
• Firearms on the ballot
• 2018 petition deadlines

Oregon

• Oregon ballot measures
• Oregon initiative laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls
• Ballot measure signature costs

External links

• Initiative #44 full text