OR HB4005 Firearm Storage vs Training Kids - problems?

dagerk · Feb 22, 2020

Hey,
Reading through pending OR HB4005 on firearm storage and youth access, it looks like youth training classes and target shooting activities could be at risk. But maybe I'm not reading it properly......

https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2020R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB4005/A-Engrossed

"SECTION 6.(1) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4) of this section, a person who delivers or otherwise transfers a firearm to a minor shall directly supervise the minor's use of the firearm. "
Subsection 3 allows the firearm owner (let's say lead instructor) to delegate to another person (let's say assistant instructor or RSO).
Subsection 4 says Section 6 does not apply if the minor becomes the owner of the firearm, or the minor holds a youth hunting license and the firearm is not a handgun.

Does anybody know the legal meaning of the word "directly" as in "directly supervise" above?

Does this boil down to youth shooting classes and events must have one-to-one supervision for every firearm in use? (unless the kids use their own guns, or it's only long guns and kids have a youth license)

Instructors - Would you round up more volunteer instructors for the event/class? Would you use a reduced line size (and so less shooting time)? Would you make parents stay to supervise?

Thanks for the help in understanding and suggestions on how to address this should it come about.

Jim (calling to encourage a no vote regardless)

Sorry if this is in the wrong forum, I saw it as an instructor problem.
Also Sorry if this has been beaten to death somewhere else - I searched here and Legal Activisim and couldn't find this combo. If so, just point me there and close this thread.

Jcon268 · Feb 22, 2020

If they would actually allow the public to speak at their hearings or gave two bubblegums about the public's opinion in such matters at all, they would realize how obtuse their bills are and how they leave normally law abiding gun owners at odds with these new "laws."

Heywood · Feb 24, 2020

I tend to act like everything I do with firearms is illegal because at this rate it probably will be so I make it a habit to fight against any bills they put forward and refuse to comply when they are passed. That way I'm consistent.
People should just go ahead and assume the worst and not give a rats rearend.
personally, I wouldn't worry about it.

titsonritz · Feb 25, 2020

They can ESAD.

ma96782 · Mar 1, 2020

Whatever happened to?

Don't bother me in my bedroom (home). What I do there, is my business?

Aloha, Mark

PS....is there going to be a movement to lock up alll of the other "ADULT TOYS"? With the criminal penalties too?

SifuGreg · Mar 2, 2020

US Legal defines it as follows "Direct supervision generally means to be physically present, or within an immediate distance, such as on the same floor, and available to respond to the needs of something or someone." which is of course followed by "Precise definitions vary by context and governing entity" and isn't that the rub. The governing entity isn't providing definitions. Typical of most bills, and the source of the irritation is exactly that! Terms without clear definition leaving WAY too much interpretation in the hands of people after the fact.

It is my understanding that simply means that you must have "eyes on" much as a RSO would at a responsible range and that if the minor causes injury to people or damage, the owner of the firearm is liable. From a trainers perspective, I require parents to be present. Last thing you want is a child's imagination interpreting something someone said incorrectly to absentee parents.