Oregon OR trigger law start date is Sept 26, 2025

[ilikegunspdx]

Just a friendly reminder of the date

Law is below. I don't have the Oregon revised statute (ORD) link, if it exists yet.

https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2025R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB243

Read More

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

So super safeties, being installed are a no-no, correct?

 

[jordanvraptor]

So Jerry Miculek can't visit Oregon after that?

 

[Koda]

So super safeties, being installed are a no-no, correct?

Being installed or even merely possessed, correct.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Being installed or even merely possessed, correct.

Oh merely possessing too? That's insane.

Thinking out loud (long winded thought)

I get having it installed.. as I could abide by the law and take it out of my firearm(s).
but having legally purchased an item making it my own private property.. I'm not sure how they can justify ban the ownership of them. Some of these devices are $200-600 (in some cases).. it's like when the ATF at one point said for folks to throw away their braces.. which again was legally purchased property.. it makes no sense throwing such items of value away. Which I think they know is the case.. so this makes many folks unwilling to throw away expensive (at one point in time, totally legal) devices instant felons?

Beyond that.. one legal quandary.. if I toss them in the trash, there is a statistic probability someone could raid trash cans depending on where I or others live.. gaining access to something I was forced by the tyrants to discard.. making anyone digging through trash a criminal of a higher charge.

..and according to the law.. technically the garbage company would be transporting a rate increasing device.. which in their bill, is a felony… unless they hide behind that word "knowingly"..
Discarding these devices in the regular trash for anyone to access, to me seems like a massive legal quagmire.
If (hypothetically) everyone threw theirs away in the trash.. this means many concentrated amounts end up in the landfills where some public have access to but also workers.. maybe those workers are scrappers and they pluck them from the trash.. I can see this chain of issues arise with their "possession clause" within the bill. What if someone has no idea it's an FRT and they come across one because some FRTs look like cassette style drop in triggers.. how would they know? Especially if they aren't a firearm person? Some in Oregon don't even know we have banned private sales..

I saw no disposal wording in the bill, I could have skipped over it.. so at this point though, without fair market compensation for discarding my legally purchased private property and with my concerns about how to dispose of my item properly.. it would seem like those of us owning these items are forced to retain them.. because we are worried about where they will end up. I'd imagine a quality lawyer could make this a focus in court. Maybe not in as silly of a way.. but there certainly is some oddity in just outright banning these items without any kind of disposal procedure or fair market compensation from our local government.

So just like firearms and mags.. any laws retroactively banning items we have previously (legally) purchased seems mighty tyrannical and unconstitutional. I hope this goes back to court as they really didn't think this ban, compensation and disposal out.

 

[1775usmc]

Oh merely possessing too? That's insane.

Thinking out loud (long winded thought)

I get having it installed.. as I could abide by the law and take it out of my firearm(s).
but having legally purchased an item making it my own private property.. I'm not sure how they can justify ban the ownership of them. Some of these devices are $200-600 (in some cases).. it's like when the ATF at one point said for folks to throw away their braces.. which again was legally purchased property.. it makes no sense throwing such items of value away. Which I think they know is the case.. so this makes many folks unwilling to throw away expensive (at one point in time, totally legal) devices instant felons?

Beyond that.. one legal quandary.. if I toss them in the trash, there is a statistic probability someone could raid trash cans depending on where I or others live.. gaining access to something I was forced by the tyrants to discard.. making anyone digging through trash a criminal of a higher charge.

..and according to the law.. technically the garbage company would be transporting a rate increasing device.. which in their bill, is a felony… unless they hide behind that word "knowingly"..
Discarding these devices in the regular trash for anyone to access, to me seems like a massive legal quagmire.
If (hypothetically) everyone threw theirs away in the trash.. this means many concentrated amounts end up in the landfills where some public have access to but also workers.. maybe those workers are scrappers and they pluck them from the trash.. I can see this chain of issues arise with their "possession clause" within the bill. What if someone has no idea it's an FRT and they come across one because some FRTs look like cassette style drop in triggers.. how would they know? Especially if they aren't a firearm person? Some in Oregon don't even know we have banned private sales..

I saw no disposal wording in the bill, I could have skipped over it.. so at this point though, without fair market compensation for discarding my legally purchased private property and with my concerns about how to dispose of my item properly.. it would seem like those of us owning these items are forced to retain them.. because we are worried about where they will end up. I'd imagine a quality lawyer could make this a focus in court. Maybe not in as silly of a way.. but there certainly is some oddity in just outright banning these items without any kind of disposal procedure or fair market compensation from our local government.

So just like firearms and mags.. any laws retroactively banning items we have previously (legally) purchased seems mighty tyrannical and unconstitutional. I hope this goes back to court as they really didn't think this ban, compensation and disposal out.

Good points. But this is Oregon where logic and critical thinking are mute.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Good points. But this is Oregon where logic and critical thinking are mute.

100% I hear that.

 

[Koda]

Oh merely possessing too? That's insane.

Thinking out loud (long winded thought)

I get having it installed.. as I could abide by the law and take it out of my firearm(s).
but having legally purchased an item making it my own private property.. I'm not sure how they can justify ban the ownership of them. Some of these devices are $200-600 (in some cases).. it's like when the ATF at one point said for folks to throw away their braces.. which again was legally purchased property.. it makes no sense throwing such items of value away. Which I think they know is the case.. so this makes many folks unwilling to throw away expensive (at one point in time, totally legal) devices instant felons?

Beyond that.. one legal quandary.. if I toss them in the trash, there is a statistic probability someone could raid trash cans depending on where I or others live.. gaining access to something I was forced by the tyrants to discard.. making anyone digging through trash a criminal of a higher charge.

..and according to the law.. technically the garbage company would be transporting a rate increasing device.. which in their bill, is a felony… unless they hide behind that word "knowingly"..
Discarding these devices in the regular trash for anyone to access, to me seems like a massive legal quagmire.
If (hypothetically) everyone threw theirs away in the trash.. this means many concentrated amounts end up in the landfills where some public have access to but also workers.. maybe those workers are scrappers and they pluck them from the trash.. I can see this chain of issues arise with their "possession clause" within the bill. What if someone has no idea it's an FRT and they come across one because some FRTs look like cassette style drop in triggers.. how would they know? Especially if they aren't a firearm person? Some in Oregon don't even know we have banned private sales..

I saw no disposal wording in the bill, I could have skipped over it.. so at this point though, without fair market compensation for discarding my legally purchased private property and with my concerns about how to dispose of my item properly.. it would seem like those of us owning these items are forced to retain them.. because we are worried about where they will end up. I'd imagine a quality lawyer could make this a focus in court. Maybe not in as silly of a way.. but there certainly is some oddity in just outright banning these items without any kind of disposal procedure or fair market compensation from our local government.

So just like firearms and mags.. any laws retroactively banning items we have previously (legally) purchased seems mighty tyrannical and unconstitutional. I hope this goes back to court as they really didn't think this ban, compensation and disposal out.

I get where your going with that but possession being 9/10ths of the law or whatever once the trash is collected you no longer possess those things, ownership becomes the legal responsibility of the finder.
These devices are super small, especially the fast reset safeties (FRS), nobody's going to know if you keep yours unless you get into some weird legal dilemma where a search warrant is served on you. No matter how you spin it, if you keep one the possession law applies to you.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

I get where your going with that but possession being 9/10ths of the law or whatever once the trash is collected you no longer possess those things, ownership becomes the legal responsibility of the finder.
These devices are super small, especially the fast reset safeties (FRS), nobody's going to know if you keep yours unless you get into some weird legal dilemma where a search warrant is served on you. No matter how you spin it, if you keep one the possession law applies to you.

Very fair. In all honesty, everyone is just going to keep theirs.. I'm just not sure how they thought this law would work out.. more posturing and "after the fact" charges to tack onto primary charges that you were talking about where the scope of the law is already focused on an individual for a situation they got themselves into.

 

[Koda]

I'm just not sure how they thought this law would work out..

Exactly as intended, a burden on lawful gun owners to discourage owning guns. The burden on "otherwise" lawful gun owners is very real in the context of what guns are often purchased for, self defense. You can uninstall it and hide it away and it becomes pointless, but those that say they just want a range toy basically have a gun they cant carry or use for actual self defense and also take that risk of being asked what they have by leo when out in the woods enjoying their FRT for fun (woods will be the only place one can potentially get away with using them).
Same debate as magazine bans if you actually need them. Many boast they dont car and will carry them anyways, well... what does anyone ccw a gun for in the first place.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Exactly as intended, a burden on lawful gun owners to discourage owning guns. The burden on "otherwise" lawful gun owners is very real in the context of what guns are often purchased for, self defense. You can uninstall it and hide it away and it becomes pointless, but those that say they just want a range toy basically have a gun they cant carry or use for actual self defense and also take that risk of being asked what they have by leo when out in the woods enjoying their FRT for fun (woods will be the only place one can potentially get away with using them).
Same debate as magazine bans if you actually need them. Many boast they dont car and will carry them anyways, well... what does anyone ccw a gun for in the first place.

Yep this won't affect criminals using them in any way shape or form. Only lawful gun owners.

 

[PiratePast40]

For now, If I had such a thing, I'd follow the legal advice of an attorney who happens to be the chair of the Oregon senate judiciary committee. He said to keep them in your safe. Yes, he actually said that while at the diaz, as the chair, during a hearing for 243.

 

[ridnourpat]

Yep this won't affect criminals using them in any way shape or form. Only lawful gun owners.

Except if any "law abiding" gun owner decides to "ignore" this unconstitutional law, then they are no longer "law abiding" and and will be labeled a criminal then are subject to the consequences if caught.

 

[Will_White]

Except if any "law abiding" gun owner decides to "ignore" this unconstitutional law, then they are no longer "law abiding" and and will be labeled a criminal then are subject to the consequences if caught.

I prefer "peaceable", over "law abiding"

 

[shibbershabber]

Yep this won't affect criminals using them in any way shape or form. Only lawful gun owners.

that is the entire point.

No one in power actually gives a crap about "stopping crime"

Theyre malicious, not stupid

 

[Vernonia MW]

Joke of a law. I don't own any triggers that were effected by this law, but I have many friends and clients who do. Any guesses how many of them have claimed they would be getting rid of theirs?

Just another great example where we took thousands of law abiding citizens and turned them into criminals overnight, for no reason other than "I'm tired of thoughts and prayers".

 

[Perdition]

Hmmm...Because making Glock switches illegal prevented actual criminals from possessing and using them in the commission of a crime too, right?
How about this: why not just add an enhanced offense IF USED IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME? Then law abiding citizens can possess what they should be allowed to, and those who abuse the law get the sentence they deserve.
It's already been proven that making something illegal does not prevent a criminal from gaining access to it. Illicit drugs have been illegal for a very long time. That doesn't stop a criminal from being able to acquire them.

 

[Stomper]

OH NO, ANOTHER GUN LAW NOBODY WILL PAY MUCH ATTENTION TOO!

 

[dulandarko]

Wasn't this just ruled as overreach in Arizona when they tried to pass something similar? Even if it passes there may be a rebuttal on good grounds with other states rulings?

 

[LacDawg]

Oh merely possessing too? That's insane.

Thinking out loud (long winded thought)

I get having it installed.. as I could abide by the law and take it out of my firearm(s).
but having legally purchased an item making it my own private property.. I'm not sure how they can justify ban the ownership of them. Some of these devices are $200-600 (in some cases).. it's like when the ATF at one point said for folks to throw away their braces.. which again was legally purchased property.. it makes no sense throwing such items of value away. Which I think they know is the case.. so this makes many folks unwilling to throw away expensive (at one point in time, totally legal) devices instant felons?

Beyond that.. one legal quandary.. if I toss them in the trash, there is a statistic probability someone could raid trash cans depending on where I or others live.. gaining access to something I was forced by the tyrants to discard.. making anyone digging through trash a criminal of a higher charge.

..and according to the law.. technically the garbage company would be transporting a rate increasing device.. which in their bill, is a felony… unless they hide behind that word "knowingly"..
Discarding these devices in the regular trash for anyone to access, to me seems like a massive legal quagmire.
If (hypothetically) everyone threw theirs away in the trash.. this means many concentrated amounts end up in the landfills where some public have access to but also workers.. maybe those workers are scrappers and they pluck them from the trash.. I can see this chain of issues arise with their "possession clause" within the bill. What if someone has no idea it's an FRT and they come across one because some FRTs look like cassette style drop in triggers.. how would they know? Especially if they aren't a firearm person? Some in Oregon don't even know we have banned private sales..

I saw no disposal wording in the bill, I could have skipped over it.. so at this point though, without fair market compensation for discarding my legally purchased private property and with my concerns about how to dispose of my item properly.. it would seem like those of us owning these items are forced to retain them.. because we are worried about where they will end up. I'd imagine a quality lawyer could make this a focus in court. Maybe not in as silly of a way.. but there certainly is some oddity in just outright banning these items without any kind of disposal procedure or fair market compensation from our local government.

So just like firearms and mags.. any laws retroactively banning items we have previously (legally) purchased seems mighty tyrannical and unconstitutional. I hope this goes back to court as they really didn't think this ban, compensation and disposal out.

Have you figured out how to legally dispose of them? Is there a buy back program somewhere?