Oregon SSB 554 - My Personal PARTIAL Analysis

[washagonian]

6/26/21 - partial analysis of NEW Oregon law - SB554

These are my notes regarding my analysis of the recently passed Oregon firearms law - SB554.

These notes are NOT a complete or thorough analysis of the law. They are just my notes regarding how the law relates to my situation. There is a lot of the law that I did not provide notes about because those sections do not relate to me.

I'm sharing this with NWFA folks because I did the work and felt like maybe some folks would benefit from the content. I know when other members have shared their analysis of laws and regulations, I have benefitted from that information. Such information has directed my own further research and saved me time and energy.

This is not meant to be legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney if you need legal advice.

Also, I MAY BE WRONG in some of my analysis. I'm not an attorney - just your average citizen trying to make sense out of this new law. So, beware.

Anyway, take what you like and leave the rest.

Best.

Senate Bill 554 - April 27, 2021

• Bill takes effect 91 days after legislature adjourns
  • Legislature scheduled to adjourn on 6/28/21 (this is always subject to change)
  • 91 days after (not counting 6/28/21) = 9/27/21
• SECTION 2: DEFINITIONS
  • "Tamper-resistant"lock - is NOT defined
    • My online researched determined that this terminology (tamper-resistant) is used in many fields and businesses (banking, security, etc) and it is SOP that the term is purposefully left undefined, so that as lock technology advances, laws, policies or operational procedures do not have to be rewritten
  • "Control" of firearm
    • "close enough to prevent" unauthorized person from obtaining firearm
    • Thus, do NOT need to lock firearm when transporting to and from range, at your bedside at night, etc.
  • "Gun Room"- definition (terms that are relevant to me)
    • All entrances have "tamper-resistant" locks
    • locked at all times when unoccupied
    • Only accessible by persons authorized to have access to firearms if stored there
    • Does NOT preclude OTHER uses of room - like having your garage also be your "gun room"
• SECTION 3: STORAGE
  • Firearm storage IF firearm is NOT under control of authorized person - MUST be secured:
    • Trigger lock (external, or internal to firearm), cable lock, locked container, gun room
    • Key or combination must NOT be "readily available" to unauthorized person
    • Specifically states that if HANDGUN is left unattended in vehicle IN VIEW - that is NOT stored in compliance with the law. Handgun MUST be out of view
      • Implied that the IN VIEW/OUT OF VIEW does NOT apply to a rifle
        • Rifle would still need to be "locked"
      • Handgun definition in ORS 166.210 - "Handgun means any pistol or revolver using a fixed cartridge containing a propellant charge, primer and projectile, and designed to be aimed or fired otherwise than from the shoulder."
        • Thus, a handgun would include an AR form-factor pistol
      • Not explicitly stated - but interpreted that EVEN IF handgun has trigger, cable lock - if left unattended in vehicle in plain view, it is not stored in compliance with law
      • Thus, if stolen, owner assumes liability if weapon used to inflict harm/damage within two years of being stolen
  • Liability
    • Liability of firearm owner extends for two years after firearm was obtained illegally IF NOT stored, controlled, or theft reported, according to the law.
      • There is a specific statement (Section 3)(3)(4)(b) which says that the owner of the firearm is not liable if: "The unsecured firearm was obtained by a person as a result of the person entering or remaining unlawfully in a dwelling, as those terms are defined in ORS 164.205. "
• SECTION 4: TRANSFERS
  • If transfer requires background check, must transfer the firearm with either cable or trigger lock or in locked container.
  • Implied that non-background check transfers - such as to relatives (as provided by law) does not require firearm to be locked at transfer
• SECTION 5: LOSS OR THEFT REPORTING
  • Owner must report loss or theft to "law enforcement agency in the jurisdiction" with 72 hours.
  • If owner could have, but didn't, report the firearm stolen within 72 hours, owner assumes liability if firearm is used to cause injury or damage within two years from theft.
  • If owner can NOT report within 72 hours, must report theft/loss as SOON AS THEY ARE ABLE
• SECTION 8: REGULATION OF FIREARMS IN PUBLIC BUILDINGS
  • My analysis focuses on how the law PROHIBITS someone with a CHL from legally carrying - and I've only summarized issues relevant to my interests
  • Public universities, OHSU, community colleges and district school boards MAY adopt a policy to not allow CHL holders to carry weapons.
    • Technically the law says that someone with a CHL who violates the no weapons policy will NOT be able to use their possession of a CHL as an "affirmative defense"
    • Non-CHL holders who violate no weapons policy - could be charged with Class C felony
    • CHL holders who violate no weapons policy - could be charged with Class A misdemeanor
• SECTION 9: SIGNIFICANT AMENDMENTS TO CURRENT ORS 166.360
  • Definition of "public building" also INCLUDES HOSPITALS (could be public or private) and PRIVATE SCHOOLS
  • CHL's cannot carry in a "passenger terminal of a commercial service airport with over one million passenger BOARDINGS per year."
    • This would obviously include Portland Airport
    • Medford Airport had over one million "passenger flow"in 2018 and 2019 - before COVID.
      • I believe this figure includes both boarding and un-boarding. But a zealot district attorney would probably argue that boarding and UNBOARDING was intended in the law.
  • Definitions of "Weapon"
    • Includes: "Mace, tear gas, pepper mace or any similar deleterious agent as defined in ORS 163.211 "
      • So, cannot carry OC spray in any of the prohibited areas (schools, universities or community colleges if they pass policies prohibiting weapons), airports, public buildings, etc.
      • Pocket knife with blade longer than 4 inches
        • This the first time I am aware of that any SPECIFIC BLADE MEASUREMENT has been codified in Oregon law restricting possession of a knife
• SECTION 10: SIGNIFICANT AMENDMENTS TO CURRENT ORS 166.370
  • Penalties if violating law of weapon possession in prohibited area
    • If NO CHL - if convicted, class C felony
    • IF CHL - if convicted, class A misdemeanor
  • You CAN possess a firearm on school property - IF ...
    • Firearm is possessed by someone NOT prohibited from possessing a firearm
    • AND - it is UNLOADED and LOCKED in a motor vehicle
      • Meaning, you can go to your kid's school, or go to your college classes and LEAVE your firearm in your car - UNLOADED AND LOCKED. (And based on wording from Section 3 on storage - if it's a handgun, it has to be out of sight)

END OF ANALYSIS RELEVANT TO MY NEEDS AND ISSUES

Read More

 

[NeSeR13]

I feel safer already.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

The Dems snuck "Grounds" back in to the bill which means CHL holders will have to run a maze around school and government buildings whos gun free zones now include their surrounding areas.

 

[mrblond]

so what this means is that gang bangers will need to keep their gat locked up on their way to and from the drive by.

 

[CRBMoA]

What exactly are we being protected from, except free will and common sense?

 

[kmk1012]

@washagonian thank you for the informative write up. Looks like you put in some time reading and typing this out. Should be a great resource for people who "forgot" about this a sham of a bill that got ramrodded on us.

 

[Elws25]

Thanks for the informative post. When is it too late for the frog to hop out of the pot ?

 

[The Heretic]

"Gun Room"- definition (terms that are relevant to me)

• All entrances have "tamper-resistant" locks
• locked at all times when unoccupied
• Only accessible by persons authorized to have access to firearms if stored there
• Does NOT preclude OTHER uses of room - like having your garage also be your "gun room"

If I have a room that is mostly for gun stuff, e.g., a walk-in closet that also has my clothes in it but has a door with a "tamper resistant lock", this doesn't qualify?

To what end does this criteria make a "gun room" safer?

 

[washagonian]

Supposedly your closet, as you describe it, does qualify as a gun room. (A sad gun room but still, a gun room. JK. ).

Regarding making the room safer - never said the law made any sense.

 

[The Heretic]

Supposedly your closet, as you describe it, does qualify as a gun room. (A sad gun room but still, a gun room. JK. ).

Regarding making the room safer - never said the law made any sense.

In other words, a "room" that is normally locked (especially when no one is home), i.e., "secured", but not the house or garage itself. I.E., someone cannot claim the whole house/etc. as a "gun room" just because the exterior doors are locked. For one thing, typical windows on most houses are not in any way secure - easily broken with a rock. Many garages have windows too. My shop has windows (I need to put security "screens" over them) and the rollup doors are easily defeated.

OTOH, most closets do not have windows and the walls are often more difficult to defeat due to the layout of the walls - some "secure gun storage" containers are more easily defeated than a closet would be if it had a secure lockable door.

Ideally, a person would have more secure storage - e.g., a gun safe, or at least a more secure door on a room than the typical residential door.

As for "tamper resistant" locks, for a door, I would think a "security" keyed dead bolt might qualify, whereas a keyed "entry door knob" would not (easily defeated with a butter knife). A secure hasp with a padlock

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

im so ready to comply

 

[The Heretic]

Gun room:

 

[The Heretic]

FWIW - I do have several gun safes. My question about a walkin closet was hypothetical.

 

[2Wheels4Ever]

Liability for a stolen gun.... What an asinine proposition. Does any other state have a similar law?

 

[washagonian]

In other words, a "room" that is normally locked (especially when no one is home), i.e., "secured", but not the house or garage itself. I.E., someone cannot claim the whole house/etc. as a "gun room" just because the exterior doors are locked. For one thing, typical windows on most houses are not in any way secure - easily broken with a rock. Many garages have windows too. My shop has windows (I need to put security "screens" over them) and the rollup doors are easily defeated.

OTOH, most closets do not have windows and the walls are often more difficult to defeat due to the layout of the walls - some "secure gun storage" containers are more easily defeated than a closet would be if it had a secure lockable door.

Ideally, a person would have more secure storage - e.g., a gun safe, or at least a more secure door on a room than the typical residential door.

As for "tamper resistant" locks, for a door, I would think a "security" keyed dead bolt might qualify, whereas a keyed "entry door knob" would not (easily defeated with a butter knife). A secure hasp with a padlock

@The Heretic All excellent points.

And, for clarification purposes - I am not a supporter of this legislation. I am just trying to analyze it and understand it.

They way I read the law is that it does NOT require the firearm owner to store the firearm a manner that PREVENTS theft.

Rather, the law reads that it is designed to prevent ACCESS by UNAUTHORIZED people (kids, visitors, acquaintances, bad guys).

And "access" seems to imply the ability to DISCHARGE the firearm WITHOUT overcoming any security measures.

For example, the law states that you can use EITHER of these methods for "safely" securing your firearm: gun room, trigger lock, cable lock, locked container.

So, the way I read the law - if my rifle is in a wall rack with a trigger or cable lock, I am in compliance with the law. It doesn't need to be in a safe or gun room if it has been rendered inoperable by one of the means proscribed within the law.

Again, I'm not an attorney.

Just a dude trudging through the muck and mire.

Cheers.

 

[bbbass]

OP,

When I initially read about the law in a previous thread, it said that guns had to be locked during transportation. Not just guns in view... that seemed to be added for special penalties. Not so??? You're saying I don't have to lock my firearms when I go to the range.... they are in the back of the SUV, so no doubt that they are not in my direct control, and some arse COULD break the rear window and get to them while I'm at a stoplight. (Uh, yeah sure, lol)

 

[washagonian]

Liability for a stolen gun.... What an asinine proposition. Does any other state have a similar law?

@2Wheels4Ever, I agree, the liability issue seems ludicrous. And I'm not aware of any other state with that type of liability in their legislation. Doesn't mean that such a law doesn't exist elsewhere.

Just to clarify, from my analysis (which may be flawed) the 2-year liability becomes operative if the following conditions occur:

• [EDIT] The firearm is stolen was obtained by an unauthorized person (not stolen) AND it was NOT SECURED as required by the law.
• The firearm is TRANSFERRED and it was NOT SECURED as required by the law.
• The firearm was LOST or STOLEN and the owner did NOT REPORT the loss or theft within 72 hours to the local law enforcement authority.
  • If the owner could not report the loss of theft within 72 hours, they must report it as soon as they can. An example might be someone who was on a hiking or hunting trip and returned home find a firearm was stolen 4 or 5 days earlier. If they report as soon as they can they are in compliance with the law, even though it is more than 72 hours since the break-in / theft occurred.

Section 3 (4) (b) reads such that if an "unsecured" firearm was obtained by a person as a result of the person entering or remaining unlawfully in a dwelling - then the firearm owner does NOT assume the two-year liability.

You have to really study the entire section to get the relationship between the sub-sections. But the way I read this entire section is:

• If a firearm is UNSECURED and is obtained by an unauthorized person - but not stolen, then the firearm owner assumes the two-year liability.
• What is implied is that if the firearm was SECURED and obtained by an unauthorized person (but not stolen), the firearm owner does NOT have a two-year liability.
• If the firearm was UNSECURED and STOLEN by someone UNLAWFULLY entering or remaining in the dwelling (like a burglar or thief), then the firearm owner does NOT have the two-year liability.

Again, I am not an attorney, but the "two-year liability" is NOT just simply - "if someone takes your firearm you're liable for two-years after it's taken if it is used to cause personal harm or damage."

Cheers

 

[washagonian]

OP,

When I initially read about the law in a previous thread, it said that guns had to be locked during transportation. Not just guns in view... that seemed to be added for special penalties. Not so??? You're saying I don't have to lock my firearms when I go to the range.... they are in the back of the SUV, so no doubt that they are not in my direct control, and some arse COULD break the rear window and get to them while I'm at a stoplight. (Uh, yeah sure, lol)

I really appreciate the comments and reply's and "what if's". Great discussion.
It is making me do a deeper dive into the language of the law. Always interesting.

Here's the disclaimer again - ad nausium - "I am not an attorney ..."

As a reminder, this is just my interpretation. But here is a quote from the law about the definition of control Section 2 (3) (a):

(3) "Control" means, in relation to a firearm:
(a) That the owner or possessor of the firearm is close enough to the firearm to prevent another person who is not an authorized person from obtaining the firearm.

They way I read it, if the firearm is in my vehicle, I am close enough to prevent an unauthorized person (kid, friend, casual passer by) from getting it.

Again, my reading of the law is that it is NOT focusing on securing firearms so that they absolutely cannot be stolen by someone. The focus is on making sure unauthorized persons cannot use (fire) them. Yes, a burglar or robber is an "unauthorized person", but the law goes as far as to say that if an UNSECURED firearm is STOLEN by someone who enters or remains in a dwelling unlawfully, then the firearm owner does NOT assume the two-year liability for any damage / harm caused by the use of that firearm. The intent seems to be that if a firearm owner is NOT in immediate control of a firearm, then the firearm needs to be secured so that an unauthorized family member, neighbor, friend of your kid's, your kid, you aunt Mae, your pet kangaroo, etc,. can't access and fire the firearm.

If someone robs me by breaking a car window and grabbing my gun bag while I'm sitting in my vehicle, I'm pretty sure a DA isn't going to waste time on prosecuting me. And if he/she did file charges, I'm guessing a decent rookie attorney would get the charges dismissed pretty quickly.

If I am robbed by someone breaking my car's window and grabbing my range bag out of the back, that's a crime of force against me, and at that time I was in compliance with the law regarding secure storage of the firearms - they were in my immediate control. So I'm pretty sure I'd be okay.

If I leave the firearm in the vehicle unattended, then I'd better have secured it in compliance with the law, (and if a handgun - have stored it out of sight as well).

If I leave the vehicle, such as walking into the post office (where you can't carry even with a CHL), then my handgun must be secured by one of the methods proscribed by the law AND stored out of sight. (I use a small metal lockbox with a cable wrapped around the front seat floor mount.)

The law does talk specifically about the firearm being SECURED when NOT UNDER THE CONTROL of an authorized person.

For me, when I'm in my truck going to the range, the firearms in the truck are DEFINITELY UNDER MY CONTROL - they have NOT been stored UNATTENDED in the vehicle.

FWIW

Cheers

 

[CRBMoA]

The FACT that we are debating how much blame can be apportioned to the citizen/victim instead of focusing on the perp shows just how lopsided the debate has become.

How about if we start from the perspective that a crim steals a gun and does crim stuff, he is guilty. /Thread.

Just like when the crim boosts a car and T-bones a bus full of nuns - we DO NOT go after the owner of the car.

 

[mrblond]

The FACT that we are debating just how much blame can be apportioned to the citizen/victim instead of focusing on the perp shows just how lopsided the debate has become.

How about if we start from the perspective that a crim steals a gun and does crim stuff, he is guilty. /Thread.

Just like when the crim boosts a car and T-bones a bus full of nuns - we DO NOT go after the owner of the car.

Yet!