SB 243 : Ban RFAs, Regulate Concealed Carry Locations (Was: Relating to Firearm Background Checks)

Position: Support Status: House

SB 243 C bans rapid fire activators (RFAs) including bump stocks; allows local public entities to prohibit concealed carry license holders from bringing hidden guns into public buildings; and creates an implementation date for Measure 114 for March 15, 2026. The bill has passed out of the full Ways and Means Committee and is headed for the House floor.

Tragically, this version also includes a harmful change: the removal of the 72-hour waiting period, a concession supported by Democratic Representative Paul Evans. Eliminating this commonsense safeguard will very likely contribute to continued high rates of firearm-related suicide.

Update

6-27 (S) Senate concurred in House amendments and repassed bill.
6-20 (H) Passes out of Ways and Means with a do pass recommendation.
6-20 (H) Work Session (vote) in Ways and Means Committee schedule at 4:00 PM
6-20 (H) Work Session (vote) in Capital Construction subcommittee scheduled at 8:30 AM
6-17 (H) Recommendation: Do pass with amendments, be printed C-Engrossed, and be referred to Ways and Means.
6-17 (H) Referred to Ways and Means by order of Speaker.
6-16 (H): SB 243 passes out of House Rules Committee.
6-16 (H) Work Session scheduled.
6-11 (H) Public Hearing scheduled for 2:30 PM
6-3 (H) Referred to Rules.
6-2 (H) First reading. Referred to Speaker's desk.
5-29 (S) Third reading. Carried by Broadman, Prozanski. Passed. Ayes, 17; Nays, 12--Anderson, Bonham, Girod, Hayden, Linthicum, McLane, Nash, Robinson, Smith DB, Starr, Thatcher, Weber; Excused, 1--Campos.
5-29 (S) Girod declared potential conflict of interest.
5-29 (S) Second reading.
5-29 (S) Motion to substitute Minority Report for Committee Report failed. Ayes, 12; Nays, 17--Broadman, Frederick, Gelser Blouin, Golden, Gorsek, Jama, Lieber, Manning Jr, Meek, Neron Misslin, Patterson, Pham, Prozanski, Reynolds, Sollman, Taylor, President Wagner; Excused, 1--Campos.
5-27 (S) Recommendation: Do pass with amendments to the A-Eng bill. (Printed B-Eng.) Bonham, Thatcher not concurring.
5-27 (S) Minority Recommendation: Do pass with different amendments to the A-Eng bill. (Printed B-Eng. Minority)
5-14 (S) Passed out of the Senate Rules Committee
5-14 (S) Work Session held
5-12 (S) Public Hearing held
4-23 (S) Referred to Rules Committee
4-9 (S) Do pass with -4 amendments.
4-9 (S) Work Session scheduled at 3:00 PM
4-3 (S) Work Session scheduled at 3:00 PM in Hearing Room E.
3-27 (S) Public Hearing held at 3:00 PM in Hearing Room E.
1-17 (S) Referred to Judiciary.
1-13 (S) Introduction and first reading. Referred to President's desk.
At the request of: (at the request of Senate Interim Committee on Judiciary)
Chief Sponsors: None
Regular Sponsors: Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the President of the Senate in conformance with presession filing rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on the part of the President.

SB 243 was repassed by the Senate on June 27! Your calls and emails worked!

The House Rules Committee adopted the -B16 amendment to SB 243 and the bill was passed out of the Committee with a do pass recommendation. The Committee rejected amendments introduced by Rep. Drazan that would have made silencers and short-barreled rifles legal in Oregon; allowed people from other states to carry loaded, hidden guns in Oregon even if they could not legally possess a gun in Oregon; and repealed Oregon’s voter-approved Measure 114. During the hearing, Rep. Drazan lamented, “I am tired of gun laws,” but did not comment on being tired of gun deaths in Oregon.

An amendment (-B16) has been added to SB 243 that will impact Measure 114.

Rapid fire activators are weapons of war and do not belong in our communities, schools, houses of worship, or streets.

  • The main difference between a fully automatic gun and a semi-automatic gun is that a fully automatic gun fires continuously when the trigger is held down or pulled, while a semi-automatic gun fires one bullet per trigger pull.
  • This bill addresses rapid fire activators. Fully automatic firearms will remain legal in Oregon under the 1934 National Firearms Act. (ATF) 
  • A rapid fire activator was used by the shooter in the October 1, 2017 massacre in Las Vegas to kill 60 people and injure 413 more with gunfire or shrapnel. More than 450 other people received non-firearm-related injuries in the shooting.
  • After the Las Vegas massacre, Mr. Trump banned bump stocks but his own Supreme Court struck down that ban in 2024. (CNN)

Cities, counties, and districts can control who is bringing loaded, hidden guns into public buildings.

  • Cities, counties, districts or other entities that are defined as municipal corporations may adopt a policy prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms even if the person carrying a firearm has a valid Oregon concealed handgun license. That policy can include the building, the grounds adjacent to the building or controlled by the city, county, district or municipal entity.
  • A few concealed carry firearm permit holders mistakenly believe that their presence is enough to deter shootings–a deadly and misguided thought.  A 2021 article in JAMA Open Network found “armed guards were not associated with significant reduction in rates of injuries; in fact, controlling for the aforementioned factors of location and school characteristics, the rate of deaths was 2.83 times greater in schools with an armed guard present.“
  • The same study further found “An armed officer on the scene was the number one factor associated with increased casualties after the perpetrators’ use of assault rifles or submachine guns.“
  • Gun-free zones give law enforcement officers the tools to remove an armed person from a building before an altercation becomes violent.
  • Finally, the US has more than 400 million firearms in civilian hands. If the presence of firearms actually reduced crime, the US would be the safest country in the world. We are not. In fact, gunshot wound is the leading cause of death of kids and teens in the US. (Johns Hopkins and KFF)

NOTE: The Waiting Period clause should be added back into SB 243

  • “Waiting period laws that delay the purchase of firearms by a few days reduce gun homicides by roughly 17%.”  M. Luca, D. Malhotra, & C. Poliquin, Handgun waiting periods reduce gun deaths, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114 (46) 12162-12165, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1619896114 (2017).
  • “A subgroup analysis also found a significant 9-percent reduction in firearm suicide rates among older victims in states that introduced waiting periods, ” RAND Gun Policy in America,
  • Some people claim that women are particularly at risk of violence from abusive partners when they cannot access firearms on demand. That view fails understand the realities of intimate partner violence and fails to consider the many tools available to women–to everyone–who are concerned about safety. The state of Oregon provides laws that require abusers to be disarmed and allow other actions to be taken to keep the abuser away. These tools include Domestic Violence Restraining Orders and Extreme Risk Protection Orders.
  • Additionally, studies indicate that waiting periods actually reduce the rate of domestic violence. In a 2009, Roberts found that “a waiting period of between two and seven days significantly lowered total and firearm-specific intimate partner homicide rates compared with no waiting period,” (RAND 2024)

  • Court cases upholding waiting periods:

    • Silvester v. Becerra (2018) – The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California’s 10-day waiting period, ruling that it did not violate the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, leaving the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in place.

    • McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) – While this case incorporated the Second Amendment against state and local governments, it did not address waiting periods specifically. However, the decision acknowledged that some gun regulations, such as background checks and restrictions for felons, are permissible.

    • District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) – This case struck down Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban but stated that some gun regulations, including “longstanding prohibitions” and conditions on commercial sales, are constitutional. While it did not address waiting periods directly, it left room for reasonable regulations.