Oregon’s ‘Ghost Gun’ Ban Now in Effect

"Ghost guns" seized by federal law enforcement displayed at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) field office in Glendale, Calif., on April 18, 2022. Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images

Oregonians who have a firearm that was made at home and never serialized can now be charged with a crime under the state’s new “ghost gun” law.

The statute, which went into effect on Sept. 1, forbids the sale, transfer, and import of unserialized firearms and the possession, sale, and manufacturing of firearms that cannot be detected by metal detectors or X-ray machines, according to a fact sheet published on the Oregon Department of Justice (DOJ) website.

The prohibited firearms “do not include a serial number and are home-built or assembled using parts purchased separately,” the Oregon DOJ said in a statement.

These weapons can be made by 3D printers or constructed from kits found online.

All firearms built after Oct. 22, 1968, must have a serial number in Oregon.

For decades, federal law has required firearms to have a serial number. This new law makes it state-specific.

Violations could result in a fine of $1,000 for first-time offenders. Repeat offenders could face higher fines and incarceration. A third offense could bring a felony charge, according to the Oregon DOJ.

Passed with bipartisan support in the state’s 2023 legislative session, House Bill 2005 was signed into law by Gov. Tina Kotek in summer 2023.

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum had advocated for the legislation for years.

“Guns assembled at home from online kits—or made from instructions on 3D-printers—are weapons of choice for gun traffickers and those who cannot otherwise legally obtain a gun,” Rosenblum said in a statement.

She cited Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) reports.

According to the ATF, in 2022, the department recovered 25,785 ghost guns in domestic seizures, as well as 2,453 through international operations. So far in 2023, the department has recovered more than 10,000 privately made firearms domestically and 1,000 internationally.

Firearms groups argue that the law violates their constitutional rights.

Suit Alleges Second Amendment Violation

In August, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Oregon against Rosenblum and Oregon State Police Superintendent Casey Codding, arguing that the law violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The nonprofit FPC, on behalf of the Oregon Firearms Federation (OFF) and three Oregon residents, said that plaintiffs would face “irreparable harm” because they own guns that would be banned under the law, and asked for the law to be blocked, according to the complaint.

“Throughout American history, people have been free to personally manufacture, construct, and/or assemble arms for lawful purposes, including self-defense in the home,” according to the suit.

“The Oregon ban completely and categorically prohibits individuals not [otherwise] prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment protected rights from possessing, acquiring, and self-manufacturing firearms that are of types, functions, and designs, and are themselves, commonly owned and possessed firearms—self-made firearms that do not bear a manufacturer’s serial number, as well as the component parts used to build such arms—by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”

U.S. District Judge Adrienne Nelson denied the suit on Aug. 20, allowing the law to take effect on Sept. 1.

Plaintiffs say that complying with the law is not possible.

“The DoJ Fact Sheet says ‘To comply, firearms, frames, and receivers that do not have serial numbers can be taken to a federally licensed gun dealer (FFL) to be serialized,’” plaintiff Kevin Starrett, president of OFF, told The Epoch Times.

“But we currently know of no FFLs who have both the proper licenses and equipment to serialize guns and are willing to put their names on a gun made by someone else.”

He cited the DOJ fact sheet that suggested that gun owners visit their local gun shops and ask how they can get their items serialized, and he questioned whether a gun store could provide legal opinions.

“Given the ambiguity of the law, it is very possible that someone will run afoul of it before we get a ruling on its constitutionality,” Starrett said.