October 19, 2022
Page 9
Opinion articles do not necessarily represent
the views of the Portland Observer. We
welcome reader essays, photos and story
ideas. Submit to news@portlandobserver.com.
O piniOn
Will Measure 114 and Firearms Legislation
Heighten Racism in Oregon?
Last year, the respected Black re-
searcher Dr. Carol Anderson published
“The Second: Race and Guns in a Fatally
Unequal America.” This remarkable book
detailed how racist local law enforcement
agencies weaponize firearms legislation
to oppress Black communities.
In November, Oregonians will face
new firearms legislation, Measure 114.
What will it do and should we fear un-
wanted racist consequences?
Measure 114 requires any seller or pur-
chaser of firearms in Oregon to first obtain
a permit. Permit applicants must success-
fully complete a background check and a
live-fire training and safety class.
Could local law enforcement agencies use
Measure 114 against Black communities?
Black voters have reason to suspect
the worst. As Dr. Anderson documents,
local law enforcement agencies have
used the Second Amendment, plus “stand
your ground” laws and firearm permits to
sustain White domination.
For example, the Second Amend-
ment was intended to ensure local armed
White militias could successfully sup-
press slave rebellions. And they did.
Another example is Florida’s “Stand
your ground” law. Laws like these allow
Samuel Metz, MD, retired physician in
Portland
citizens to shoot and kill those perceived
as a threat. Local law enforcement agen-
cies in Florida use this “justifiable de-
fense” law to excuse ten times as many
White men killing Black men as Black
men killing White men.
And many of us remember that after
his home was firebombed, Martin Luther
King Jr. applied for a permit to keep a
gun in his house. His local sheriff refused
to issue a permit, claiming King lacked
“a good reason.”
How does Measure 114 fit into this
horrific history of oppression?
First, background checks will be con-
ducted by state and federal agencies, not
by local law enforcement.
Second, training programs will be cer-
tified by the state, not by local law en-
forcement. While any organization may
host the training (e.g. community col-
leges, gun clubs, churches, even book
groups) the curriculum must meet state
standards and receive state certification.
Local law enforcement plays no role.
Lastly, Measure 114 will require that
local law enforcement agencies, either the
chief of police or sheriff, “shall issue” the
permit to applicants who meet the require-
ments. Note the word “shall” – not “may.”
There’s a difference: In states using the
phrase “may issue,” local law enforcement
agencies need not issue the permit, even
when all requirements are fulfilled. The
case of Dr. King’s 1956 application is only
one instance. But in “shall issue” states,
local law enforcement agencies must issue
the permit if requirements are met. There is
no discretion, option, or subjective assess-
ment. Applicants meeting requirements get
their permit, according to Measure 114.
Thus Measure 114 reduces potential
risks of abuse to Oregon’s Black com-
munities. But what are benefits?
Background checks and safety train-
ing reduce firearms deaths. In Oregon,
they can save Black lives. How? The
rate of firearms deaths is six times high-
er among Black Oregonians than among
White Oregonians. While shootings of
Black men by police make headlines,
most firearms deaths in all communities
result from suicide, homicide, domestic
abuse, and misuse by children. Any re-
duction in firearms deaths in Oregon will
have an outsized and positive impact on
Black communities.
Full disclosure. I’m White. It is not
my place to tell Black Oregonians what to
think or how to vote. So this message is
for my White colleagues: Measure 114 will
save lives of children, women, and men of
all races, and especially those in communi-
ties of color.
I endorse Measure 114. I urge all Orego-
nians to endorse it as well.