Measure 114 Passed.. NOW WHAT? (Q&A)

[titsonritz]

https://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/measure-114-passed-whats-next.430863/page-11#post-3423091

 

[tatarinov]

n

 

[Librarian]

My question: The range I frequent is also the closest range for many Washington residents, they regularly outnumber Orgonians during our "Tactical Sunday" shoots. So, will Washingtonian's be able to bring they're legally owned standard cap mags to the range? Any other ways this effects non residents that regularly frequent Oregon ranges?

Should be no problem - use at a range is specifically included.

But someone else pointed out, you need to check WA law to see if bringing them back is legal!

 

[troutsasquatch]

My glock 10 rounders other than the ones for the 26, have an entirely different base. I got them by an accidental order one time.

Are they not removable? I haven't seen a glock baseplate (factory) that doesn't have a removable baseplate. It seems like even standard 10-round factory glock mags would be a "banned" and a no for carry.

 

[ColeInOregon]

Should be no problem - use at a range is specifically included.

But someone else pointed out, you need to check WA law to see if bringing them back is legal!

Thanks for the reply, I don't know much about WA gun laws so I amended my question to apply to all non residents.

I don't see any exemption for non residents, recreational use or otherwise, so wouldn't they be importing a verboten mag(s)?

 

[Mikej]

Or, we could merge all of the threads so I don't have to post in 40 different places!

You still posting in these? I'm pretty much done. It's not there's anything new. And not like there's anything to be done. And unless I spend all my time on these, you can't keep up. Step away for a time and there's 100 posts to catch up on. I'll just have to risk missing something fantastical.
Enjoy!

 

[Jv22]

You still posting in these? I'm pretty much done. It's not there's anything new. And not like there's anything to be done. And unless I spend all my time on these, you can't keep up. Step away for a time and there's 100 posts to catch up on. I'll just have to risk missing something fantastical.
Enjoy!

Actually this is incorrect. There are multiple questions here that have still been unanswered. If you'd like to go back and read my original post then contribute like everyone else has it would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! (As much as all this is now the new unknown and there is much we CANT answer, I get it)..

 

[oremike]

All I know for sure is after Nov. 8th a lot of people are buying guns and every new gun needs at least 2 boxes of ammo.

 

[DragoonCabbage]

I tried to give the measure text another careful read with respect to the "permit to purchase" provisions. I've come to the conclusion that it is perfectly legal to travel to any other state, acquire a firearm in compliance with local laws, and then return to Oregon. Does anyone disagree?

I suppose this raises other procedural questions for this kind of scenarion: whether any states prohibit this, whether they contact the county of residence, etc.

Thanks in advance to anyone who might have input on this.

 

[solv3nt]

I tried to give the measure text another careful read with respect to the "permit to purchase" provisions. I've come to the conclusion that it is perfectly legal to travel to any other state, acquire a firearm in compliance with local laws, and then return to Oregon. Does anyone disagree?

I suppose this raises other procedural questions for this kind of scenarion: whether any states prohibit this, whether they contact the county of residence, etc..

Thanks in advance to anyone who might have input on this.

Disagree. Based on my experience being a harsh resident, AFT enforces state laws in different states. For example, Hawaii has a long gun permit, and I couldn't buy a rifle in Oregon without having the permit in Oregon even if the rifle would never return to Hawaii.

Federal law prohibits pistol purchases out of state.

 

[Librarian]

I tried to give the measure text another careful read with respect to the "permit to purchase" provisions. I've come to the conclusion that it is perfectly legal to travel to any other state, acquire a firearm in compliance with local laws, and then return to Oregon. Does anyone disagree?

I suppose this raises other procedural questions for this kind of scenarion: whether any states prohibit this, whether they contact the county of residence, etc.

Thanks in advance to anyone who might have input on this.

Also disagree - it's Federal 18 USC 922 (a)(3) and (a)(5); violation is risking a $10K fine AND 5 years in Federal prison for everyone involved. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid:USC-1994-title18-section922&num=0

One may buy a long gun at an FFL in any state IF that sale follows the laws of all the states involved - buyer's state, FFL shop's state, and if private seller, the seller's state. That's the buy it and bring it home version. Since it would not go through an OR FFL, the PTP stuff might not apply, but it could - laws of the OR residents state; how an out of state FFL could verify an OR PTP might be an issue, and the suggestion that some or many out of state FFLs might not sell to OR residents at all is worth remembering.

If it's a handgun, however, that handgun must be shipped to an FFL in the buyer's state, and delivered there. That's why CA residents are unable to buy 'off-Roster' handguns out of state - cannot be delivered to them by the CA FFL unless the transfer is somehow exempt. And that's what will cross up OR residents when the Permit-to-purchase garbage goes into effect - one would need the PTP so the OR FFL could deliver the gun.

Some states allow their own residents to buy/sell without an FFL; that permission does NOT apply to residents of other states.

18 USC 922 has been law since 1968; very few people know about it, and no one would look at that and think interstate transfers might be a crime - this is mala prohibitum ('bad because we say so') rather than mala in se ('bad in itself', like theft). So, anecdotally, this seems to happen a lot, though since it does not get recorded, can't say how often.

 

[rurallife]

I came that close to ordering firearm last night . Glad I didn't. I would suggest getting more Ammo. I foresee more PRCalifornia garbage on the near horizon.

 

[Dozer99]

All I know for sure is after Nov. 8th a lot of people are buying guns and every new gun needs at least 2 boxes of ammo.

2 boxes? Those are rookie numbers there oremike. How bout adding a few zero's after that.....

 

[Jeromepinoy]

Just so disappointed in OREGON, I tried to tell all y friends and family that are able to VOTE NO to measure 114 but we all failed, it's going to be hard! Let's all work together.

 

[Member 34319]

You still posting in these? I'm pretty much done. It's not there's anything new. And not like there's anything to be done. And unless I spend all my time on these, you can't keep up. Step away for a time and there's 100 posts to catch up on. I'll just have to risk missing something fantastical.
Enjoy!

Mostly just browse through them. Occasionally I see something I might like at.

 

[DragoonCabbage]

Disagree. Based on my experience being a harsh resident, AFT enforces state laws in different states. For example, Hawaii has a long gun permit, and I couldn't buy a rifle in Oregon without having the permit in Oregon even if the rifle would never return to Hawaii.

Federal law prohibits pistol purchases out of state.

Also disagree - it's Federal 18 USC 922 (a)(3) and (a)(5); violation is risking a $10K fine AND 5 years in Federal prison for everyone involved. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid:USC-1994-title18-section922&num=0

One may buy a long gun at an FFL in any state IF that sale follows the laws of all the states involved - buyer's state, FFL shop's state, and if private seller, the seller's state. That's the buy it and bring it home version. Since it would not go through an OR FFL, the PTP stuff might not apply, but it could - laws of the OR residents state; how an out of state FFL could verify an OR PTP might be an issue, and the suggestion that some or many out of state FFLs might not sell to OR residents at all is worth remembering.

If it's a handgun, however, that handgun must be shipped to an FFL in the buyer's state, and delivered there. That's why CA residents are unable to buy 'off-Roster' handguns out of state - cannot be delivered to them by the CA FFL unless the transfer is somehow exempt. And that's what will cross up OR residents when the Permit-to-purchase garbage goes into effect - one would need the PTP so the OR FFL could deliver the gun.

Some states allow their own residents to buy/sell without an FFL; that permission does NOT apply to residents of other states.

18 USC 922 has been law since 1968; very few people know about it, and no one would look at that and think interstate transfers might be a crime - this is mala prohibitum ('bad because we say so') rather than mala in se ('bad in itself', like theft). So, anecdotally, this seems to happen a lot, though since it does not get recorded, can't say how often.

This is incredibly helpful, thank you both.

 

[Howard1955]

I know we have to have these discussions, but when we start trying to figure out the best way to comply with the leftists, I always have the feeling that we're getting 'lost in the weeds'.

The gun-control road our society is on is well-known (or should be). Maybe the young folks aren't being taught history in schools anymore. If they knew what was at stake, I think fewer folks would be voting for things like 114.

 

[oremike]

2 boxes? Those are rookie numbers there oremike. How bout adding a few zero's after that.....

Well honestly I don't know how much ammo each individual person is ordering, what I do know is in a week I've taken orders for 14,000 rounds of 9mm.

 

[Cavedweller]

When will Oregon Measure 114′s gun limits start: Uncertainty reigns

"It's going to be awhile before this law goes into effect , if it ever does," said Adam Winkler, a constitutional law professor at UCLA School of Law.

www.oregonlive.com

"Lift Every Voice Oregon committee members are conferring with state lawmakers and state police on setting up a Measure 114 committee and workgroup to write the rules on everything from the information sought on permit application forms to the type of courses required for safety training.

The proponents' goal is to have a committee that includes a wide range of stakeholders."

LEVO will have input into the rule making process? That's BS! I hope the stakeholders committee includes gun rights organizations.

 

[rurallife]

2 boxes? Those are rookie numbers there oremike. How bout adding a few zero's after that.....

Some of us are from the generation of "a 30-30 in the closet with a box of cartridges up on the shelf, revolver in the nightstand and box of bullets in the dresser". It appears those days are gone forever, we've got thousands of drug addicts in the wind armed with glocks with 33 round mags. That have absolutely nothing stopping them from attacking us decent citizens. New gun owners should stock up before Ammo is the gun grabbers next target.