JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
"There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and cartridge. Please use in that order" Frederick Douglass

A new type of urban camo.
But if it doesn't work, lawyers are expensive, lawfare insidious, and you are putting your livelihood, life and faith in the jury box.
Hypothetically, if I had an 80% and if I chose not to comply, it would not make any public appearances until I moved out of state, or society collapsed.

Everyone has to make a gut check and determine where we are on the continuum.
I think the hypothetical was... that a person is perfectly free to mark or adorn their firearms however they like. Under light scrutiny... if your firearm appears to be legally serialized... you could save yourself some headache. IE., A traffic stop and for whatever reason an officer wants to secure your firearm for the duration of the stop and does a casual glance to verify it's serialized. He's not going to perform a serial number search for a traffic violation and more than likely... deal with the traffic violation and send you on your way.

If you've done something that warrants deep scrutiny... you likely have bigger legal issues to contend with... and even if they run a serial check (which fewer than 5% are ever run even in major crimes)... coming back without a "hit" is pretty typical. The only record of it would be on a local registry with an FFL. Theoretically, that FFL would have to have gone out of business and turned over their log books and then be added into the federal database before it would kick back any result.

They would simply be verifying that the serial number hadn't previously been logged and associated with a previous crime.

You're right though. It's a personal choice and not encouraging anyone to willfully violate the law, but just pointing out the hypothetical.
 
IIRC, the new state law requires the FFL to "register" the serialization of the lower with the state - which is the main thing I have a problem with.
Ohhh... FFL's have to report them to the state registry??

I guess I wasn't paying attention. One of those... "yeah, I'm not doing that" and admit I didn't read all the fine print.🤣

That would change things a bit. Seeing how they are wanting to put the purchase permits under the DMV I have to wonder if the state firearm registry is going to be part of our DMV record too(?). Get pulled over for a traffic stop and all registered firearms are going to pop on a DL# lookup(?)


It won't be long before the state starts assigning social credit scores... like China. 🤪
 
IIRC, the new state law requires the FFL to "register" the serialization of the lower with the state - which is the main thing I have a problem with.
That's how I read the law, too. I had mentioned this earlier, but I am not a lawyer. The verbiage does seem to confirm that 80% and PMFs will be under heavier scrutiny and require registration which is not required for other firearms in Oregon...at least currently. I believe this is a back door scheme for universal registration in the near future.
 
That's how I read the law, too. I had mentioned this earlier, but I am not a lawyer. The verbiage does seem to confirm that 80% and PMFs will be under heavier scrutiny and require registration which is not required for other firearms in Oregon...at least currently. I believe this is a back door scheme for universal registration in the near future.
But, but, but, it's for the children!
 
That's how I read the law, too. I had mentioned this earlier, but I am not a lawyer. The verbiage does seem to confirm that 80% and PMFs will be under heavier scrutiny and require registration which is not required for other firearms in Oregon...at least currently. I believe this is a back door scheme for universal registration in the near future.
"ONLY" built after 2019 in Washington. Anything before that does not require ANY numbers. It is up to the prosecution to prove guilt and when it was built. It is NOT up to the defendant to prove inocense. End of story.
 
Ok so we can say it is safer to put some made up serial on it (make sure its uniqe to you i guess) just so you wouldnt have to explain the whole 80% thing to an officer at a traffic stop?

What about... the firearm is locked away in a case which is protected under "do not consent to searches and seizurs"? At a traffic stop you should "stfu" and just accept the ticket anyway!?

Do i need to invest in a laserengraver??? Haha
 

Roberts and Barrett joined the 3 known Statists in lifting the temporary stay on enforcement of the Frame and Receiver Final Rule in August.
 
There's no guarantee that the SCOTUS will overturn the Frame and Receiver Final Rule, just like there's no guarantee that they will overturn/vacate/void the Pistol Brace Final Rule either; and we have no guarantee that they would consider Oregon's Permit to Purchase firearms as unconstitutional, or any of the States' magazine capacity limits (WA and CA for examples) either.

Indeed we only have two known Constitutionalist/Originalists, and the rest are... more flexible it seems, though Gorsuch seems more consistently originalist than either Barrett or Kavanaugh. Roberts has shown himself to be consistently Institutionalist/leftist than the other 5 conservative Justices.

Right now there seems to be a full court press to remove Thomas and for Biden or the Democrats to expand and stack SCOTUS in order to overturn Bruen and in order to return to the two-part interest balance tests.
 
There's no guarantee that the SCOTUS will overturn the Frame and Receiver Final Rule, just like there's no guarantee that they will overturn/vacate/void the Pistol Brace Final Rule either; and we have no guarantee that they would consider Oregon's Permit to Purchase firearms as unconstitutional, or any of the States' magazine capacity limits (WA and CA for examples) either.

Indeed we only have two known Constitutionalist/Originalists, and the rest are... more flexible it seems, though Gorsuch seems more consistently originalist than either Barrett or Kavanaugh. Roberts has shown himself to be consistently Institutionalist/leftist than the other 5 conservative Justices.

Right now there seems to be a full court press to remove Thomas and for Biden or the Democrats to expand and stack SCOTUS in order to overturn Bruen and in order to return to the two-part interest balance tests.
Stomper has for a good while been trying to warn people about this here. Every time some state or fed anti rights law is proposed several wake the constitution and say "they can't do that!" Stomper among others keeps trying to tel people you can NOT count of black robes to undo the damage done by elected law makers.
 
Stomper has for a good while been trying to warn people about this here. Every time some state or fed anti rights law is proposed several wake the constitution and say "they can't do that!" Stomper among others keeps trying to tel people you can NOT count of black robes to undo the damage done by elected law makers.
Indeed. Time is coming where free people have to make a choice between abolishing/changing the Federal government or keeping it as is and continue onwards towards a dystopian corrupt system where neither "Party" is held accountable to the People.
Unfortunately I get the feeling that the majority of the people will just go along to go along and let a group of 535 "elected" lawmakers decide for 400+ million people :(
 

Upcoming Events

Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Arms Collectors of Southwest Washington (ACSWW) gun show
Battle Ground, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top