Background check needed selling to a sibling in OR?

[sithc]

Based on my research, it seems the private sales background check does not apply if I want to sell to my (blood) sister since she is a direct family member? We even have the same last name still.

Oregon Firearms Safety Act – Ceasefire Oregon (http://www.ceasefireoregon.org/bills/oregon-firearms-safety-act/)

However, it does not mention if my sister needs to be in the same household or not. We are both Oregon residents (a few blocks away actually), but we don't live together obviously as we are both of adult age.

So am I right.... I could sell her one of my pistol without a background check just like the good old days without breaking any law?

Thanks in advance.

Read More

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

As far as I know and as far as the law states, immediate family members are fine to do private sales/transfers with so long as their record (if any) doesnt prohibit them from ownership.

 

[bolus]

Family is fine. plus unless you think she is going to do armed robbery with it, no one would know.

 

[etrain16]

So what if your family is in another state?

 

[STUKA]

I was just looking into that-because I have a whole bunch of family in WA and Idaho.. Im pretty sure the regular ATF state to state laws apply

 

[etrain16]

I was just looking into that-because I have a whole bunch of family in WA and Isaho.. Im pretty sure the regular ATF state to state laws apply

I figured they would, but I've never looked into it. I have family out of state too and I recently thought about selling something to them, I was curious if the ATF would have been kind enough to allow a family exemption.

 

[sithc]

Ok, so say she commits armed robbery, or a fatal self-defense shooting by her. Since the gun was last registered to me, am I going to be in any trouble then? Can I simply say I sold it to her years ago without getting in trouble? Or should I do a simple bill-of-sale still for future reference?

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

So what if your family is in another state?

I think you're within the law to "forget" them at an out of state
(family members) house. And it wouldnt make sense to pay for a plane ticket when you'll be bac next year.. Or when ever.

It is family after all, and lord knows I forget things from time to time

 

[The Heretic]

Immediate family, i.e., parent/grandparent/aunt/uncle, sibling/first cousin, child/grandchild - all okay. Sale or gift or loan - no BGC:

ORS 166.435 - Firearm transfers by unlicensed persons - 2015 Oregon Revised Statutes (http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/166.435)

The requirements of subsections (2) and (3) of this section do not apply to:

(a)The transfer of a firearm by or to a law enforcement agency, or by or to a law enforcement officer, private security professional or member of the Armed Forces of the United States, while that person is acting within the scope of official duties.

(b)The transfer of a firearm as part of a firearm turn-in or buyback event, in which a law enforcement agency receives or purchases firearms from members of the public.

(c)The transfer of a firearm to:

(A)A transferors spouse or domestic partner;

(B)A transferors parent or stepparent;

(C)A transferors child or stepchild;

(D)A transferors sibling;

(E)A transferors grandparent;

(F)A transferors grandchild;

(G)A transferors aunt or uncle;

(H)A transferors first cousin;

(I)A transferors niece or nephew; or

(J)The spouse or domestic partner of a person specified in subparagraphs (B) to (I) of this paragraph.

(d)The transfer of a firearm that occurs because of the death of the firearm owner, provided that:

(A)The transfer is conducted or facilitated by a personal representative, as defined in ORS 111.005 (Definitions for probate law), or a trustee of a trust created in a will; and

(B)The transferee is related to the deceased firearm owner in a manner specified in paragraph (c) of this subsection.

 

[The Heretic]

Out of state, state law fades away a little and federal law comes into play.

If it is an inheritance you are basically okay as long as it is legal in the state that the recipient resides in. Mostly, the law exempts such transfers, but it would surely vary by state (NYC or maybe it was NY state is very tight on this).

The one thing you absolutely never want to do is a "straw man" buy, even if the recipient is legal to receive it.

Moreover, if your relative is not legal to buy it, do not buy it for them, or gift it to them. You can give them a gift if they are legal to receive it, but not if they aren't. I.E., if they are not legal to buy it, you can't buy it for them, whether they pay for it or not.

If they are legal to receive it, you can buy it as a gift, but only as a gift - the cannot compensate you for that gift.

 

[sithc]

Thanks Heretic but I'm even more confused now. So I can't sell it to my sister then, only give it to her as a "gift"? <wink wink>

 

[The Heretic]

I have no idea whether you can sell or give to her - you haven't really said exactly what the circumstances are. You need to look at what the law is and make your own decision.

But you can gift a gun to her, or sell a gun to her, without a BGC, if you are both Oregon residents, and you are both legal to own a gun, and you previously owned the gun.

You can also buy a gun for her as a gift, but you should not buy a gun for her if you plan to turn around and sell it to her immediately. You can sell her a gun that you have owned for some time with the intention of *you* owning it.

E.G. - if a *anybody* comes to you and gives you money, or promises to give you money or other compensation (trades something for it), if you buy a gun *for* them - then that is a "straw man" purchase - family member or not, whether they can legally own it or not (especially if they can't) - regardless of the reason they asked you to buy it for them. That is against federal law. Do not do it.

I just bought a gun for a family member as a birthday gift - no BGC will be done.

It is kind of a bit non-sensical, and there are some nuances there, but it is the law, and unless you want to go to a federal pound me in the a** prison, do not break the law - it isn't worth it.

 

[sithc]

Heretic, thanks again. By no means am I trying to break the law hence my reason for asking. I'm not trying to get around any laws either. I'm just curious if we need to go to a FFL or not to waste time or money.

Here is the whole story if that helps...
We are both residents of Oregon. We both are CC permit carriers. We both are legal to own and buy guns. I have many guns. She already has "a gun". I have a small-sized pistol in my possesion I legally bought via private trade using BGC about a month or two ago that I have no need for. It would be a nice CC for her compare to the one she already has. I offered to sell it to her. I was just curious if we need to go do it at an FFL, hence the original question.

Hope that is enough info to get correct answer as I find the laws too wordy to understand for me and the common person.

Thanks.

 

[The Heretic]

You can go ahead and sell it to her since it appears that you didn't buy it for her - without going to an FFL for a BGC.

To be clear - the Oregon state BGC laws are not the laws that prohibit "straw man" purchases - it is the federal laws that prohibit "straw man" purchases, in any state. So the two things are separate issues.

So not getting a BGC for her is not the issue I was harping on. Someone mentioned out of state transfers. Someone else (you) mentioned something about her breaking the law - I think that was hypothetical. So I wanted to be clear about "straw man" purchases since sometimes this is why people do those kind of purchases.

"Straw man" purchases basically comes down to two hypothetical cases:

1) Person 'A' buys a gun to sell to person 'B', and person 'B' cannot buy a gun legally (for whatever reason; e.g., they are not a resident, they are not allowed to own a gun, etc.).

2) Person 'A' buys a gun to sell to person 'B' because person 'B' doesn't want their name associated with the purchase of the gun.

This does not apply (to my understanding of the law - IANAL) to gifts to family members. If person 'A' buys a gun intending give the gun as a gift (no compensating except a "thank you") to person 'B' who is a family member of the type I quoted in the law post above, and that person can legally own that gun, then my understanding is that the intention irrelevant, because it is a gift.

I think you also asked about what happens if she breaks the law with the gun. They will ask her where she got the gun. They will trace it back to you if there is any kind of transfer paperwork from an FFL before you transferred it to her. So abide by the law.

Also - never talk to the police without a competent attorney present who represents you, and then only within the attorney's advice.

 

[Diamondback]

Up here in WA at least one FFL (Rook Defense) interprets it thus:

How does the new i594 affect transfers?

In general, no one can have possession of a firearm unless they are the legal owner of that firearm. This includes instances where a firearm is stored in a family car without the owner in it, handling a handgun at a gun store before you buy it, or even letting your buddy take some shots with your new gun at the range. These instances are considered crimes committed by both parties involved. While it's been said by local law enforcement agents that these aren't the types of incidences that will be enforced, they are still able to be enforced now. The first offense is classified as a gross misdemeanor whereas a second offense is a class C felony.

There are three provisions in the initiative where another person other than the legal owner of a firearm may legally posses a firearm that is not theirs. First is handing your firearm to a hunting partner temporarily while climbing over a fence and only while actively hunting in designated hunting land. Second is if the non-owner is in immediate danger and is justified in using the gun for self defense as long as that non-owner returns the firearm to the owner as soon as the danger has passed. Lastly, you may let your child under the age of 18 use your firearm while in your direct supervision but only for teaching purposes or for hunting.

There is only one instance where a permanent transfer of ownership does not require a FFL; that is a legitimate gift between immediate family members (Mother, Father, son/brother or daughter/sister). Every other scenario you can think of other than the four explicitly given above, will require you to go to a FFL to perform a transfer for another person to handle that particular firearm. Wherein the firearm will then belong to that person and another FFL transfer will have to occur to return ownership back to the original owner.
--from Help: Answer (http://www.rookdefense.com/help_answer.asp?ID=20#261)

I notice they make no mention of grandparents, aunts/uncles, domestic partners/spouses... granted this is WA not OR, but 594 and 941 were probably written by the same Bloomingfascist Buttnugget, so...

 

[The Heretic]

you really need to look at the actual laws, not someone's interpretation of it

and yes - i agree, the old "but we aren't going to use the law that way" crap is a bunch of equine fecal matter. they said that about the patriot act too, but then turned around and used it against just about everybody for everything.

 

[PiratePast40]

I'm getting confused here. I thought OR 941 was all about gun safety and saving lives, not making the law confusing and hard to interpret. That's why it was an emergency right? The dialogue back and forth seems that you could easily become an accidental felon without endangering anyone.

Yes, I know, I'm not contributing anything useful to this particular case. Sorry about that. Just seems that people are jumping through hoops to pass personal property on to a family member. It shouldn't be confusing, but in reality, people are afraid of what the government may do to them. We shouldn't be this afraid of our government.

 

[The Heretic]

I'm getting confused here. I thought OR 941 was all about gun safety and saving lives, not making the law confusing and hard to interpret. That's why it was an emergency right? The dialogue back and forth seems that you could easily become an accidental felon without endangering anyone.

"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

 

[PaulB47]

We shouldn't be this afraid of our government.

No kidding. It's amazing how worked up people can get about ignoring some BS law, when they are probably committing 3 felonies every day without knowing it. Even more so, when the law in question probably does not apply to this case. Sheesh people, grow a pair. Anyway how are they going to know when the transfer was done, even if it does come up? Coulda been 10 years ago...

If we are still worrying about stuff like this, how the Hell are we going to perform in an actual revolution?

 

[Koda]

Even more so, when the law in question probably does not apply to this case. Sheesh people, grow a pair. Anyway how are they going to know when the transfer was done, even if it does come up? Coulda been 10 years ago...

probably?


easy to know if the original purchase was done from an ffl...