JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
2,274
Reactions
794
<broken link removed>


The latest from BERDICK!!

<broken link removed>

PORTLAND, Ore. -- A new law requiring background checks for all firearm sales and transfers, including private transactions, goes into effect in Oregon Sunday.

But will anyone enforce it?

One of the main sponsors of the bill, State Sen. Ginny Burdick (D-Portland), admitted Friday the law doesn't include money for enforcement.

Still, Burdick said, "This will make it harder for the criminals and the dangerously mentally ill to get guns."

If you sell a gun privately, in person or online, the law says you have to meet the buyer at a licensed gun shop and have them go through a background check, which Burdick says costs $10.

Law enforcement authorities in the Portland area and throughout the state say they won't go out and find people who are breaking the law, though they will investigate any reports they get.

"It's just a simple practicality - until we have the resources here to fully fund law enforcement and prosecution, new crimes probably aren't going to get much attention," Lane County Sheriff Byron Trapp said when asked about the bill in June.

"Some of this [enforcement] will most likely be after the fact," Burdick said. "If something, if someone commits a crime with a gun, you found out that it was sold without a background check, at that point you'd go after the person. Enforcement dollars are always limited."

Burdick also cited studies by the group Everytown For Gun Safety, which say in states with universal background checks, there's less gun trafficking and fewer police officers shot and killed in the line of duty.

Opponents dispute those findings and say the law is pointless.

"Are the gang-bangers in Northeast Portland that can't legally buy guns to begin with, that are shooting everybody every night, are they going to come in here to do background checks? No," said Warren Lacasse, owner of The Gun Room in Southeast Portland.

The law does have some exceptions: You can still legally give a gun to an immediate family member or borrow your friend's gun while hunting.

For more on the law, click here.
 
Last Edited:
Your frowny face broke the link

well, I dont feel so bad now if the media cant even get a response from OSP.

There are places that do private sale background checks. Like Cut Above Pawn already does them (even before 941 the did them if someone asked) for $25. When I was there the other day doing a purchase, there was someone doing a private sale and background check.
 
Some dealers who say they will do the checks are planning on charging $100! :eek:Time to gather up the pitch forks and torches and head to the capital!!! Anybody have tar and feathers handy????:mad:
 
Some dealers who say they will do the checks are planning on charging $100! :eek:Time to gather up the pitch forks and torches and head to the capital!!! Anybody have tar and feathers handy????:mad:
Before you go to the capital you might want to swing by those dealers first.
 
What is this Background Check thing you speak of 941 ? I guess it doesn't apply to me.:rolleyes:
All joking aside, the people whom, many would think would be on your side are in many cases not on your side, they are on the side of coin.

Why there will be a few that are good honest people that will see this 941 BS and try and help. I am hearing many dealers are going to be telling private transfer people they do not do private sales.
But will help with the transfer if you sell it to them. What they are going to do is offer to buy your
say Ak-47 for 400.00 and then sell it to your buddy for 650.00 . The reason or as I like to call lie is they do not want to be involved in a private sale. Yet they sell firearms to us using the same system they do not want to trust us with?
Many gun shops feel they have lost allot of money on private sales, so they are going to offer to sell your gun on the cheap and resell it back to the person you were going to sell it too.
Yes, TIN FOIL HAT TIME once again.

We had a big family get together on July 4th and ( zero) knew about SB941 and I live in a very conservative county. The problem has always been Antis educate Oregon far better then the Pros,
even if 99.9% of the Antis education is false, misleading and lies it works, it did at election and this year in Salem . And now we get to suffer for it. ( umm those that apply the SB941 to themselves)
 
Many gun shops feel they have lost allot of money on private sales, so they are going to offer to sell your gun on the cheap and resell it back to the person you were going to sell it too.

That- or they simply do not want to be apart of a cluster of a system. Who keeps track of the paperwork on transfers? The dealer or the seller? The FFL is putting his/her stamp on the transfer...so what happens when the ATF says "hey, you sold this gun to Mr. Smith, we'd like the 4473 form."

FFL: "I didn't sell a gun to Mr. Smith, I just did the transfer."
ATF: "Well, who sold it?"
FFL: "Looks like a Mr. Jones."
ATF: "Mr. Jones is a false name. That gun was recently reported stolen after the sale, we need his info."

Can you imagine being the FFL in this situation? Being the middle-man in a botched sale because you did the transfer and slapped your FFL number on the check so now you are apart of the process as being the transferee of a stolen weapon but you have no info on the guy that did the sale? So, yeah...I'd want to buy the gun then sell it at a markup to cover the paperwork and FFL transfer (basically paying for the time and paperwork).

This is a sue-happy country that wants to disarm everyone and make you smile while doing it or have it done to you at gunpoint.
 
Last Edited:
We just had the ATF come in last week and do there inspection, and one of the things that we asked him was what are the requirements on doing a f-f transfer and he said the ATF has no requirement and the State of Oregon is skating on thin ice as they don't have any way set up to record a f-f transfer and we could not use the ATF form to document the transfer. In short they got there hands slapped by the feds.
 
I suspect a few months or a year of data showing that any firearm related crime or death (despite SB941) remaining the same will be sufficient to have a strong hand to play to reverse this bill and remove it from law books.

Sadly we'll have to put up with it for that time, but the other side will just consider what we know to be true as merely "talking points." We need hard data to put in their faces showing that it does nothing, as well as the moderates or undecided.
 
That- or they simply do not want to be apart of a cluster of a system. Who keeps track of the paperwork on transfers? The dealer or the seller? The FFL is putting his/her stamp on the transfer...so what happens when the ATF says "hey, you sold this gun to Mr. Smith, we'd like the 4473 form."

FFL: "I didn't sell a gun to Mr. Smith, I just did the transfer."
ATF: "Well, who sold it?"
FFL: "Looks like a Mr. Jones."
ATF: "Mr. Jones is a false name. That gun was recently reported stolen after the sale, we need his info."

Can you imagine being the FFL in this situation? Being the middle-man in a botched sale because you did the transfer and slapped your FFL number on the check so now you are apart of the process as being the transferee of a stolen weapon but you have no info on the guy that did the sale? So, yeah...I'd want to buy the gun then sale it at a markup to cover the paperwork and FFL transfer (basically paying for the time and paperwork).

This is a sue-happy country that wants to disarm everyone and make you smile while doing it or have it done to you at gunpoint.
I have purchased many guns off GunBroker - as have thousands of others. My local Dealer never had an issue with it as he wanted me at least coming by in hopes of future business - which he got. He charged his $25, did the NICS and sent me on my way until next time.
Besides, the NICS tells you if that SN is stolen or not.
 
Before you go to the capital you might want to swing by those dealers first.
Good point, but I can see how setting the price that high says "I don't want to do it but I will if it's worth my time ". What would the State do if every dealer refused to process private sales????
 
<broken link removed>
-
I do my own background check every time I sell a firearm FTF with another person . I Look at a piece of 'State Issued' , Oregon Identification .

Current Identification which that ' Person Holding ID ' has already paid the State of Oregon with getting an extensive Background Check to posses .
. Oregon State Drivers license . Which is also linked to US Fed. facial recognition data base .
. or I look at 'State issued' Concealed Carry Identification .
. optional but better, I look at OR. State issued , DPSST PSID # .

Then I get a post transaction Receipt . ( A Handshake ) .
That Is Enough . And That is all I will ever do, enough said .
.
 
Last Edited:
There is nothing in the law that says that a FFL is required to do a f-f it just states that you can have a FFL do the check for you. They have not informed us on the requirements or how to do the check and I am not going to spend my time to try to find from what state dimwit that I have to contact to get the info.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top