Oregon Good luck Clatsop County, hope this passes.

Messages
258
Reactions
463
This ordinance is definitely not going to provide a free for all environment. You raise a good point about whether background checks are required by ORS 166.291 to be completed by Sheriffs office. It's not clear to me that they are but it is a question the Sheriff could probably answer.
ORS 166.291 Section 3 b:
The applicant must submit to fingerprinting and photographing by the sheriff. The sheriff shall fingerprint and photograph the applicant and shall conduct any investigation necessary to corroborate the requirements listed under subsection (1) of this section. If a nationwide criminal records check is necessary, the sheriff shall request the Department of State Police to conduct the check, including fingerprint identification, through the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall return the fingerprint cards used to conduct the criminal records check and may not keep any record of the fingerprints. The Department of State Police shall report the results of the fingerprint-based criminal records check to the sheriff. The Department of State Police shall also furnish the sheriff with any information about the applicant that the Department of State Police may have in its possession including, but not limited to, manual or computerized criminal offender information.
 
OP
A

arakboss

Messages
6,725
Reactions
11,049
ORS 166.291 Section 3 b:
The applicant must submit to fingerprinting and photographing by the sheriff. The sheriff shall fingerprint and photograph the applicant and shall conduct any investigation necessary to corroborate the requirements listed under subsection (1) of this section. If a nationwide criminal records check is necessary, the sheriff shall request the Department of State Police to conduct the check, including fingerprint identification, through the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall return the fingerprint cards used to conduct the criminal records check and may not keep any record of the fingerprints. The Department of State Police shall report the results of the fingerprint-based criminal records check to the sheriff. The Department of State Police shall also furnish the sheriff with any information about the applicant that the Department of State Police may have in its possession including, but not limited to, manual or computerized criminal offender information.
Necessary is the key word. Is it up to the Sheriff to decide what they determine is necessary? If not why didn't the State require in the law for specific investigation(s) to be completed?
 
Messages
258
Reactions
463
What I gather from reading the law is that there is a whole list of checks that a sheriff must complete before issuing a license, many of those checks include a legal and or criminal statuses. Here is a link to ORS 166.291

 
OP
A

arakboss

Messages
6,725
Reactions
11,049
What I gather from reading the law is that there is a whole list of checks that a sheriff must complete before issuing a license, many of those checks include a legal and or criminal statuses. Here is a link to ORS 166.291

Thanks for link, I have read it and what I am not clear on is this part:

"The sheriff shall fingerprint and photograph the applicant and shall conduct any investigation necessary to corroborate the requirements listed under subsection (1) of this section.

This doesn't lay out any specific requirement for background checks. If the Sheriff feels he can get corroboration without a background check then he appears to be free to do so under the law.
 
Messages
258
Reactions
463
Thanks for link, I have read it and what I am not clear on is this part:

"The sheriff shall fingerprint and photograph the applicant and shall conduct any investigation necessary to corroborate the requirements listed under subsection (1) of this section.

This doesn't lay out any specific requirement for background checks. If the Sheriff feels he can get corroboration without a background check then he appears to be free to do so under the law.
The way I read it section 1 sub sections g-p lay out the frame work for requiring a background check.
From ORS 166.291 Section 1:

1)The sheriff of a county, upon a person’s application for an Oregon concealed handgun license, upon receipt of the appropriate fees and after compliance with the procedures set out in this section, shall issue the person a concealed handgun license if the person:

g)Has never been convicted of a felony or found guilty, except for insanity under ORS 161.295 (Effect of qualifying mental disorder), of a felony;

(h)Has not been convicted of a misdemeanor or found guilty, except for insanity under ORS 161.295 (Effect of qualifying mental disorder), of a misdemeanor within the four years prior to the application, including a misdemeanor conviction for the possession of marijuana as described in paragraph (L) of this subsection;

(i)Has not been committed to the Oregon Health Authority under ORS 426.130 (Court determination of mental illness);

(j)Has not been found to be a person with mental illness and is not subject to an order under ORS 426.130 (Court determination of mental illness) that the person be prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm as a result of that mental illness;

(k)Has been discharged from the jurisdiction of the juvenile court for more than four years if, while a minor, the person was found to be within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court for having committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute a felony or a misdemeanor involving violence, as defined in ORS 166.470 (Limitations and conditions for sales of firearms);

(L)Has not been convicted of an offense involving controlled substances or participated in a court-supervised drug diversion program, except this disability does not operate to exclude a person if:

(A)The person can demonstrate that the person has been convicted only once of a marijuana possession offense that constituted a misdemeanor or violation under the law of the jurisdiction of the offense, and has not completed a drug diversion program for a marijuana possession offense that constituted a misdemeanor or violation under the law of the jurisdiction of the offense; or

(B)The person can demonstrate that the person has only once completed a drug diversion program for a marijuana possession offense that constituted a misdemeanor or violation under the law of the jurisdiction of the offense, and has not been convicted of a marijuana possession offense that constituted a misdemeanor or violation under the law of the jurisdiction of the offense;

(m)Is not subject to a citation issued under ORS 163.735 (Citation) or an order issued under ORS 30.866 (Action for issuance or violation of stalking protective order), 107.700 (Short title) to 107.735 (Duties of State Court Administrator) or 163.738 (Effect of citation);

(n)Has not received a dishonorable discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States;

(o)Is not required to register as a sex offender in any state; and

(p)Is not presently subject to an order under ORS 426.133 (Assisted outpatient treatment) prohibiting the person from purchasing or possessing a firearm
 
Messages
1,226
Reactions
262
It's possible I've been blinded my whole life by media bias. Perhaps a gun store owner or prior owner can comment to this and tell me if background checks have ever turned possible felons away trying to purchase firearms. I work in cyber security and deterrent controls actually work.
Here you go:

In 2017, almost 2200 folks were denied due to being prohibited or wanted in Oregon. Not a ton, but not irrelevant
 
Messages
7
Reactions
1
Going to try to not mess up this paraphrasing, but I talked to the Oregon Firearms Federation for clarification. The main premise of the ordinance, but not everything about it, revolves around restrictions of the local, county and state spending funding or lack of funding enforcing firearm laws in the sanctuary county. Federal Firearm background checks will still be required for purchases in businesses, but person to person sales in sanctuary counties would not be required (still optional if you want to traverse the process).

The recent findings and experience is that some of the counties and local government (specifically state police) are either cutting funding or not allocating correct resources towards performing state background checks which in turn is causing undue delays with firearm purchases, CCW, to law abiding citizens. (Also this ordinance would not make you a criminal, expediciously giving your a best friend a gun if they needed it for immediate danger)

I feel better about the ordinance and my vote FOR it , thanks for the discussion everyone.
 
Messages
258
Reactions
463
but person to person sales in sanctuary counties would not be required
You would still be violating state law. So maybe the sheriff cant arrest you but seeing as OSP does most of the firearms transfer stuff already I doubt the sheriff is your true concern if caught violating the Oregon firearms safety act.
 
Messages
7
Reactions
1
You would still be violating state law. So maybe the sheriff cant arrest you but seeing as OSP does most of the firearms transfer stuff already I doubt the sheriff is your true concern if caught violating the Oregon firearms safety act.
Thats TRUE , I forgot gentleman at Oregon Firearms Federation did say that. I knew I forgot something. I think something along the lines, but not exact, was said 'Would OSP even both enforcing or coming after you since they are not doing anything right now?' lol
 

SUPER X

Messages
3,700
Reactions
7,671
I Read a article in the D.A. It did not sound like the sheriff was very happy about it . I hope it does not put friction between gun owners and the sheriffs office
.The sheriff's
Have always seemed to be pro 2A .But the measure sounded like it removed all authority from the sheriffs office which sounded to be a over reach unfortunately there are a few very rare cases that they have to do their thing.The 2A needs protection from Salem not the Sheriff office . If there were radical gun control the sheriffs is probably the last thing to worry about considering most stand with The Constitution. Ironically the same group that hates Guns Also Hate the police and have been putting them through Hell. It might be better If the SO was in control of all the gun laws if it kept 100% of all others out of it.There is A county in Kansas if I recall correctly that does not reconize the national Firearms act of 1934 .
 
Last edited:
OP
A

arakboss

Messages
6,725
Reactions
11,049
I Read a article in the D.A. It did not sound like the sheriff was very happy about it . I hope it does not put friction between gun owners and the sheriffs office .The sheriff's
Have always seemed to be pro 2A .But the measure sounded like it removed all authority from the sheriffs office which sounded to be a over reach .The 2A needs protection from Salem not the Sheriff office . If there were radical gun control the sheriffs is probably the last thing to worry about considering most stand with The Constatution.
If I understand the measure correctly, it in part prohibits county resources from being used to enforce or participate in gun restriction enforcement. In my mind that means the Sheriff would no longer be able to issue CHLs as that is a form of gun restriction. Maybe that is partly why the Sheriff is not happy with the measure?
 

UPCOMING EVENTS

Arms Collectors of SW Washington Gun Show
Battleground Community Center
912 E Main St, Battle Ground, WA 98604, USA
Rimfire Challenge Dec 12th @ DRRC
Douglas Ridge Rifle Club
27787 OR-224, Eagle Creek, OR 97022, USA
Albany Rifle & Pistol Club (ARPC) Gun Show
Linn County Expo Center
3700 Knox Butte Rd E, Albany, OR 97322, USA

LATEST RESOURCE REVIEWS

  • Adaptive Firing Solutions
    5.00 star(s)
    Adaptive Firing Solutions. A+
    5 stars does not do Adaptive Firing Solutions justice. I have done business with him multiple times and wish I could give at least 12 stars...
  • Limitless America
    5.00 star(s)
    Awesome shop
    Love this shop. Purchased a few items from them. Always have a lot of parts in stock without much markup. Purchased two cans this summer from them...
  • Gator's Custom Guns
    5.00 star(s)
    Great, old school gun shop
    The store is a treasure trove I have found magazines for H&K, Ruger and M1A's and at great prices. The staff is knowledgeable and friendly and...
    • GWS
  • HighLine Firearms
    4.00 star(s)
    great place
    nice guy, local
  • Sportsman's Warehouse - Albany
    5.00 star(s)
    Good products at good prices with friendly and knowledgeable staff!
    We like to visit the Albany location as it's closer but have been to several others and they have all been great!:D
Top Bottom