Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Im not a lawyer...help

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by deshoots, Apr 7, 2015.

  1. deshoots

    deshoots central oregon Member

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    62
    Does this mean...
    If a buddy or my girlfriend and I go out to the woods to shoot some steel we will be breaking the law if we trade guns. (this area is not designed for target shooting ...just a randon spot in the forest)
    Or does it mean. We are ok if we are at an area designed for shooting, a shooting gallery???? OR any other spot (like out in the woods where we do 100% of our shooting) as long as we are "target shooting?

    I am not good at speaking lawyer. This is the direct quote from the proposed bill.

    "SECTION 2. (1) As used in this section: (a) “Transfer” means the delivery of a firearm from a transferor to a transferee, including, but not limited to, the sale, gift, loan or lease of the firearm. “Transfer” does not include the temporary provision of a firearm to a transferee if the transferor has no reason to believe the transferee is prohibited from possessing a firearm or intends to use the firearm in the commission of a crime, and the provision occurs:

    (A) At a shooting range, shooting gallery or other area designed for the purpose of target shooting, for use during target practice, a firearms safety or training course or class or a similar lawful activity;

    (B) For the purpose of hunting, trapping or target shooting, during the time in which the transferee is engaged in activities related to hunting, trapping or target shooting;"
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2015
  2. Martini_Up

    Martini_Up NW USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,632
    Likes Received:
    1,733
    I'm also not a lawyer but I think we are all fine shooting same as we did before long as we clean up after ourselves, don't destroy trees and property, know what's behind the target, etc... If you haven't already done so, you may want to add a full size blade shovel and fire extinguisher to your outdoor shooting kit and keep it handy should you see Johnny-law/ranger snooping around.
     
    BoonDocks36, Sgt Nambu and Stomper like this.
  3. deshoots

    deshoots central oregon Member

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    62
    Yes that is all a given. We always shoot safe. Its the wording of 941 I am questioning.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2015
  4. IronMonster

    IronMonster Washington Opinionated Member Diamond Supporter

    Messages:
    4,184
    Likes Received:
    6,652
    Not that I would ever encourage anyone to break the law :rolleyes:. However unless there is a SUV marked BATF next to you a couple of friends should be able to plink with each other's firearms without worry. Is it a crime? Maybe. The likelihood of being charged and prosecuted is right around 0%. You will notice even though it's been "law" for 4 months now there has not been a single reported case involving I594. 99% of law enforcement are not out to make good people criminals.

    I know that does not really help. But don't let this crazy unenforceable law ruin your fun. Be safe, be responsible and don't swap guns infront of black SUV's with tinted windows and exempt govenment plates and you will be fine.

    If you follow this advice and run into a problem I will personally mount a campaign for your defense :D
     
    Ed Guinn likes this.
  5. Monica Cowles

    Monica Cowles Grays Harbor, Washington Member, NRA (Life) USCCA, ACLDN, SAF (Life) Staff Member Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    Interesting wording in your version....whoever drafted it has apparently been keeping a hairy eyeball on Washington's reaction to I-594 with the vague definition of 'transfer' and tried to avoid some of the pushback in their shiny new 'gun safety' law...o_Oo_O
     
  6. Dyjital

    Dyjital Albany, Ore Flavorite Member Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    4,895
    Likes Received:
    5,839
    As of right now:

    Go have fun and cleanup after yourself
     
  7. deshoots

    deshoots central oregon Member

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    62
    Guys/gals, yes I will still go shooting with my friends after this passes.
    My whole point here is...if it will be ILLEGAL after this passes, we need to get the word out. As this will bring LOTS more people on board in the fight against this abomination.
    I am sorry if my wording is confusing...I had to read my post a few times myself.

    I am just trying to figure out if it will be illegal for some friends to be out shooting in the woods some random place and trade guns.

    This is what I am questioning...is this an AND or an OR between these 2

    (A) At a shooting range, shooting gallery or other area designed for the purpose of target shooting, for use during target practice, a firearms safety or training course or class or a similar lawful activity;

    (B) For the purpose of hunting, trapping or target shooting, during the time in which the transferee is engaged in activities related to hunting, trapping or target shooting;"
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2015
  8. Hawaiian

    Hawaiian Tigard Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,284
    Likes Received:
    1,637
    (B) For the purpose of hunting, trapping or target shooting, during the time in which the transferee is engaged in activities related to hunting, trapping or target shooting;"

    This seems to say you are good to go.
     
  9. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,911
    Likes Received:
    19,541

    This right here. I concur.

    If any LEO would/should try to apply/enforce this STUPID and unconstitutional law upon citizens in the above scenerio, then they're a willing party to tyranny, and shouldn't be surprised (at all) to find themselves get dealt with accordingly on the spot by the citizenry... just sayin'. o_O
     
    Dornai likes this.
  10. PiratePast40

    PiratePast40 Willamette Valley Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,096
    Likes Received:
    2,079
    I would tend to disagree. There is neither an "and" or an "or" between (A and (B). There is nothing, so it is completely up to whomever wishes to make an interpretation. I would think that you could argue it whichever way you wished and wouldn't be wrong. That is unless the judge disagrees with you!

    I'm not a lawyer, and rarely stay at Holiday Inns. But I have written quite a few procedures based on regulations. You would have thought that the brainiacs that came up with this crap would have gone over it with a fine toothed comb.
     
  11. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,911
    Likes Received:
    19,541
    They don't care, it's just the foundation for 100% gun registration anyway. It's simply another case of progressive "ends justifies the means" BS. :mad:
     
    BoonDocks36 and Slobray like this.
  12. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    IMO the A & B Provisions are a heads up as to where this is eventually heading. They will eventually drop the "B" part IMO if all this passes with no repercussions next election.

    For now as I read it you are covered under "B" as I see it.
    I had an earlier thread where I hadn't read the whole Bill and missed the "B" part.:s0092:

    BTW they have us all a little bit scared (me included) of accidently breaking the law somehow. That is one of their intentions. Create a layer of fear around handling and being around guns and people who own them.
    Forums like this keeping everyone informed are a good way to beat them at their game.
     
  13. deshoots

    deshoots central oregon Member

    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    62
    My goal by getting this understood is to drum up more interest in the fight against this.
    IF it will be illegal under the current wording to swap guns while out plinking....that will get a LOT more feathers ruffled than already are!
     
    BoonDocks36 and OLDNEWBIE like this.
  14. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    "At a shooting range, shooting gallery or other area designed for the purpose of target shooting"

    Someone smart among the gun grabbers talked them out of limiting our rights to just this^^ obviously.
    How soon before they drop the "B" provision?
    I guess if we keep Voting in the Dems we will find out!
     
  15. RW-Ore

    RW-Ore Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    468
    Likes Received:
    355
    Monica
    A little history if I may
    Washington's I-594 and Oregon's SB-941 had the close to the same language in the beginning Prozanki has tried to pass this garbage going on three years now.
    We had the votes in the senate to kill the bill the last two years.
    Two republicans lost their seats along with one democrat that said , and proved she would not vote for any negative gun laws. Betsy was replaced by a rabid gun hater that was bank rolled out of California.
    Sara Gelser is as dumb as a post and has proven it over and over.
    In prozanski's wish to get this passed this year he ask a few pro gun people what language they would take out of it just to show him , you know, why the people didn't like it. that's what we have today.
    Prozanki's sister was murdered by her boyfriend in Texas years ago but ole Floyd blames the gun , not the person and he will never change his mind.
     
    Monica Cowles likes this.
  16. Medic!

    Medic! What just happened? Has eagle eyes. But cant remember what he saw. Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,034
    Likes Received:
    6,588
    All I know is the day may come when my government calls on me to defend it. And I wont.
    And a day may come when my country calls on me to defend it. And I will.;)
     
  17. Partsproduction

    Partsproduction Tillamook Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    824
    Likes Received:
    187
    Now they have more power over where and why I go shooting? When will Americans rise up and assert the original intent of the second amendment? It's not for hunting or target practice! I don't try to tell a bunch of old women when or why the should go quilting! I wouldn't even think of being so rude. The fact that I have no interest in quilting does NOT mean I have a right to turn against them, or support laws that limit the activities or mandate what purpose the quilting is for.

    I'm so sick of this, what they are doing is evil.
     
    BoonDocks36 likes this.
  18. Martini_Up

    Martini_Up NW USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,632
    Likes Received:
    1,733
    The exact word I think you're looking for would be tyrannical.
     
  19. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    The people of Oregon people bear some of the responsibility for their victimization by being so gullible and allowing one Party to gain so much power.
    We all know what absolute power does to people:s0087:
     
    Stomper and Slobray like this.
  20. Uberdillo

    Uberdillo Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    128
    I am not a lawyer either, but by comparison, ORS 166 is generally written more clearly. As it stands, by numerous analogies of lists in the ORS, each clause should stand on its own, either of them independently satisfying that a "transfer" has not occurred per the first paragraph. Also, each clause specifies multiple, albeit overlapping, satisfactory activities as well as defining the duration in which a "transferor" can give a "transferee" a firearm without it being a "transfer"... It's a "provision"!

    I...feel...dumber for having gone through that little exercise. Don't ask me to do this again.

    If the English language were a dog or a cat we would call this animal abuse and the author would be in jail.
     
    BoonDocks36 and PiratePast40 like this.