Inheriting guns in Oregon!

kingdaddy · Mar 21, 2014

Need some advice on the issues involved with inheriting guns from my father who lived in Oregon but I live in California (thanks for your condolences)

There are a number of things to consider I realize, so I'm thinking I may need to consult with a legal expert in this area who knows Oregon law. Maybe someone on this forum is that person, or at least knowledgeable in this area?
Really appreciate any advice with this!

PiratePast40 · Mar 21, 2014

I don't think your issue is with Oregon as far as firearms is concerned, but taxes on inheritance may be if there's a paper trail. I think your main concern will be California and possessing certain guns there.

ocarolan · Mar 21, 2014

You might ask Jake Whitemire in Eagle Point. People here use him for NFA trusts.

www.epgoregon.com
Jake R. Whitmire is an Oregon attorney practicing in the areas of estate planning, probate, business formation, N.F.A. Trust and guardianship/conservatorship law.

kingdaddy · Mar 21, 2014

ocarolan said:
You might ask Jake Whitemire in Eagle Point. People here use him for NFA trusts.

www.epgoregon.com
Jake R. Whitmire is an Oregon attorney practicing in the areas of estate planning, probate, business formation, N.F.A. Trust and guardianship/conservatorship law.

Thanks! I think I will give him a call or email. I've been reading on a couple different forums, but really feel like I need a professional opinion considering the various issues involved.

The Heretic · Mar 22, 2014

Yeah, I think the main issues are complying with federal law in moving the firearms across state lines (may not be an issue - but it is a transfer of ownership if there wasn't a trust), and complying with Calif. Law.

Many people just do it anyway without worrying about the legalities as it is almost always off paper and not inventoried.

GunRightsCoalition · Mar 22, 2014

This might help:

<broken link removed>

kingdaddy · Mar 22, 2014

The Heretic said:
Yeah, I think the main issues are complying with federal law in moving the firearms across state lines (may not be an issue - but it is a transfer of ownership if there wasn't a trust), and complying with Calif. Law.

Many people just do it anyway without worrying about the legalities as it is almost always off paper and not inventoried.

Ya that is very tempting to do, but I am afraid of running afoul of federal laws and being smacked with a huge fine or even prison for not jumping through the hoops! It's so ridiculous...

The Heretic · Mar 23, 2014

kingdaddy said:
Ya that is very tempting to do, but I am afraid of running afoul of federal laws and being smacked with a huge fine or even prison for not jumping through the hoops! It's so ridiculous...

Yeah, I am not suggesting that you do it, just saying that many people do.

I don't think the federal laws are the problem, it is the Calif. laws that catch you up. The wiki link seems to make those pretty clear.

Having talked to some people from Calif., I don't think they (at least those people) really understand the laws there - they seem to have gone by what some other person told them instead of checking out the laws themselves.

It is one thing to actually read the law, understand it, and ignore it, another thing to just go by hearsay. The latter probably don't even think they have broken any laws and are the ones likely to be caught because they will mention their ownership to someone or otherwise do something that brings that ownership to the attention of the authorities.

It is one of the reasons why I won't live there. If I ever take a firearm there, it won't be one of their "evil" guns either.

Nwcid · Mar 23, 2014

I very seldom refer people off to other boards but when it comes to CA and CA law this place can not be beat, https://www.calguns.net

ocarolan · Mar 23, 2014

Just remember... the code is not the law. The law is how previous courts interpreted the code. A good lawyer knows both.

For firearms, these can be quite different. For a local example, ORS 166.210(2) has a specific definition of firearm. It states:

"a weapon, by whatever name known, which is designed to expel a projectile by the action of powder and which is readily capable of use as a weapon."

This would seem to exclude non-functioning antiques or pieces of firearms. However, the court recently decided "readily capable of use" actually means it can be constructed into a firearm via mail order parts within a week or two, and upheld a disassembled pistol (Goltz), and an old pistol with no firing pin (Gortmaker) as firearm violations.

This case law opens the door to all kinds of new potential infringements. A prosecutor might even charge someone carrying a stripped action with concealed carry, based on Goltz.

So if you read the code, also be sure to read the prior cases.