We believe the 2nd Amendment is best defended through grass-roots organization, education, and advocacy centered around individual gun owners. It is our mission to encourage, organize, and support these efforts throughout Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming.
CREATE FREE ACCOUNT Already a member? Log InYes, but as I understand, there is a bit of a wait as it goes through the background check part.Is it still possible right now to purchase without going through the new system?
Never understood the firearms part? I see that on gunbroker now . I was looking at a Swedish Lahti M40 ( luger) type pistol that's a curio and relic. " no sales to Oregon"YES, but some online retailers will still not ship firearms and magazines to Oregon.
Be mad at where we live not the sellers that have good stuff and don't want the ole stiffie !Never understood the firearms part? I see that on gunbroker now . I was looking at a Swedish Lahti M40 ( luger) type pistol that's a curio and relic. " no sales to Oregon"
Da fuk?
Let GOA and OFF know of any online sales sites that say they won't sell to Oregon. That is the type of information needed for the lawsuits. It shows damages to Oregonians and is what strengthens our case.YES, but some online retailers will still not ship firearms and magazines to Oregon.
SB941 says all transactions must go through a " gun dealer" Unless outlined in 18 923 U. S. C. And ORS 166.436& 438. "b) "Transferee" means a person who is not a gun dealer or licensed as a manufacturer or importer under 18 U.S.C. 923 and who intends to receive a firearm from a transferor."In Oregon, a C&R license is basically a waste of money... even C&R transfers must go through an FFL
If the C&R FFL03 would comply with such unconstitutional BS, which most would hopefully not...In Oregon, a C&R license is basically a waste of money... even C&R transfers must go through an FFL
As far as I am aware there are not any hearing dates currently scheduled.I thought Judge Rashio was having all parties return to the court on February 3?
Where did you hear that?I thought Judge Rashio was having all parties return to the court on February 3?
Thought I read it here. Obviously mistaken. So unless the OSC steps in, February looks like a good month. Except for the waiting period, which is definitely BS.Where did you hear that?
Well... there was a 02/02 deadline for a plaintiffs brief in response to the federal courts question and a 02/09 date for the defendants response to be filed... to coincide with the progress conference on the same day... and I'm pretty sure that was posted somewhere's around here. Maybe that's why the date stuck in mind(?)Thought I read it here. Obviously mistaken. So unless the OSC steps in, February looks like a good month. Except for the waiting period, which is definitely BS.
Thanks Yarome! Yes, the brief. So I was sorta close to the gist of the date. Man, I hope this law gets deep sixed.Well... there was a 02/02 deadline for a plaintiffs brief in response to the federal courts question and a 02/09 date for the defendants response to be filed... to coincide with the progress conference on the same day... and I'm pretty sure that was posted somewhere's around here. Maybe that's why the date stuck in mind(?)
The only real "key" date that would affect any effective stay though is in the state court... likely some time in later March. It makes no difference what immerkraut has to say while Saint Raschio has her by the short hairs.
The appeals court could throw a wrench in at any moment, but they obviously don't seem too hot to trot to make a move either way just yet.