JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
FYI, from the enrolled law SB554

SECTION 4. (1) If a person transfers a firearm and a criminal background check under ORS 166.435 is required prior to the transfer, the person shall transfer the firearm: (a) With an engaged trigger or cable lock; or (b) In a locked container.
(2)(a) A violation of subsection (1) of this section is a Class C violation. (b) Each firearm transferred in violation of subsection (1) of this section constitutes a separate violation.
(3) If a firearm transferred in a manner that violates subsection (1) of this section is used to injure a person or property within two years of the violation, in an action against the transferor to recover damages for the injury, the violation of subsection (1) of this section constitutes per se negligence, and the presumption of negligence may not be overcome by a showing that the transferor acted reasonably.
(4) Subsection (3) of this section does not apply if the injury results from a lawful act of self-defense or defense of another person.
(5) This section does not apply to: (a) The transfer of a firearm made inoperable for the specific purpose of being used as a prop in the making of a motion picture or a television, digital or similar production. (b) A transfer that occurs when a firearm is taken from the owner or possessor of the firearm by force.
Does "A person" include the FFLs? If so this will mean no firearms can be handed over to customer without a lock?

Or does it only apply to private party transfers?

I wonder how many FFLs are aware of this and have looked into to it? New firearms pretty much all have locks included except frames and receivers but the law says "engaged" so just including a lock won't be sufficient?
 
Am I going blind here?

I see a BUNCH of posts that are missing completely or not even numbered right in a row on this thread.

What do you SEE? The same thing as I do or what now?

Thank you!

Old Lady Cate
 
Have you blocked any members?
No, I do not have any member blocked.

The only thing that I did again, within a day or two, was close off my private message thing due to being AWAY from my computer if I travel.

Cate
 
FYI, from the enrolled law SB554

SECTION 4. (1) If a person transfers a firearm and a criminal background check under ORS 166.435 is required prior to the transfer, the person shall transfer the firearm: (a) With an engaged trigger or cable lock; or (b) In a locked container.
(2)(a) A violation of subsection (1) of this section is a Class C violation. (b) Each firearm transferred in violation of subsection (1) of this section constitutes a separate violation.
(3) If a firearm transferred in a manner that violates subsection (1) of this section is used to injure a person or property within two years of the violation, in an action against the transferor to recover damages for the injury, the violation of subsection (1) of this section constitutes per se negligence, and the presumption of negligence may not be overcome by a showing that the transferor acted reasonably.
(4) Subsection (3) of this section does not apply if the injury results from a lawful act of self-defense or defense of another person.
(5) This section does not apply to: (a) The transfer of a firearm made inoperable for the specific purpose of being used as a prop in the making of a motion picture or a television, digital or similar production. (b) A transfer that occurs when a firearm is taken from the owner or possessor of the firearm by force.
Who is the violator if this occurs? The person receiving the firearm without a lock or the person handing over the firearm without a lock or both?

If the FFL trys to hand me a firearm without a lock engaged am I suppose to refuse until they provide a lock. Can the FFL require that I provide the lock?
PS:

Maybe some people BLOCKED me.

No problem if they chose to do this.

Cate
I guess that is possible, I wasn't aware that you could block people from seeing your own post?
 
So a guy who walks into a OREGON gun store to consign or do some business with his own gun has to have it LOCKED UP?

So the FFL DEALER has to UNLOCK the gun so he can check out what the potential customer aka A SELLER may want to put on consignment or sell or trade?

Either way, the FFL dealer or ANY potential BUYER of 'said gun' would want to check out what the heck they may or may not choose to buy.

IT is a stupid law - one among the REST of the OVER 20,000 gun laws out there in LA LA LAND.

Cate
 
I guess that is possible, I wasn't aware that you could block people from seeing your own post?
Beats me - I never did understand all of the past or recent changes on blocking people go on This Forum or even on other forums if they had such things on their forums.

No problem but a bunch of posts are not on here or maybe some so called troll got deleted and I missed a LOT on here since I was doing other things and NOT online here.

Cate
 
Beats me - I never did understand all of the past or recent changes on blocking people go on This Forum or even on other forums if they had such things on their forums.

No problem but a bunch of posts are not on here or maybe some so called troll got deleted and I missed a LOT on here since I was doing other things and NOT online here.

Cate
If you want to see the missing posts, visit this thread when you are not signed on. All the posts should show up then.
 
If you want to see the missing posts, visit this thread when you are not signed on. All the posts should show up then.
I could try that since I do not always sign into this forum.

But there have been some so called troll posts deleted that I have missed lately and in the past that have been DELETED totally so some threads did not make sense in some things. NOT all of them but in some of them.

Sorry, I did not mean to disrupt this thread.

Cate
 
Wouldn't this require all firearms to be locked up once they enter our State?

Tigard Pawn is going to be excited, now they can sell locks to everyone. Crazy times we are living in.
This board is acting up here for me or my computer is messed up.

Anyway... I bet that a traveler would have to LOCK UP HIS FIREARMS coming into Oregon but I could be WRONG.

Many states REQUIRE THIS now and some of them did in the PAST too.

Didn't OREGON stop honoring ALL OUT OF STATE conceal carry permits too?

Cate
 
Who is the violator if this occurs? The person receiving the firearm without a lock or the person handing over the firearm without a lock or both?

If the FFL trys to hand me a firearm without a lock engaged am I suppose to refuse until they provide a lock. Can the FFL require that I provide the lock?
Great question and legislators often do not think of things like this. For example, where I was an LEO there was a law that said children who are passengers on a bicycle must wear a helmet. Confirmed with a judge, the way the law was written the two year old was actually the violator. Whisky. Tango. Foxtrot.
 
FYI, from the enrolled law SB554

SECTION 4. (1) If a person transfers a firearm and a criminal background check under ORS 166.435 is required prior to the transfer, the person shall transfer the firearm: (a) With an engaged trigger or cable lock; or (b) In a locked container.
(2)(a) A violation of subsection (1) of this section is a Class C violation. (b) Each firearm transferred in violation of subsection (1) of this section constitutes a separate violation.
(3) If a firearm transferred in a manner that violates subsection (1) of this section is used to injure a person or property within two years of the violation, in an action against the transferor to recover damages for the injury, the violation of subsection (1) of this section constitutes per se negligence, and the presumption of negligence may not be overcome by a showing that the transferor acted reasonably.
(4) Subsection (3) of this section does not apply if the injury results from a lawful act of self-defense or defense of another person.
(5) This section does not apply to: (a) The transfer of a firearm made inoperable for the specific purpose of being used as a prop in the making of a motion picture or a television, digital or similar production. (b) A transfer that occurs when a firearm is taken from the owner or possessor of the firearm by force.
I don't see anywhere that it says you need to have a gun locked up to enter a gun shop. To transfer, yes, but not to enter the shop or to have them inspect, evaluate, or work on the gun.
 
Does this mean that you need to provide a lock with a stripped lower?

I thought I was making a good investment by buying a bunch of lower receivers when they were on sale. Maybe not such a good idea now.
 
Was planning on selling four to pay for one. Just ordered a few of these. $4 each when you buy three.
An even better deal - best I know of - perfect to comply with the new (bs) law on transfers

$6.99 for a 3 Pack

Remington Trigger Block Keyed Alike, 3 Pack, 66% Off

 

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