Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And if that task force shows up at your door, they are going to need a search warrant, and on what grounds would a judge issue that order? Because some FFL had a Form 4473 that says you bought one 5 years ago that could have been sold or destroyed before or during those 120 days? Probably not good enough for a warrant.
IP 43 allows you to remove the weapon from the state, transfer it, turn it in, render it inoperable, or register it (which few will do). An OSP BC is not involved for an out of state transfer. All an Oregonian has to do is take the weapon to an out of state FFL for transfer to a friend or family. The family or friend would undergo the BC at their state. How would you prove you destroyed the weapon and got rid of the parts? The point is not that Oregon gun owners will do this, but that they could, so OPS records are inaccurate.I noticed that you didn't add the SB 941 effect into the mix here.
Yes, there is no way to document possession pre-5/11/15. After that, any new transfer is already in the data base, and will stay there by virtue of Kate's order to retain OSP BC information. The 4473 only documents purchase and stops there, making it somewhat irrelevant.
You can bet that the candles at OSP HQ are already burning to work out a software feature to highlight banned weapons that have no turn-in documented. This would be followed by a demand to show proof of disposition letter and then a show cause bench warrant. Failure to appear before the warrant issuing judge would automatically give you the warrant{s} discussed above. Now we are back to the gun getter squad, armed with warrants to be executed at their leisure, media scheduling not withstanding. As the body count rises, the pool of targets will rise as informants are created, willing to roll on their buddies to save their own arses.
All an Oregonian has to do is take the weapon to an out of state FFL for transfer to a friend or family. The family or friend would undergo the BC at their state.
IP 43 allows you to remove the weapon from the state, transfer it, turn it in, render it inoperable
I think OSP BGCs can only be retained for five years. I don't think the state can use illegal information in court. It seems to me a good lawyer should be able to have illegally kept records thrown out of court.The information stored from the OSP BGC's are forever unless Kate's order is reversed by a successor, which I doubt will happen anytime soon.
Oregon doesn't have access to out of state FFL records, especially if they are on paper. Oregon can't order someone from out of state to do anything. I think only the ATF can request FFL records and I don't see the ATF under Trump getting involved in state matters. The ATF allowed telescoping and/or folding pistol stabilizing braces that just about turns something like an MPX into an SBR. I don't see that ATF getting involved.If that doesn't show up in an Oregon state query
What happens if you destroy your weapon (or claim to) after IP 43 passes but before the state provides a procedure? State procedures aren't created overnight.As for rendering a weapon inoperable or destroyed, I assume that should IP43 become law, the State will provide a procedure to have a a weapon taken to a gunsmith or other contractor to inactivate or destroy it. This would include a certification process to provide the owner with proof of disposition. No certificate, no proof.
I noticed that you didn't add the SB 941 effect into the mix here.
Yes, there is no way to document possession pre-5/11/15. After that, any new transfer is already in the data base, and will stay there by virtue of Kate's order to retain OSP BC information. The 4473 only documents purchase and stops there, making it somewhat irrelevant.
You can bet that the candles at OSP HQ are already burning to work out a software feature to highlight banned weapons that have no turn-in documented. This would be followed by a demand to show proof of disposition letter and then a show cause bench warrant. Failure to appear before the warrant issuing judge would automatically give you the warrant{s} discussed above. Now we are back to the gun getter squad, armed with warrants to be executed at their leisure, media scheduling not withstanding. As the body count rises, the pool of targets will rise as informants are created, willing to roll on their buddies to save their own arses.
How do you know for sure they haven't been keeping records before 5 11 2015 , regardless of the law ?
I doubt anyone will come door to door looking for guns. As much as those gun-hating hypocrites want to repeal the 2nd Amendment, they still haven't got rid of the 4th Amendment. IP 43 gives everyone 120 days to get rid of their guns. So before the stormtroopers task force arrives at your front gate with a battering ram tank, you will receive a letter, assuming they even suspect you of having guns, which they shouldn't because you had 120 days to get rid of them. And if that task force shows up at your door, they are going to need a search warrant, and on what grounds would a judge issue that order? Because some FFL had a Form 4473 that says you bought one 5 years ago that could have been sold or destroyed before or during those 120 days? Probably not good enough for a warrant.
And if they send a letter asking if you have that gun you bought 5 years ago, I don't think you would have to respond, because of the 5th Amendment, so they probably wouldn't even send such a letter. It would be pointless. Yes, the US Constitution is a VERY good thing as it is today!
The real pain of IP 43 will be in not being able to shoot on public lands, or even at gun clubs, like Tri-County where LEOs practice, for fear of being harassed or arrested by an OSP.
NY and CT have already passed IP 43 like laws. Only 5 to 10 % of citizens complied. No task forces going door to door. Same will happen here unless people get off their __sses and vote!