Mossberg 590 Shockwave and Rem Tac 14 purchases are now being blocked in Oregon! (Updated)

[etrain16]

Yet another overreach by the Draconian Democrats in Salem...

Just waiting to see this there's enough consternation among the subjects of the State to actually do something about it...

I suspect that small core of belivers in the Constitution will be vocal, but Oregon gun owners, by far and large, are a compliant group...

Sorry, but the last several legislative sessions have proven that Oregon gun owners cannot flex sufficient muscle or provide a sufficiently sized crowd to get the Draconian leaders to take notice...

That's the really sad part. Not enough voters willing to toss these idiots out on their backsides. Until that changes, we are pretty much hosed here. I still think if we could get every single pro-gun person in Oregon to vote against people like Brown, we would have the numbers, just barely, to toss her out. Far too many folks not even bothering to vote though, so what are you going to do when citizens won't exercise their right to vote and make a choice to rid us of these goons?

 

[etrain16]

its just a firearm that shoots shot shells for sh!t sake.

But apparently it's more dangerous - because who in their right mind would want to shoot those little things in the first place?? Clearly only the mentally ill and gang-bangers

 

[The Heretic]

Yet another overreach by the Draconian Democrats in Salem...

Just waiting to see this there's enough consternation among the subjects of the State to actually do something about it...

I suspect that small core of belivers in the Constitution will be vocal, but Oregon gun owners, by far and large, are a compliant group...

Sorry, but the last several legislative sessions have proven that Oregon gun owners cannot flex sufficient muscle or provide a sufficiently sized crowd to get the Draconian leaders to take notice...

Agreed. The gov. will chew on these issues around the edges, going after politically incorrect firearms while leaving the core alone. Even Calif. does that. They would like nothing better than to ban all guns, but they know that this would not work, so they go after the firearms that fewer people like and that affect fewer owners/buyers, and that scare non-owners/shooters more.

Classic divide and conquer

 

[mjbskwim]

I don't understand why anyone wants one of those POS' anyway.
But too bad the state is doing this

 

[nehalemguy]

I wasn't sure what the 590 Shockwave was so I looked it up on the PSA website.

Big bold letters at the bottom of the page say "Not For Sale for Residents of Texas or Ohio".

So apparently Oregon isn't the only state that has issues with the legality of the Shockwave?

E

 

[DieselScout]

Someone needs to take them to court. No one in this state seems to have the backbone.

 

[11Charlie]

Someone needs to take them to court. No one in this state seems to have the backbone.

You can always be the first

 

[etrain16]

Someone needs to take them to court. No one in this state seems to have the backbone.

Just out of curiosity, over what? For better or worse, states have the right (10th amendment) to make their own rules with respect to this stuff, so long as it doesn't directly infringe on the 2nd amendment. Problem appears to be a matter of definitions. Under current ORS's, it appears this is classified a short barreled shotgun, not a pistol. The feds say it's a pistol, but apparently the states say it's not. Kind of like the pot issue - the state says it's legal, the feds say it's not.

I would be all for someone finding a way to get them to update their definitions for this particular class of guns - I just don't see that the state would have any interest or motivation to do so.

But lawsuit? It appears they are within their rights, even though gun owners, once again get hosed in the process. What could they be sued on?

Would it be better if the Feds force the state to change the rules? If so, what prevents the feds from later forcing more gun control on the state?

I don't know, until we find a way to get a pro-gun majority in Oregon (which is not likely given the current climate), we appear to be somewhat hosed. Sucks.

 

[MilitantBEEMER]

Just out of curiosity, over what? For better or worse, states have the right (10th amendment) to make their own rules with respect to this stuff, so long as it doesn't directly infringe on the 2nd amendment. Problem appears to be a matter of definitions. Under current ORS's, it appears this is classified a short barreled shotgun, not a pistol. The feds say it's a pistol, but apparently the states say it's not. Kind of like the pot issue - the state says it's legal, the feds say it's not.

I would be all for someone finding a way to get them to update their definitions for this particular class of guns - I just don't see that the state would have any interest or motivation to do so.

But lawsuit? It appears they are within their rights, even though gun owners, once again get hosed in the process. What could they be sued on?

Would it be better if the Feds force the state to change the rules? If so, what prevents the feds from later forcing more gun control on the state?

I don't know, until we find a way to get a pro-gun majority in Oregon (which is not likely given the current climate), we appear to be somewhat hosed. Sucks.

Spot on!

 

[nammac]

Another option might be to get all the bit and pieces, then use them to create your own...

Just thinking outside the box...

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

But apparently it's more dangerous - because who in their right mind would want to shoot those little things in the first place?? Clearly only the mentally ill and gang-bangers

noooooo, gangsters prefer their ILLEGAL saw'd-off mossberg 500s because they have a buttstock. easier and cheaper

 

[11Charlie]

My mossberg came with a short barell

 

[Boboclown]

Even though the Feds see them as a pistol, not an SBS - but remember, the states have their own separate rules.

Feds don't see it as a pistol. Its seen as a "firearm."

 

[etrain16]

Another option might be to get all the bit and pieces, then use them to create your own...

Just thinking outside the box...

As I understand it, the receiver has to be assembled in the factory, with the pistol grip, for these to be legal. I don't think there is an option for us to buy a receiver and do it on our own. But again, I'm open to hear about it if someone knows differently.

 

[Boboclown]

If you can get a virgin receiver, as in one that was never used/assembled/somethirdthing, you can do it yourself. A receiver isn't (or isn't supposed to be) classified as a long gun, pistol, or shotgun. Just as a "firearm." So with a virgin receiver, as long as it never had a stock and is 26" OAL you can do that. It would just be classified as a "firearm" instead of a shotgun.

 

[Gonzales]

Folks just need to remember, they are not classified as shotguns, they are firearms.

 

[Vaultman]

...

I looked up definitions in the ORS's and I found this under ORS 162.210(12):

"Short-barreled shotgun" means a shotgun having one or more barrels less than 18 inches in length and any weapon made from a shotgun if the weapon has an overall length of less than 26 inches.

....

Some of us aren't reading all the words!!!

As etrain quotes ORS: "...any weapon made from a shotgun..."

The Tac-14 and Shockwave are not made from a shotgun. They are manufactured this way.

The way that these have made it through some other states in the past is because they are not a modified shotgun. They are manufactured this short, as a firearm. BATF calls them a firearm when they are made.

 

[etrain16]

If you can get a virgin receiver, as in one that was never used/assembled/somethirdthing, you can do it yourself. A receiver isn't (or isn't supposed to be) classified as a long gun, pistol, or shotgun. Just as a "firearm." So with a virgin receiver, as long as it never had a stock and is 26" OAL you can do that. It would just be classified as a "firearm" instead of a shotgun.

Folks just need to remember, they are not classified as shotguns, they are firearms.

Some of us aren't reading all the words!!!

As etrain quotes ORS: "...any weapon made from a shotgun..."

The Tac-14 and Shockwave are not made from a shotgun. They are manufactured this way.

The way that these have made it through some other states in the past is because they are not a modified shotgun. They are manufactured this short, as a firearm. BATF calls them a firearm when they are made.

It sounds like the state of Oregon's definitions need to be updated to better reflect the variety of guns available on the market. Question is, what reason do they have to do this, especially if it benefits folks like us?? Who could possibly make this happen? OFF? Letter writing campaign? Would they even bother to listen to us?

 

[Boboclown]

It sounds like the state of Oregon's definitions need to be updated to better reflect the variety of guns available on the market. Question is, what reason do they have to do this, especially if it benefits folks like us?? Who could possibly make this happen? OFF? Letter writing campaign? Would they even bother to listen to us?

The State of Oregon said made from a shotgun. Unless they specify that the receiver is classified as a shotgun, it isn't "made from a shotgun" and they don't need to update that.

Why would they do it? Why any anti-gun politician does anything anti-gun is because they are anti-gun.

 

[etrain16]

The State of Oregon said made from a shotgun. Unless they specify that the receiver is classified as a shotgun, it isn't "made from a shotgun" and they don't need to update that.

Why would they do it? Why any anti-gun politician does anything anti-gun is because they are anti-gun.

It appears there is a question of definition with regard to these delays - here is what OFF just sent out a short time ago:

The Oregon State Police have confirmed that they are "delaying" all sales of "Shockwave" and "Tac-14" shotguns.

It appears this new policy started on Friday. They said they are awaiting a decision from the Department of Justice on whether these firearms are "legal" under Oregon law.

ATF has already determined that these firearms are NOT regulated under the National Firearms Act.

Oregon law describes "short barrel" shotguns as:

"a shotgun having one or more barrels less than 18 inches in length and any weapon made from a shotgun if the weapon has an overall length of less than 26 inches."

However, Oregon law does not define what a "shotgun" is.

Under Federal law, these are not shotguns at all since they are not designed to be fired from the shoulder. These firearms are not considered to have been "made from a shotgun" either since they come from the factory configured with no stock.

While Oregon law prohibit shotguns with barrels shorter than 18 inches, it provides for an "affirmative defense" if the shotgun "was registered as required under federal law."

Of course, these guns cannot be "registered" under Federal law because they are not regulated under the NFA.


My suspicion that this was a question of definition seems to have been on target. So apparently, someone (likely an anti, I would guess) probably tipped off the OSP and/or the legislature in an attempt to use a grey area in the definitions to try and block sales of legitimate, legal firearms. Maybe the anti's got an idea from Ohio, where these are definitely not allowed.