Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Oregon's new background check law and antiques

Discussion in 'Firearm Laws & Legal' started by OcelotZ3, Jun 27, 2016.

  1. OcelotZ3

    OcelotZ3 Corvallis Active Member

    Messages:
    390
    Likes Received:
    59
    Anyone know or have a quess as to antique firearms and Oregon's new law?

    C&R's have been discussed and it seems that the consensus is that C&R isn't worth anything in private transactions. I've had talks with various Oregon FFLs and they believe that the C&R is still good when buying from them whether at an Oregon show or in person.

    I'm interested in purchasing an antique firearm (22lr) from out-of-state and was wondering if it could be shipped directly to me. I also realize this isn't a legal forum.

    Thanks,
    Scott
     
  2. DominionAccuracyLLC

    DominionAccuracyLLC Amity, OR New Member

    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Scott,
    The new Oregon law SB941 has not changed the existing law with regard to selling or purchasing an antique to a private party.
    The key is that an antique is defined as manufactured before 1898. So for example if the gun model is called an 1898 but was manufactured in 1903, then it is not an antique. Therefore in that case you would have to sell it through an FFL dealor and a background check is required. If not, and it is an antique, then no FFL dealor is required. If you are selling to a family member no FFL is required either way. Hope that helps.
    If you have more questions, we can help you as we hold an FFL.
    Dominion Accuracy LLC
    Amity, OR
     
    bolus and AndyinEverson like this.
  3. AndyinEverson

    AndyinEverson Everson, Wa. Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,016
    Likes Received:
    6,536
    Having bought , sold , traded or worked on many an antique firearm, I'm really glad there is no extra paperwork or background check involved.
    Looking forward to hearing about your new to you rifle Ocelot23.
    Andy
     
  4. wired

    wired Yakima Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,673
    Likes Received:
    1,340
    C&R's arent irrelevant. Travel out of state and you can buy with a C&R no problem.
     
  5. bolus

    bolus Portland Gold Supporter Gold Supporter 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    3,356
    Likes Received:
    6,915
    Just remember that in the very remote chance the state police were looking at a C&R purchase from a dealer, they could ask why a background check was not done by the dealer (it is not exempted by 941, it was specifically left out by the politician who wrote the law and confirmed that background checks are needed by the Legislative counsel for C&R purchases - meaning the lawyers who work for the politicians would consider it illegal)

    I cant see any reason for the police to enforce this but if one is arrested for other reasons the DA would most certainly add on as many charges as possible to punish a gun owner.

    in my opinion, not worth the risk.
     
  6. wired

    wired Yakima Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,673
    Likes Received:
    1,340
    we have different opinions.
     
  7. bolus

    bolus Portland Gold Supporter Gold Supporter 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    3,356
    Likes Received:
    6,915
    That's fine of course. But here is the opinion of the legislative counsel. I also talked to Prozanski directly who wrote the law and my legislators for months prior to the law even being introduced as a bill to make a specific exemption for C&R and he intentionally left it out and told me directly that background checks were going to be needed. See below how the C&R amendment was specifically left out as described by the state's lawyers.

    Please dont underestimate the goals of the state government on making all gun owners criminals in one way or another.



    "You have asked our office about the application of the criminal background check requirement in section 2 of Senate Bill 941 (chapter 50, Oregon Laws 2015, soon to be codified as ORS 166.435) to Curios and Relics federal firearms licensees. I believe the specific license you are asking about is the collector license referenced in 18 U.S.C. §923(b).


    In interpreting the meaning of statutes, courts discern the legislative intent by looking first to the text and context of the statute and any relevant legislative history. State v. Gaines, 346 Or. 160, 171-172 (2009). If, after a review of the text, context and legislative history, the court concludes that the meaning of the statute is ambiguous, “the court may resort to general maxims of statutory construction to aid in resolving the remaining uncertainty.” Gaines at 172, quoting PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or. 606, 612 (1993).


    Looking at the text of ORS 166.435, the criminal background check requirement applies to all persons except those licensed as dealers, importers or manufacturers under 18 U.S.C. §923, unless some other exception applies. This is because under ORS 166.435 (1)(b) and (c) (2015 edition), persons with those specified licenses are excluded from the definition of “transferee” and “transferor.” Collector licenses are not included in the exemption.


    The legislative history seems to support this conclusion. During the 2015 session there were amendments drafted to SB 941 that proposed adding the term “collector” to the list of licenses that would exempt a person from the background check requirement (see the A13 and A24 amendments to the A-Engrossed bill, available on OLIS). The resulting definitions of “transferee” and “transferor” would have read “a person who is not a gun dealer or licensed as a collector, manufacturer or importer under 18 U.S.C. 923….” However, these amendments were not adopted and as a result the word “collector” was never added to SB 941.


    Finally, if a court needed further clarification when interpreting ORS 166.435, the court could consider the maxim of statutory constructionexpressio unius est exclusio alterius. Under this maxim, if certain licenses exempt from the criminal background check are expressly mentioned, this implies a legislative intent to exclude other licenses not mentioned.


    Therefore, we believe a court would find that the background check requirement in section 2 of SB 941 (ORS 166.435) does apply to persons with Curios and Relics collector federal firearm licenses.
     
    etrain16 likes this.
  8. wired

    wired Yakima Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,673
    Likes Received:
    1,340
    They may believe a court would find something to be the way they want but without explicit wording in the law a court may not. There is no definitive answer and relying on the person who drafted the emergency law as the whole source of information about what will be legal after a court judgement is folly. Until there is applicable case law its anyone guess what the courts may rule.

    C&R's are not dead as of yet in either Washington or Oregon.

    Even a ruling from the state attorney general and/ The ATF would go a long way towards answering some of these questions. Asking the guy who wrote the law though...not useful.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2016
  9. bolus

    bolus Portland Gold Supporter Gold Supporter 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    3,356
    Likes Received:
    6,915
    Thats the problem requiring case law, who is the first to have to defend themselves over this

    By the way, I spoke with the Oregon branch of the ATF and they advised not using the C&R until they get clarification from the Attorney general. Then I tried about 10 times to contact the attorney general who refused to answer either me or the ATF.

    I gave up after about 6 months because the attorney general refused to respond to the ATF about this. So last I talked with the ATF, they also said to not use the license in Oregon. Though it would not be a federal issue, they said there was risk of breaking state law because of 941. I also called the state police firearms division and most of them did not even know what a C&R.

    I know Im being pessimistic but I have no interest in testing this one out in court over a mosin or mauser.
     
    salmonriverjohn and etrain16 like this.