Serialization of Firearms. $50 Per Firearm. Not Cheap But At Least They Are Doing It.

[arakboss]

I guess my question is... If said company serialized it, and they just give it to you with number/letter arrangement engraved on it. Who will be the wiser of them or anyone with a laser engraver or nicely done Dremel or ghostwriter software doing the job?...
I mean, so they put your name in a book at their place and no BGC (bonus btw) and there is still no record if the AFT does a trace on it.
The AFT wont know to call them to trace it, they won't be able to call the manufacturer to trace the POS for the firearm.. thereby getting the last known buyer..
What's the point of this then?
I mean serializing for the state. What did this accomplish really?
For the owner of said firearm I get, if they want to carry it and all.
But why can't someone just get Carl the calligraphy dremel wizard at the flea market to do it and call it good?

The State wanted to cut down on importation of 80% frames and receivers. I suspect HB2005 is working as intended.

 

[Yarome]

Ironically, Ghost guns wouldnt ever been invented if there wasn't a huge prohibition based movement. The whole point of ghost guns is so someone could still own a gun after their registered guns got confiscated.
It would be very problematic if used in even the most clear case of self defense, but most agree their families lives would be worth that.


Yes, Im guessing there are some that want to actually use what they built in those cases getting serialized would mean if it was ever used they wouldnt be charged with using an unlawful gun. Bonus if it was serialized and still unregistered.

That's partially true, IMHO. Some folks simply like tinkering, enjoy firearms, and advances in technology making it practical for the "every day Joe" to be able to delve into that part of firearm ownership is highly attractive to some. In this day and age, the ever dwindling concept of deriving joy and satisfaction from producing something with your own two hands does still exist among many.

Not unlike home beer/wine making "kits", or for that matter, the internet in general that allows a vast number of folks access to info for a wide variety of DIY projects. Taking on things they typically wouldn't have... just because they can... and the satisfaction is it's own reward.

Across the board, technology is always advancing.

One school of thought is that many of OR infringements over the past years are simply scare tactics with few teeth. Like 941, or say... ghost guns. Violations are misdemeanors and have a 2 year statute of limitations. In some peoples minds... what is the State going to do 2 years after the laws have gone into affect? So long as you can show the firearm in question was purchased/constructed 2 years prior they can't be legally prosecuted for it. The likely outcome being the state attempting to coerce an individual into forfeiting the firearm in exchange of not pursuing any charges. (So the theory goes)

For someone of that mindset, EDC'ing a PMF may be an acceptable risk for that 2 year period(?)

Not that I'm encouraging anyone to break the "law". Blatantly unconstitutional or not. Just putting forth some different perspectives going around that may or may not have merit. For each to decide.

 

[Yarome]

I mean serializing for the state. What did this accomplish really?

One theory: "Compliance conditioning". By that I mean... while one law may not actually accomplish much, it does "condition" and repeatedly reinforce a compliance mindset. "It's not that big of a deal and the threat of consequences is too great." Even if the risk is largely manufactured and hollow.

It's taking advantage of human nature for people to want to feel "safe from threat" and the natural tendency to be desensitized through repetitive exposure to something.

When some major infringement does come down the pike, acceptance and compliance is easier to accomplish.

 

[PiratePast40]

Honestly that doesn't sound like they are prepared to do this service "cleanly". MacGyvering something to make it work doesn't inspire confidence. When I had my lowers engraved for the NFA, BYE Engraving had a jig all set up for it. Made the work neat and even. I don't want ANY serial on an 80% but if I'm forced to I want it to look professional and as OEM as possible.

One of the problems is that 80% lowers don't all have the same dimensions throughout. You see that when you put one in a jig made by a different manufacturer. There is no way to tell if a certain lower will fit correctly into a certain jig until you try it. I don't think there is anything wrong with saying that you can't predict the universe of manufactured 80% lowers are going to fit your jig perfectly. IMO, they are telling you that they will do everything they can to make yours fit but they won't know until they set it up.

 

[Yarome]

One of the problems is that 80% lowers don't all have the same dimensions throughout. You see that when you put one in a jig made by a different manufacturer. There is no way to tell if a certain lower will fit correctly into a certain jig until you try it. I don't think there is anything wrong with saying that you can't predict the universe of manufactured 80% lowers are going to fit your jig perfectly. IMO, they are telling you that they will do everything they can to make yours fit but they won't know until they set it up.

I don't think there is anything wrong with saying they are still in the trial and error phase, but for someone thinking of utilizing their services... there's nothing wrong with being leery or waiting until they gain more proficiency. If you are going to offer professional services some folks are going to be nit-picky and expect professional looking results in all aspects. Others may be perfectly satisfied with any utilitarian result.

It may just be that the machine they are using is purpose specific and has limited functionality, work space or clearances. Getting it to engrave at heights and orientations it wasn't intended for may take some doing.

 

[Koda]

The AFT wont know to call them to trace it, they won't be able to call the manufacturer to trace the POS for the firearm.. thereby getting the last known buyer..
What's the point of this then?

This is why i called this a loophole. The antis focused too hard on the prohibition part, but didnt think it thru on the serialization part. Happens all the time making laws.

Technically, the FFL has a record... registry, of any gun they serialize. They are required by law to turn that registry over if requested or if they close shop.
But apparently, its legal for them to not run a BGC on the person asking them to serialize.

 

[Yarome]

This is why i called this a loophole. The antis focused too hard on the prohibition part, but didnt think it thru on the serialization part. Happens all the time making laws.

Technically, the FFL has a record... registry, of any gun they serialize. They are required by law to turn that registry over if requested or if they close shop.
But apparently, its legal for them to not run a BGC on the person asking them to serialize.

It may be splitting hairs but I think "loophole" is rather inaccurate, and not a term we want to be tossing around to be picked up by the anti's. It's not "getting around" or side stepping any legal provision/law... like registration.

I don't think anyone is so naïve to believe OSP/State doesn't keep 4473 data and isn't building a registry, but legally... it's prohibited.

It's rather moot to HB2005 if the lawmakers "forgot" to pass state registry laws (or any others, for that matter) at the same time but that's a wholly separate issue, IMHO.

Just sayin...

 

[PiratePast40]

I don't think there is anything wrong with saying they are still in the trial and error phase, but for someone thinking of utilizing their services... there's nothing wrong with being leery or waiting until they gain more proficiency. If you are going to offer professional services some folks are going to be nit-picky and expect professional looking results in all aspects. Others may be perfectly satisfied with any utilitarian result.

It may just be that the machine they are using is purpose specific and has limited functionality, work space or clearances. Getting it to engrave at heights and orientations it wasn't intended for may take some doing.

Maybe we're saying the same thing here. If I had a shop and was trying to work on a non-standard piece of equipment, I'd be letting people know that I would do my best to get the job done but it will take more time to get parts to fit.

If you brought a home made car into a shop and asked for shock absorbers that were not standard, I suspect that a shop would tell you that they will do what they can but they will need to fab up new mounts so that off the shelf shocks can be made to fit your one off car.

Perhaps people don't understand that 80% lowers can come in just about any size and shape the manufacturer wants, as long as most of the dimensions work with milspec parts. Couple that with the build quality and number of people that have made lowers, there really are some big differences. Grab a couple from different manufacturers out of your safe and take a look at the differences to see what I mean.

 

[Alexx1401]

The State wanted to cut down on importation of 80% frames and receivers. I suspect HB2005 is working as intended.

That is exactly what they wanted and it did of course achieve what they wanted. Same in WA. The companies offering the lowers just stopped selling them here.

 

[Alexx1401]

This is why i called this a loophole. The antis focused too hard on the prohibition part, but didnt think it thru on the serialization part. Happens all the time making laws.

Technically, the FFL has a record... registry, of any gun they serialize. They are required by law to turn that registry over if requested or if they close shop.
But apparently, its legal for them to not run a BGC on the person asking them to serialize.

Suspect the main push was to just stop places from selling these by mail. They got what they wanted there. The rest few law makers probably have any clue and little care about for now. As with ALL gun law if the people in OR just ignore this and do nothing? Then of course the same law makers will come back for more.

 

[Koda]

Another question is if this FFL will/can offer their serialization services after September (when the law will be enforced)?

 

[PiratePast40]

Another question is if this FFL will/can offer their serialization services after September (when the law will be enforced)?

I'd say that depends on what games the OSP wants to play. After Sept 1, if you're not a licensed FFL, it's a misdemeanor to possess an unserialized lower or frame. If they wanted, OSP could come give you a ticket after they learn of you taking your unserialized piece of plastic or metal to a gunsmith. If you're a felon or prohibited person, it'll supposedly be worse than just a ticket. However, we've seen how felons get let go without bail and a pinky swear to show up at a hearing someday maybe.

 

[Yarome]

I'd say that depends on what games the OSP wants to play. After Sept 1, if you're not a licensed FFL, it's a misdemeanor to possess an unserialized lower or frame. If they wanted, OSP could come give you a ticket after they learn of you taking your unserialized piece of plastic or metal to a gunsmith. If you're a felon or prohibited person, it'll supposedly be worse than just a ticket. However, we've seen how felons get let go without bail and a pinky swear to show up at a hearing someday maybe.

Kinda like they are doing in Illinois. Continuing to register after the deadline has already come and gone. Essentially... self incriminating themselves as being in violation. The governor has said multiple times it is his intention to enforce it... even to confiscations. Who's houses do you think they will be hitting first to make an example?

Probably the people that admitted they were in violation and told the state exactly what they have and where they can go to get them(?)

Getting back to OR FFL's still offering services after Sept 1st... why wouldn't they? It's still not illegal to make a PMF and serialization services would still be needed. Something like NFA's(?) Having to obtain a serial number prior to construction(?) The nimrods that wrote that law didn't think to address anything other than a preexisting PMF.

As far as I'm aware, the only construction prohibition is on "undetectable" firearms.

 

[crstrode]

I wonder if they'll do tattoos as well?

 

[PiratePast40]

Let's be clear about what's going to be prohibited without an FFL. It's an unfinished frame or receiver. If it's an unfinished receiver, HB2005 says it needs to be marked as a firearm IAW ATF regs. According to HB2005, the FFL can take an unfinished receiver, mark it as a firearm and sell it to you as a firearm. The problem we have is that the ATF rule about unfinished frames and receivers is now in limbo. Therefore, you can't mark the unfinished frame or receiver as a firearm because it isn't one according to the ATF. There is no ATF procedure for making something a firearm that is not a firearm. I can put an aircraft nameplate on my buttocks, however that doesn't make me an airplane. There is no procedure for making a person an airplane, therefore it can't be registered.

They thought they were just doubling down on federal law. My guess is that it was a form of virtue signaling. In fact, Knopp said he approved passing it because it was repeating of federal law. They never thought, of didn't care, that the federal law was unconstitutional and would be held up in federal court.

Here's the section from HB2005. Section 4 concerning frames is similar.

SECTION 5. (1)(a) A person may not knowingly import into this state, offer for sale, sellor transfer an unfinished frame or receiver unlessA) The person is licensed as a firearm dealer under 18 U.S.C. 923;(B) The name of the manufacturer and an individual serial number is conspicuously placed on the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for the serialization of a firearm in 18 U.S.C. 923(i) and all regulations under the authority of 18 U.S.C.923(i), including but not limited to 27 C.F.R. 478.92; and(C) The person maintains records relating to the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for record keeping related to firearms in 18 U.S.C. 923(g) andall regulations issued under the authority of 18 U.S.C. 923(g), including but not limited to 27C.F.R. 478.121 to 478.134.(b)(A) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection is a Class B violation.(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) ofthis subsection is a Class A misdemeanor if, at the time of the offense, the person has aprior conviction under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023 Act.(C) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection constitutes a Class B felony if, at the time of the offense, theperson has two or more prior convictions under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023Act.(2)(a) A person may not knowingly possess an unfinished frame or receiver that is notserialized as provided in subsection (1)(a)(B) of this section, unlessA) The person is a federally licensed gun manufacturer; and(B) The unfinished frame or receiver is an unfinished part within a manufacturing process that includes serialization.(b) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection occurring before September 1, 2024,does not constitute an offense

 

[Yarome]

Let's be clear about what's going to be prohibited without an FFL. It's an unfinished frame or receiver. If it's an unfinished receiver, HB2005 says it needs to be marked as a firearm IAW ATF regs. According to HB2005, the FFL can take an unfinished receiver, mark it as a firearm and sell it to you as a firearm. The problem we have is that the ATF rule about unfinished frames and receivers is now in limbo. Therefore, you can't mark the unfinished frame or receiver as a firearm because it isn't one according to the ATF. There is no ATF procedure for making something a firearm that is not a firearm. I can put an aircraft nameplate on my buttocks, however that doesn't make me an airplane. There is no procedure for making a person an airplane, therefore it can't be registered.

They thought they were just doubling down on federal law. My guess is that it was a form of virtue signaling. In fact, Knopp said he approved passing it because it was repeating of federal law. They never thought, of didn't care, that the federal law was unconstitutional and would be held up in federal court.

Here's the section from HB2005. Section 4 concerning frames is similar.

SECTION 5. (1)(a) A person may not knowingly import into this state, offer for sale, sellor transfer an unfinished frame or receiver unlessA) The person is licensed as a firearm dealer under 18 U.S.C. 923;(B) The name of the manufacturer and an individual serial number is conspicuously placed on the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for the serialization of a firearm in 18 U.S.C. 923(i) and all regulations under the authority of 18 U.S.C.923(i), including but not limited to 27 C.F.R. 478.92; and(C) The person maintains records relating to the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for record keeping related to firearms in 18 U.S.C. 923(g) andall regulations issued under the authority of 18 U.S.C. 923(g), including but not limited to 27C.F.R. 478.121 to 478.134.(b)(A) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection is a Class B violation.(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) ofthis subsection is a Class A misdemeanor if, at the time of the offense, the person has aprior conviction under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023 Act.(C) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection constitutes a Class B felony if, at the time of the offense, theperson has two or more prior convictions under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023Act.(2)(a) A person may not knowingly possess an unfinished frame or receiver that is notserialized as provided in subsection (1)(a)(B) of this section, unlessA) The person is a federally licensed gun manufacturer; and(B) The unfinished frame or receiver is an unfinished part within a manufacturing process that includes serialization.(b) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection occurring before September 1, 2024,does not constitute an offense

Since the state is playing in dream land.. that it's going to illegal and enforceable... here's a hypothetical.

Is a block of metal, plastic or a pipe an "unfinished frame or receiver"? (If so, wouldn't anyone in possession of a block of metal, plastic or pipeage be in violation of the new law?) If not, then if you take one of the above in and have it serialized... as you progress with your PMF project... you would at no time be in possession of an unserialized frame or receiver, right?

An unfished frame or receiver, by definition, "...designed to or may readily be completed, assembled or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver".

There is already a federal process for a non firearm mfg licensed individual, albeit for NFA items, where you apply and have a serial number issued prior to mfg. It is duly considered a serialized item during the mfg process even if the serial number has yet to be affixed. If the state is copying alphabet rules/laws... then... allowing a process for what would be an illegal build to be done legally would be consistent.

Obviously, that goes against their desire to outlaw any new firearm from coming into being, but still.

 

[Saladfarmer]

I can put an aircraft nameplate on my buttocks, however that doesn't make me an airplane. There is no procedure for making a person an airplane, therefore it can't be registered.

Don't say that to the Aerosexuals out there. You may have the rainbow alphabet mafia show up on your doorstep

 

[arakboss]

Let's be clear about what's going to be prohibited without an FFL. It's an unfinished frame or receiver. If it's an unfinished receiver, HB2005 says it needs to be marked as a firearm IAW ATF regs. According to HB2005, the FFL can take an unfinished receiver, mark it as a firearm and sell it to you as a firearm. The problem we have is that the ATF rule about unfinished frames and receivers is now in limbo. Therefore, you can't mark the unfinished frame or receiver as a firearm because it isn't one according to the ATF. There is no ATF procedure for making something a firearm that is not a firearm. I can put an aircraft nameplate on my buttocks, however that doesn't make me an airplane. There is no procedure for making a person an airplane, therefore it can't be registered.

They thought they were just doubling down on federal law. My guess is that it was a form of virtue signaling. In fact, Knopp said he approved passing it because it was repeating of federal law. They never thought, of didn't care, that the federal law was unconstitutional and would be held up in federal court.

Here's the section from HB2005. Section 4 concerning frames is similar.

SECTION 5. (1)(a) A person may not knowingly import into this state, offer for sale, sellor transfer an unfinished frame or receiver unlessA) The person is licensed as a firearm dealer under 18 U.S.C. 923;(B) The name of the manufacturer and an individual serial number is conspicuously placed on the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for the serialization of a firearm in 18 U.S.C. 923(i) and all regulations under the authority of 18 U.S.C.923(i), including but not limited to 27 C.F.R. 478.92; and(C) The person maintains records relating to the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for record keeping related to firearms in 18 U.S.C. 923(g) andall regulations issued under the authority of 18 U.S.C. 923(g), including but not limited to 27C.F.R. 478.121 to 478.134.(b)(A) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection is a Class B violation.(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) ofthis subsection is a Class A misdemeanor if, at the time of the offense, the person has aprior conviction under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023 Act.(C) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection constitutes a Class B felony if, at the time of the offense, theperson has two or more prior convictions under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023Act.(2)(a) A person may not knowingly possess an unfinished frame or receiver that is notserialized as provided in subsection (1)(a)(B) of this section, unlessA) The person is a federally licensed gun manufacturer; and(B) The unfinished frame or receiver is an unfinished part within a manufacturing process that includes serialization.(b) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection occurring before September 1, 2024,does not constitute an offense

On a slightly different note. It's only the possession of an unserialized frame or receiver that is not an offense before Sept 1, 2024. Subsection 1 is in effect now and prohibits the sales, transfers, and importation of unfinished frames and receivers.



Section 5 has two subsections 1 and 2.
Subsection 1 deals with sales, transfers and importation of unfinished frames and receivers. There is no Sept 1, 2024 exemption clause in Subsection 1

Subsection 2 deals with possession and has this temporary exemption clause in it:

(b) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection occurring before September 1, 2024, does not constitute an offense.

It clearly states that the September 1, 2024 delay applies to the subsection In which it is written and that is subsection 2. They could have included a temporary exemption clause in subsection 1 but they did not. That means that law in subsection 1 is in effect now.

It's likely the reason they didn't provide an exemption clause in subsection 1 is because there would have been a flood of unfinished frames and receivers imported into the State before the deadline.

 

[dangerranger60]

Let's be clear about what's going to be prohibited without an FFL. It's an unfinished frame or receiver. If it's an unfinished receiver, HB2005 says it needs to be marked as a firearm IAW ATF regs. According to HB2005, the FFL can take an unfinished receiver, mark it as a firearm and sell it to you as a firearm. The problem we have is that the ATF rule about unfinished frames and receivers is now in limbo. Therefore, you can't mark the unfinished frame or receiver as a firearm because it isn't one according to the ATF. There is no ATF procedure for making something a firearm that is not a firearm. I can put an aircraft nameplate on my buttocks, however that doesn't make me an airplane. There is no procedure for making a person an airplane, therefore it can't be registered.

They thought they were just doubling down on federal law. My guess is that it was a form of virtue signaling. In fact, Knopp said he approved passing it because it was repeating of federal law. They never thought, of didn't care, that the federal law was unconstitutional and would be held up in federal court.

Here's the section from HB2005. Section 4 concerning frames is similar.

SECTION 5. (1)(a) A person may not knowingly import into this state, offer for sale, sellor transfer an unfinished frame or receiver unlessA) The person is licensed as a firearm dealer under 18 U.S.C. 923;(B) The name of the manufacturer and an individual serial number is conspicuously placed on the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for the serialization of a firearm in 18 U.S.C. 923(i) and all regulations under the authority of 18 U.S.C.923(i), including but not limited to 27 C.F.R. 478.92; and(C) The person maintains records relating to the unfinished frame or receiver in accordance with the procedures for record keeping related to firearms in 18 U.S.C. 923(g) andall regulations issued under the authority of 18 U.S.C. 923(g), including but not limited to 27C.F.R. 478.121 to 478.134.(b)(A) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection is a Class B violation.(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) ofthis subsection is a Class A misdemeanor if, at the time of the offense, the person has aprior conviction under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023 Act.(C) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this paragraph, a violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection constitutes a Class B felony if, at the time of the offense, theperson has two or more prior convictions under this section or section 3 or 4 of this 2023Act.(2)(a) A person may not knowingly possess an unfinished frame or receiver that is notserialized as provided in subsection (1)(a)(B) of this section, unlessA) The person is a federally licensed gun manufacturer; and(B) The unfinished frame or receiver is an unfinished part within a manufacturing process that includes serialization.(b) A violation of paragraph (a) of this subsection occurring before September 1, 2024,does not constitute an offense

I'm not great with legaleze, But what keeps you from marking your reciever with the manufactures name and a unique individual serial number?
The Manufactures name would be your own, and create your own series of letters and numbers for the serial#.
For example
John Q Smith
PEWPEW001
Why would I need to pay someone to do this for me if I have the skills to make my own gun?
DR

 

[Alexx1401]

I'm not great with legaleze, But what keeps you from marking your reciever with the manufactures name and a unique individual serial number?
The Manufactures name would be your own, and create your own series of letters and numbers for the serial#.
For example
John Q Smith
PEWPEW001
Why would I need to pay someone to do this for me if I have the skills to make my own gun?
DR

You "could" certainly do this. If the gun was ever "looked at" by any LEO, good chance they would not care as long as it was not being used in a crime. VERY few LEO's are going to be anything close to any kind of expert at this. Now if you had to use the gun in defense? This "may" get sticky if you are in some jurisdiction that does not like guns. You have to remember you can be totally "right" and that does not mean some DA will not try to charge you anyway. If they do its then up to you to prove you did not commit a crime at your own cost. The people charging you could care less how much money they waste doing so. You may care if it costs you for lawyers.