Thoughts on how to prove ownership before the AW ban takes effect

[Yarome]

It's a waste of time.

The entire point... you expressed your opinion and the steps you felt necessary to "protect yourself". That's perfectly valid.

I simply expressed my opinion that if there is no practical need for it, it's not required and could possibly have unforseen and undesirable consequenes... then I don't, personally, feel it's a good idea.

From experience, nothing ever good comes from oversharing, volunteering private information or making it easier for others to potentially exploit or use that information against you. Especially when it comes to transmitting it to the internet. You never know how something might come back and bite you, until it does, so as a habit.... I choose not to needlessly overshare. Call it paranoia. I call it being prudent.

I understand the argument that if you bought it under a 4473, they are already discoverable. I get it. However, not everyone owns firearms that have passed through an FFL. Why tell "them" what they don't know?

 

[front_sight]

Just go back and read the threads on Oregon mag ban. It's page after page of solutions about how to prove ownership before a certain date. All of it will be duplicated here I'm sure. And every second or third response will be "but that can be faked by doing x...".

For example this thread:

Magazines: Proof of date purchased.

Ok, I'll pick at part of your statement regarding use on public lands or property. The measure reads: Section 11 (5) (C) While engaging in the legal use of the large-capacity magazine, at a public or private shooting range or shooting gallery or for recreational activities such as hunting, to...

www.northwestfirearms.com

Myself I took photos with solocator app (built in time stamp not just exif) and emailed them to myself (time stamp), and uploaded them to google drive (time stamp). I just ignore the poeple who say "but that can be faked". Its not about if it can be faked (pretty much anything can), it's about do you have evidence if needed. And if you can prepare that evidence so easily for yourself, why not? If I ever need the info I can show I made a thorough effort to document proof of ownership before to the effective date. Probably will never need it but it was worth the $1 app and 20 minutes of time for peace of mind to me. Everybody can do what they want.

Thank you for the only constructive reply here so far. Yes there are some very unlikely security issues with those solutions but it does provide documentation that would probably not be challenged unless there was some other underlying situation for them to do so.

Yes, this whole mess here in WA sucks. No, you shouldn't have to prove anything - "they" have to prove it from their side. If the passage of these bills tells us anything it tells us that you cannot rely on even elected judges, or a jury of your "peers" (since most people in western WA apparently are not constitutionally like-minded) to require the government to prove their case. So having some documentation seems prudent if it can be done in a secure and effective way.

 

[Jay Walk]

Dude covered this already.

Take a picture of your guns next to an old newspaper.

 

[front_sight]

Dude covered this already.

Take a picture of your guns next to an old newspaper.

That's a great idea! I have a few saved up just for that use. Maybe this one?




Kidding of course. So the "proof" would be in the EXIF data for the photo right, since the newspaper simply proves you couldn't have taken the photo BEFORE that date. But it doesn't prove when after that newspaper date the photo was taken. And with EXIF editors out there, that info can be changed.

This is why ilikegunspdx solution he posted makes sense. It adds a couple of layers of additional "proof" that would probably not be questioned during a "routine" check.

This whole subject is so depressing. I'm sorry I brought it up.

 

[SCannon]

I have a firearm trust that I use and have listed all of my guns that can be traced to me. My dad and brother are also part of the trust and live in different states. I got the assets page notarized, which also means I don't have any digital copies or photographs. I technically don't own any guns as the trust owns them all. As my children get to be of age they will be added as executors to the trust.

 

[mkoz2222]

Complying is what got us into this mess

 

[SCannon]

My question on this, relates to the section 2 iii of 1240
'A conversion kit, part, or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled or from which a firearm can be converted into an assault weapon if those parts are in the possession 4 or under the control of the same person'

Will that ban the shipment of parts, say of an AR upper, into Washington?

 

[Stomper]

I ain't admitting anyting.

Aloha, Mark

I didn't do nothing!




(See what I did there?)

 

[Stomper]

This is a ridiculous argument and a waste of time. No I am not worried about someone trying to hack my email to steal photos of magazines. I will engage in no more discussion on this topic. It's a waste of time.

You're worried about all those selfies stored on "the cloud" that you took of your no-no zone, aren't you?

 

[Yarome]

Will that ban the shipment of parts, say of an AR upper, into Washington?

Welcome to the gray zone. Short answer.... no. It's legal to buy and import them.

However, if you have a firearm that they could be attached to that would make your fiream fall under the definition of a so called "assault weapon" then it would be illegal to possess them.

 

[crstrode]

Cops won't in force it, at least the sheriffs here won't

That statement implies the Cops will out force it.

 

[osprey]

Jay and Bob can go have a threesome with a Saguaro.

 

[titsonritz]

Jay and Bob can go have a threesome with a Saguaro.

That would be a prickly mess.

 

[TTSX]

Photos (clear SN's) with dated newspaper and a reliable witness not related to you.

A dated newspaper proves nothing. In ten years I can take a picture of anything with a newspaper dated 04/23/97. Doesn't mean squat.

 

[titsonritz]

A dated newspaper proves nothing. In ten years I can take a picture of anything with a newspaper dated 04/23/97. Doesn't mean squat.

This is why I insulate my walls with newspaper, that way I have plenty of old newspapers around.

 

[Stomper]

Jay and Bob can go have a threesome with a Saguaro.

That, or with Pickle Rick…

 

[Cavedweller]

If you want to have a photographic record but are concerned about security, take a time stamped photo with a digital camera (not a phone camera) and save them directly to a memory card. Store the card in your gun safe.

I am not urging compliance or non-compliance and not looking to debate that issue. Just proposing a solution to the previously mentioned concerns about creating a record others could access.

 

[jtr]

In spite of what the Dems and Libs did to Kavanaugh.......

It's the Govt's job/burden to PROVE that you're guilty.

Aloha, Mark

PS.........don't forget.

View attachment 1380622

Not in Oregon with the magazine ban. You have to prove you are innocent.

 

[Wyo79]

They sell receipt books at staples or Office Depot.

 

[made in china]

To the OPs point, I'd say just hand-write, or type, a list thoroughly describing your current inventory, descriptions alone are probably enough, but part numbers and serial numbers could be useful if the items are stamped with them.

Make a few copies, seal in an envelope, and mail to yourself. Keep them, unopened, in a safe place.
I would say that shows a reasonable attempt to be compliant, should you ever need it. Also, keeps everything "offline" preventing data loss or future attempts to digitally mine through electronic data.