Welcome to Northwest Firearms
Join our community, sign up for free today!
Sign Up

Washington Washington purchases after July 1.

arakboss

Messages
3,026
Reactions
5,299
Ask Oregon why they wont approve a rifle sale to a CA resident. Because its in violation of federal law and CA called Oregon up and said...stop, youre breaking Federal law. You need to forget about Washington RCWs, its 18 USC that applies here, Federal Law. OSP will be sued by Washington for approving rifle sales once the AG gets off of suing Trump and the US Navy.

Sheriff Atkins, whom we're suing in Federal Court, is retiring...so election won't matter much to him.

FYI - Sportsmans refused to honor our 1639 training certificate too. Until we talked to them and showed them the law, explained it for them. Most of the folks on the counters know very little about 1639, especially those in Oregon.
Does I-1639 directly require that Oregon FFL's follow the same procedures for selling restricted firearms to WA residents as WA FFL's are required to do?

Or do you feel Oregon FFL's are required to follow the I-1639 law because the Feds require it as part of the FFL requirements?
 
I see what you are getting at with the suggestion that WA law doesn't require OR FFL's to collect the sales tax. On the same front, WA I-1639 doesn't require OR FFL's to follow I-1639 law. The issue being raised is whether the Feds are going to require Oregon FFL's to follow I-1639 law or not? If they do require that then why didn't they require Oregon FFL's to follow the previous laws I mentioned?
It's pretty simple concerning BG checks: OR is a point-of-contact state for ALL firearms, WA is a NICS state for long guns and a POC state for handguns. WA is a bit more complicated now with 1639 as they've carved semi-auto rifles out of the long gun pool. When I buy a long gun in OR the BG check is called into OSP who in turn contacts NICS among other criminal record and mental health sources. So, what happens in OR for a long gun BG check is a superset of what happens in WA, if anything OR has gone way beyond what would have happened in WA.
 

arakboss

Messages
3,026
Reactions
5,299
It's pretty simple concerning BG checks: OR is a point-of-contact state for ALL firearms, WA is a NICS state for long guns and a POC state for handguns. WA is a bit more complicated now with 1639 as they've carved semi-auto rifles out of the long gun pool. When I buy a long gun in OR the BG check is called into OSP who in turn contacts NICS among other criminal and mental health sources. So, what happens in OR for a long gun BG check is a superset of what happens in WA, if anything OR has gone way beyond what would have happened in WA.
Once again I am suggesting that the FFL's follow their own State laws and procedures, even with out of state residents. This would seem to conflict with the Fed requirements that FFLs follow the laws of the State the purchaser is from.

From the feds:
"In addition, a licensee may sell a rifle or shotgun to a person who is not a resident of the State where the licensee’s business premises is located in an over–the–counter transaction, provided the transaction complies with State law in the State where the licensee is located and in the State where the purchaser resides."
 
Last edited:
Once again I am suggesting that the FFL's follow their own State laws and procedures, even with out of state residents. This would seem to conflict with the Fed requirements that FFLs follow the laws of the State the purchaser is from.
Please explain how an OR FFL fails to comply with a non-existent WA law concerning a long gun transfer to a WA resident?

For a WA resident:

WA FFL: NICS
OR FFL: OSP->NICS
 

arakboss

Messages
3,026
Reactions
5,299
Please explain how an OR FFL fails to comply with a non-existent WA law concerning a long gun transfer to a WA resident?

For a WA resident:

WA FFL: NICS
OR FFL: OSP->NICS
Let's do this in reverse since I have been involved with this type of purchase. Oregon requires that if I am purchasing a firearm, that I have my background check run through OSP, at the same time Oregon does a stolen gun check and I pay the FFL $10 fee which goes to the State. If I purchase the firearm in WA, the FFL does not go through the OSP, they may or may not do a stolen gun check and I do not pay a $10 fee that goes to OSP. The WA FFL would not be following OR law.

If you were to take the Feds requirement literally the FFLs would be required to do two background checks, One for the State I am purchasing the firearm in and one for the State reside in. Each background check would need to be done as required by laws of the prospective State.
 
Let's do this in reverse since I have been involved with this type of purchase. Oregon requires that if I am purchasing a firearm, that I have my background check run through OSP, at the same time Oregon does a stolen gun check and I pay the FFL $10 fee which goes to the State. If I purchase the firearm in WA, the FFL does not go through the OSP, they may or may not do a stolen gun check and I do not pay a $10 fee that goes to OSP. The WA FFL would not be following OR law.

If you were to take the Feds requirement literally the FFLs would be required to do two background checks, One for the State I am purchasing the firearm in and one for the State reside in. Each background check would need to be done as required by laws of the prospective State.
OK, I see where you are coming from, makes sense.

I guess we'd have to ask the question: if a person can pass a BG check, and legally possess, a bolt-action rifle in WA, is it possible that same person, with that same rifle, might be denied in OR? I don't think it matters how the BG check is conducted as long as NICS is consulted in both cases.
 

arakboss

Messages
3,026
Reactions
5,299
OK, I see where you are coming from, makes sense.

I guess we'd have to ask the question: if a person can pass a BG check, and legally possess, a bolt-action rifle in WA, is it possible that same person, with that same rifle, might be denied in OR? I don't think it matters how the BG check is conducted as long as NICS is consulted in both cases.
If each State was allowed to do their own procedure for background checks prior to July 1st, why can't they continue to do so? That would allow WA residents to avoid the mental health privacy violations that WA FFLs would participate in.
 
If each State was allowed to do their own procedure for background checks prior to July 1st, why can't they continue to do so? That would allow WA residents to avoid the mental health privacy violations that WA FFLs would participate in.
I could be wrong since I haven't bought any guns in WA since July 1 but I think mental health privacy concerns applies to handguns and semi-auto rifles only. As far as I know nothing has changed with respect to POC states, even partial POCs like WA, 1639 just forced WA be POC for an additional class of firearms; semi-auto rifles.

I did check with a local FFL about transferring a stripped lower; no WA forms involved, just a NICS check, for now anyway, I'm sure the ruling class will fix that in short order.
 
Messages
184
Reactions
312
Hey Sporting Systems, any news on the lawsuit?

Something I was reading caught my attention: the Doctrine of Unconstitutional Conditions generally prohibits the government from making you surrender one right in order to exercise another. I found a nice law review style paper on it here:http://www.rbs2.com/duc.pdf

The lifetime HIPAA waiver portion of the law does exactly that: you can't acquire a handgun or semi-auto rifle without agreeing to waive your medical privacy rights. I can think of some weak arguments that the government might make to say that it doesn't, but ultimately they require that you grant them access to information that they would otherwise not have any right to in order to buy a firearm.

I'm not sure if your lawyers were looking at this angle, but maybe you could share it with them if they weren't. It's one more possible argument against a piece of the law, and a death by a thousand cuts serves our purposes just as well as one mighty blow.
 
Where exactly does this lifetime HIPAA waiver appear that I have to agree to? I looked over the older and newer Pistol Transfer Forms and didn't see anything like that. I'll stipulate to being a poor fine-print reader in advance :)
 
Messages
73
Reactions
190
I pretty much feel I've lost my right to buy a pistol or semi auto in Washington. I will not be signing a permanent HIPPA waiver.

What are the disqualifiers, what will Seattle decide they are in the future?
 

scarlo

Messages
71
Reactions
149
2019 NICS Checks for Washington
January56,051
February47,674
March61,812
April53,377
May53,125
June83,436
July37,439
August40,144
What's going on in Illinois with 491,715 and Kentucky with 315,548 checks for the month of August? If Sept. stays calm without major incident will be interesting to see what happens to Washington's numbers.

Edited to include below link to above data:

 
Last edited:
I’ll tell you one thing, I quit selling semiautos to anyone but people willing to transfer them at my preferred FFLs, or people out of state. I’m not leaving my gun in someone else’s town, only to have them get denied and me have to go get my gun back.

Its easier to drive to OR and have the thing over with.
 
I’ll tell you one thing, I quit selling semiautos to anyone but people willing to transfer them at my preferred FFLs, or people out of state. I’m not leaving my gun in someone else’s town, only to have them get denied and me have to go get my gun back.

Its easier to drive to OR and have the thing over with.
Asking only for educational purposes: If I have to go get a semi-auto rifle back from a WA FFL because the buyer is denied, I now have to endure a semi-auto WA BG check?
 
Asking only for educational purposes: If I have to go get a semi-auto rifle back from a WA FFL because the buyer is denied, I now have to endure a semi-auto WA BG check?
I did. They made me do a BGC to get my gun back and I had to drive 120 miles each way. Never again!
 
I did. They made me do a BGC to get my gun back and I had to drive 120 miles each way. Never again!
Sorry to hear about your experience, time is money for me so I get it.

I'm wondering about any sale of a semi-auto rifle; even if a buyer in OR get's denied I don't think the gun dealer will give it back to me, they'll need to have a WA FFL return it to me, and that will only happen after a WA semi-auto BG check.

I don't plan on EVER submitting to a WA semi-auto rifle BG check, I already ordered up an auxiliary coffin so the family can bury my rifles next to me, lol.
 

NEW CLASSIFIED ADS

LATEST REVIEWS

  • Klickitat County Firearms Training Facility
    4.00 star(s)
    Not really a range guy, as in I am 53 years old and today is the very first time I have been to an actual managed shooting range. Also, not a WA...
    • CRBMoA
  • Supporting Vendor Oregon Arms & Ammunition
    5.00 star(s)
    I've made several purchases here over the past few years and I've had a great experience every time. Prices are good, their staff is helpful, and...
    • Joe Link
  • Big Iron Armory
    5.00 star(s)
    It's great to have an LGS inside Portland Metro. Walt and Noah have put care into setting good prices and acquiring quality firearms and...
    • kr0ptkin
  • Supporting Vendor Lucky Sporting Goods
    5.00 star(s)
    Well I finally got around to taking pics of the Cerakoting work that Jeremy of Lucky Sports did for my wife and me about 3 weeks ago. We couldn't...
    • jg rider
  • Supporting Vendor Lucky Sporting Goods
    5.00 star(s)
    Here's more work that Jeremy did for me The first 3 pics are of an RIA frame that I had Cerakoted years back by an outfit in Molino. I had Jeremy...
    • jg rider