In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Dealers on Oregons New Law.

grumpygygrumpygy Member Posts: 53,466
quote:SPRINGFIELD, Ore. - Days after the governor signed new background check requirements into law, firearm buyers and sellers alike are firing back.

"I believe this law is unjust," said Frank Leclair, "and I refuse to comply with it."

Leclair wanted to know how much transferring a gun was going to cost him at Cabella's in Springfield.

Turns out, the store won't be doing background checks for private sales at all.

And Cabella's isn't alone

"I don't have to do it if I don't want to," said Marvin Loy at SM Gun Shop in Eugene. "If a customer comes in or 2 people come in and they want to transfer a gun and I have 2 or 3 people here and we're busy selling things, I'm not going to take time to do that when could be selling something."

"If they can't find any dealers that will do the background check for the transfer or that are going to charge a huge amount of money for the transfer, what are they going to do?" Leclair asked.

The lawmakers who pushed the bill say over 95 percent of Oregonians live within 20 miles of gun dealers that have advertised to do private background checks. Lawmakers hope shops don't take advantage for their liberty to set a reasonable fee.

Some have set the fee at up to $35.

Marvin Loy Shop is Known as SM. Or for the folks that Can't stand Him(me included) its Starven Marvin. Total Idiot. Unless he knows you and has seen you buy from him before he won't even give you the time of day. He lost some big sales from me cause of his attitude. Week after I bought and 870 and a Kimber ultra Covert (just not from him) I went back to check another guns Price. He could not even be bothered to answer any question. So I bought it on GunBroker.

http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/Gun-dealer-on-private-background-checks-I-dont-have-to-do-it-if-I-dont-want-to-303965061.html?tab=video&c=y

This may affect folks that buy from GunBroker and try to do their transfer. Right now I use Baron's Den.

Comments

  • toad67toad67 Member Posts: 13,019 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    LGS's up near Forest Grove are starting at $50, if they will even do them at all.
  • moonshinemoonshine Member Posts: 8,471
    edited November -1
    I have an FFL that will do it for $25 and that includes back ground check.
  • dfletcherdfletcher Member Posts: 8,162 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I live in CA. Allow me to paint a picture of what folks in OR can look forward to .....

    None of the big stores will do the transfer. Cabela's, Sportsmans, Bass Pro. Smaller stores will do them but only grudgingly and they'll make it a PITA. Limited hours, imaginative fees and "you've got to buy a locked case" charges.

    Fees in CA, depending on the details and dealer, are anywhere from a low of about $65.00 to a high of about $300.00. FFLs who don't want to be bothered simply set the fee high to discourage transfers.

    Then there's confusion - some fellow's going to show up to sell his gun, the fellow he sells it to may not have the right ID or paperwork. Or a problem will come up - do you leave the gun at the store, does the buyer hand over the $$$ before getting cleared?

    I sold a little Smith 37 today, had to drive about 30 miles to meet at a mutually convenient gun store. Cost me $10.00 in bridge fares and a few $$$ in gas. Pluse $675.00 because when I was in the gun store I saw a old stock NIB Browning 63 ......[}:)]

    Things will settle down in OR after a bit. Gun stores will figure out how much is "too much" and what they can tack on. But all in all, this is a huge pain to deal with and it won't ever stop being one.
  • mcasomcaso Member Posts: 1,120 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Good thing for the anti gunners that there is no nra, goa, etc
  • chiefrchiefr Member Posts: 13,641 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    What can you do about such laws? Little if anything. Not much different in CT, NY, MA, or NJ.
    The people vote, and the majority votes democrat. The democrat party has made their goal clear: No Second Amendment, no more guns.
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,655 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by chiefr
    What can you do about such laws? Little if anything. Not much different in CT, NY, MA, or NJ.
    The people vote, and the majority votes democrat. The democrat party has made their goal clear: No Second Amendment, no more guns.



    I respectfully disagree.

    Mass open, notorious, no violent public civil disobedience to unconstitutional laws does work. Yes, it does work even against powerful governments, ask Gandhi.
  • kidthatsirishkidthatsirish Member Posts: 6,985 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by chiefr
    What can you do about such laws? Little if anything. Not much different in CT, NY, MA, or NJ.
    The people vote, and the majority votes democrat. The democrat party has made their goal clear: No Second Amendment, no more guns.




    Stop obeying laws like this? that is a question, not a suggestion. After all what would our founding fathers do in a similar situation? I often think about the true civil rights movement of the 60s. Much of what they did was illegal and landed them in jail with beatings...yeah now they are celebrated.

    At some point the restrictions become so ridiculous and tyrannical that the reasonable man theory would state we are all going to become criminals Because it would be reasonable to disobey them.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,418 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by mcaso
    Good thing for the anti gunners that there is no nra, goa, etc


    The GOA and SAF are working to reverse Washington State's similar law. The NRA has been silent, but historically has supported the NICS system of background checks, so one would not expect them to put much effort into overturning either.

    With WA being a test case, though it is not be challenged on the merits, rather on the technicalities, we shall see what perhaps may lie in store for OR.

    There is a significant difference in the two laws in that in WA it was passed by a majority vote of the people and in OR by the legislature. Not sure if that will matter, but at least in OR, you have the option to vote the sons of bitches out of office.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • NeoBlackdogNeoBlackdog Member Posts: 16,449 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by mcaso
    Good thing for the anti gunners that there is no nra, goa, etc


    The GOA and SAF are working to reverse Washington State's similar law. The NRA has been silent, but historically has supported the NICS system of background checks, so one would not expect them to put much effort into overturning either.

    With WA being a test case, though it is not be challenged on the merits, rather on the technicalities, we shall see what perhaps may lie in store for OR.

    There is a significant difference in the two laws in that in WA it was passed by a majority vote of the people and in OR by the legislature. Not sure if that will matter, but at least in OR, you have the option to vote the sons of bitches out of office.



    That sounds good in theory, the problem is that there are so dang many of the sons o' bitches that vote the sons o' bitches into office! The place is overrun with leftwing dingbats.
  • chiefrchiefr Member Posts: 13,641 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by bpost
    quote:Originally posted by chiefr
    What can you do about such laws? Little if anything. Not much different in CT, NY, MA, or NJ.
    The people vote, and the majority votes democrat. The democrat party has made their goal clear: No Second Amendment, no more guns.



    I respectfully disagree.

    Mass open, notorious, no violent public civil disobedience to unconstitutional laws does work. Yes, it does work even against powerful governments, ask Gandhi.


    Your right Bpost, I guess I should have reworded my post as the enactment of such laws.
  • toad67toad67 Member Posts: 13,019 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by mcaso
    Good thing for the anti gunners that there is no nra, goa, etc


    The GOA and SAF are working to reverse Washington State's similar law. The NRA has been silent, but historically has supported the NICS system of background checks, so one would not expect them to put much effort into overturning either.

    With WA being a test case, though it is not be challenged on the merits, rather on the technicalities, we shall see what perhaps may lie in store for OR.

    There is a significant difference in the two laws in that in WA it was passed by a majority vote of the people and in OR by the legislature. Not sure if that will matter, but at least in OR, you have the option to vote the sons of bitches out of office.



    That sounds good in theory, the problem is that there are so dang many of the sons o' bitches that vote the sons o' bitches into office! The place is overrun with leftwing dingbats.


    IMO, Portland and Eugene run the whole State.
  • NeoBlackdogNeoBlackdog Member Posts: 16,449 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by toad67
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by mcaso
    Good thing for the anti gunners that there is no nra, goa, etc


    The GOA and SAF are working to reverse Washington State's similar law. The NRA has been silent, but historically has supported the NICS system of background checks, so one would not expect them to put much effort into overturning either.

    With WA being a test case, though it is not be challenged on the merits, rather on the technicalities, we shall see what perhaps may lie in store for OR.

    There is a significant difference in the two laws in that in WA it was passed by a majority vote of the people and in OR by the legislature. Not sure if that will matter, but at least in OR, you have the option to vote the sons of bitches out of office.



    That sounds good in theory, the problem is that there are so dang many of the sons o' bitches that vote the sons o' bitches into office! The place is overrun with leftwing dingbats.


    IMO, Portland and Eugene run the whole State.


    IMO your IMO is dead nutz on. Over here on the east side there's a whole different way of thinking. What the heck is it about people that they turn into liberal morons the more densely you pack 'em together?
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,418 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog

    IMO your IMO is dead nutz on. Over here on the east side there's a whole different way of thinking. What the heck is it about people that they turn into liberal morons the more densely you pack 'em together?


    Washington used to be similar, but in 2014 Spokane and Whitman counties on the east side voted for I-594.

    Both states have taken a big step towards Californication.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 66,152 ******
    edited November -1
    Good bye freedom, hello exorbitant fees and tyranny.
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • Dads3040Dads3040 Member Posts: 13,552 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    quote:Originally posted by toad67
    quote:Originally posted by NeoBlackdog
    quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by mcaso
    Good thing for the anti gunners that there is no nra, goa, etc


    The GOA and SAF are working to reverse Washington State's similar law. The NRA has been silent, but historically has supported the NICS system of background checks, so one would not expect them to put much effort into overturning either.

    With WA being a test case, though it is not be challenged on the merits, rather on the technicalities, we shall see what perhaps may lie in store for OR.

    There is a significant difference in the two laws in that in WA it was passed by a majority vote of the people and in OR by the legislature. Not sure if that will matter, but at least in OR, you have the option to vote the sons of bitches out of office.



    That sounds good in theory, the problem is that there are so dang many of the sons o' bitches that vote the sons o' bitches into office! The place is overrun with leftwing dingbats.


    IMO, Portland and Eugene run the whole State.


    IMO your IMO is dead nutz on. Over here on the east side there's a whole different way of thinking. What the heck is it about people that they turn into liberal morons the more densely you pack 'em together?

    I actually think it is more that the leftist d-bags are more likely to herd up. They can't operate by themselves, so they congregate together. We get a crap load of leftys from all points of the compass, especially back east where they have a surplus of stupid.
Sign In or Register to comment.