Jump to content


AR15Armory Announcements


Photo

Oregon state police blocking the sale of shockwave shotguns


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 ONLINE   adair_usmc

adair_usmc

  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 17,136
  • Posts: 5,072
  • Joined: Oct. 27 2009
  • Location:La Grande, Oregon


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 09:58 AM

GVTBiUQ.png


I wonder how this will work for those of us who already got one? I guess I will have to go have another boating accident soon.


#2 ONLINE   Gmountain

Gmountain

  • Group:Senior Staff
  • Member ID: 417
  • Posts: 57,684
  • Joined: Nov. 20 2005
  • Location:Heliosphere


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 11:20 AM

Why are they doing that?


  • gmor likes this


Signature:

Wag more. Bark less.

 

So many guns, so little time.

 


#3 ONLINE   adair_usmc

adair_usmc

  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 17,136
  • Posts: 5,072
  • Joined: Oct. 27 2009
  • Location:La Grande, Oregon


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 11:38 AM

Why are they doing that?

 

 

We are not sure, I was able to get one a while back and some posters on the facebook page report getting approvals as soon as last week.

 

Our state police do all of our background checks, and they have an online site where you enter some information from the 4473 to get your approval.  When we did the tranfer on mine, the FFL that I used found that there was not really a category for these in the choices on the state police's website, so we ran it as a pistol grip shotgun and it went through with no trouble.  According to the Oregon Firearms Federation, FFLs are now being told that the sale of the shockwave shotguns is being blocked, rumor is because of a rule issued by the governor (though that is just a rumor, no rule has been published that I am aware of...yet).  




#4 ONLINE   Pepper

Pepper

    Ban-O-Matic


  • Group:Admins
  • Member ID: 21
  • Posts: 37,674
  • Joined: Sep. 17 2005
  • Location:Oregon


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 02:38 PM

They don't meet the definition of a SBS, so don't need an ATF stamp. In Oregon, a rifle must have a barrel length of 16", and a shotgun must have a barrel length of 18", or it's possession is considered a felony. An "affirmative defense" to a charge under the statute, is a record that the federal tax has been paid by the owner of the firearm. Since it is not an NFA weapon and there is no tax to be paid, it is in fact a prohibited weapon in Oregon. 

 

While I don't necessarily agree with their interpretation and implementation of the law, that is the rationale behind it. 

 

 

ETA: This is particularly worrisome for the "Hearing Protection Act". Suppressors are specifically forbidden in Oregon, with the exception of owners who have paid the federal tax. If that tax no longer exists, then there will not be any further suppressors legally owned or produced in the state. Only those that were owned prior to the tax being removed will be "legal".


Edited by Pepper, Jul. 03 2017 - 02:41 PM.



Signature:

"Weakness of attitude becomes weakness of character"
- Einstein


Isaiah 6:8
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Who shall I send? And who will go for us?" And I said, "Here I am. Send me!"

 

I will NOT comply!
 

 


#5 ONLINE   adair_usmc

adair_usmc

  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 17,136
  • Posts: 5,072
  • Joined: Oct. 27 2009
  • Location:La Grande, Oregon


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 03:34 PM

They don't meet the definition of a SBS, so don't need an ATF stamp. In Oregon, a rifle must have a barrel length of 16", and a shotgun must have a barrel length of 18", or it's possession is considered a felony. An "affirmative defense" to a charge under the statute, is a record that the federal tax has been paid by the owner of the firearm. Since it is not an NFA weapon and there is no tax to be paid, it is in fact a prohibited weapon in Oregon. 

 

While I don't necessarily agree with their interpretation and implementation of the law, that is the rationale behind it. 

 

 

ETA: This is particularly worrisome for the "Hearing Protection Act". Suppressors are specifically forbidden in Oregon, with the exception of owners who have paid the federal tax. If that tax no longer exists, then there will not be any further suppressors legally owned or produced in the state. Only those that were owned prior to the tax being removed will be "legal".

 

 

But the shockwave is not a shotgun, it is a "firearm" and outside the NFA.  Oregon law as far as I can tell does not define a shotgun, however it does define the term short barreled shotgun as ""Short-barreled shotgun" means a shotgun having one or more barrels less than 18 inches in length and any weapon made from a shotgun if the weapon has an overall length of less than 26 inches. [Amended by 1977 c.769 §1; 1979 c.779 §3; 1989 c.839 §1; 1993 c.735 §14; 1995 c.670 §3; 1999 c.1040 §2; 2001 c.666 §§32,44; 2003 c.614 §7; 2007 c.368 §1]"

 

US code however defines a shotgun as a weapon designed to be fired from the shoulder, hence the loophole allowing for these shockwave firearms to be legal federally.

 

What does that mean pepper, for the hundreds if not thousands of us who had these approved by the state police on our transfers, and what about all of the inventory in stock by gun dealers throughout the state?  Should we all take a boating trip together in crater lake and have an unfortunate accident?


Edited by adair_usmc, Jul. 03 2017 - 03:34 PM.



#6 OFFLINE   Retcop

Retcop

    No Country for Old Men


  • Group:Silver Patron
  • Member ID: 19,861
  • Posts: 30,480
  • Joined: May. 28 2010
  • Location:SOUTHERN Illinois


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 03:44 PM

https://www.american...-590-shockwave/




Signature:

A Vote for Trump is a vote for a liberal !

 

NRA Life Member

The People's power flows through the States, not Washington.

Repeal the 17th Amendment.

Read Levin's The Liberty Amendments, Liberty and Tyranny, Ameratopia, and Men in Black.


#7 ONLINE   adair_usmc

adair_usmc

  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 17,136
  • Posts: 5,072
  • Joined: Oct. 27 2009
  • Location:La Grande, Oregon


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 03:49 PM

 

 

So after looking at that, the Oregon definition of a short barreled shotgun is identical to the definition I found for them under Oregon statutes.  If they are using the NFA's definition of a SBS, by extension the definition of a standard shotgun should also be accepted, absent a alternative definition like California, or at least that would make sense to me.  

 

Sucks that they are pulling the plug after letting so many of these go through.  The store manager for my local FFL bought the Remington model for himself and was supposed to arrive soon, now it looks like he wont be able to take it home unless something changes.  

 

I know that when I got mine, the Oregon State Police website did not have an explicit category for these, so the FFL that did the transfer called them and they said to run it as a pistol grip shotgun, and it went through with no trouble.




#8 ONLINE   adair_usmc

adair_usmc

  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 17,136
  • Posts: 5,072
  • Joined: Oct. 27 2009
  • Location:La Grande, Oregon


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 05:20 PM

Update on the Oregonfirearms website - 

 

http://www.oregonfir...cking-transfers




#9 ONLINE   Pepper

Pepper

    Ban-O-Matic


  • Group:Admins
  • Member ID: 21
  • Posts: 37,674
  • Joined: Sep. 17 2005
  • Location:Oregon


Posted Jul. 03 2017 - 06:28 PM

 

 

 

What does that mean pepper, for the hundreds if not thousands of us who had these approved by the state police on our transfers, and what about all of the inventory in stock by gun dealers throughout the state?  Should we all take a boating trip together in crater lake and have an unfortunate accident?

I personally don't think it's going to be a problem legally. I think that most cops would assume that since it was purchased legally, that it is legal. An explanation might be necessary in some places. 




#10 OFFLINE   Sorceress 21

Sorceress 21

    The Ultimate Big Mouth


  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 25,053
  • Posts: 1,103
  • Joined: Jan. 18 2012
  • Location:Roanoke, VA


Posted Jul. 13 2017 - 04:21 PM

Ugghhhh...a better question is why the heck would you want one?




Signature:

For some girls it shoes, others it's purses...But for me if it's loud and kills things at long distances then it's just a matter of deciding what color I want it in. A fashionable camo or an elegant black!
 


#11 OFFLINE   Casper

Casper

  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 17,345
  • Posts: 2,743
  • Joined: Nov. 14 2009
  • Location:Midwest


Posted Jul. 15 2017 - 11:35 PM

Yeah, I'm not sure I'd shoot that thing very often even if given to me.

But it sucks a state changes what's approved after letting some go through.


Signature:

"If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. That's ridiculous. If you have a gun, what in the hell do you have to be paranoid for."

Chili with meat AND beans!


#12 ONLINE   TomJefferson

TomJefferson

  • Group:Senior Staff
  • Member ID: 7
  • Posts: 38,186
  • Joined: Sep. 13 2005
  • Location:Tennessee


Contributor

Posted Jul. 16 2017 - 07:23 AM

It sucks when a state thinks they can limit a right at all.  Its not their place to be "approving" whether we own a gun and which one. 




#13 OFFLINE   Retcop

Retcop

    No Country for Old Men


  • Group:Silver Patron
  • Member ID: 19,861
  • Posts: 30,480
  • Joined: May. 28 2010
  • Location:SOUTHERN Illinois


Posted Jul. 16 2017 - 08:16 AM

GVTBiUQ.png


I wonder how this will work for those of us who already got one? I guess I will have to go have another boating accident soon.

I don't quite understand by what legal mechanism the Governor or the OSP has the power to do that.

 

I can understand the firearm's "experts" at the OSP being able to make a determination to refer the status of a borderline compliant weapon to the State Attorney General for a ruling, or even stretch their power in a liberal State to put a temporary hold on transfer until the AG or State Legislature or the Courts sort it out.

 

What really blows me away that Oregon's legislation allows the Governor and his political hacks who don't know which end of a firearm the bullet leaves from, the power to decide what can be transferred and what can not be. 

That must be one hell of a law...

 

One thought is that this may be a good opportunity to assert that Oregon's Gun Control Law is much too vague, and therefore unconstitutional.

Laws are struck down regularly for that reason. 

If the law is so unclear as to cause all of this confusion, it may be time to file suit in a higher Court on that ground alone. 

Judges do not usually abide by truly vague laws. 

 

File suit, ask for an injunction, and marshall the pro-gun folks in the State to rally round the flag. 

Make the Legislators start over from scratch.


Edited by Retcop, Jul. 16 2017 - 08:19 AM.



#14 ONLINE   Pepper

Pepper

    Ban-O-Matic


  • Group:Admins
  • Member ID: 21
  • Posts: 37,674
  • Joined: Sep. 17 2005
  • Location:Oregon


Posted Jul. 16 2017 - 04:09 PM

Oregon law isn't vague. It's a shotgun, with a barrel less than 18", under Oregon law. There is no need for a federal stamp, which is what would make it a legal exemption under Oregon law. This is also the problem with the Hearing Protection Act removing the tax stamp. Suddenly, there will be no more new suppressors legal within the state of Oregon. What people have, they'd better be happy with, as they won't even be legal for transfer within the state. These laws weren't a problem if everything stayed the same. However, things happen to change from time to time. Instead of hand wringing over what happened, getting state legislators to get off their asses, or putting a ballot measure in front of the voters of the state would be the way to get things changed. Instead, we're going to argue about a clearly defined law that has existed for quite some time. Oregon's laws do not use federal definitions for objects, whether we like it or not. 




#15 ONLINE   Variable

Variable

  • Group:Members
  • Member ID: 32,006
  • Posts: 1,424
  • Joined: Apr. 30 2017
  • Location:Penumbra


Posted Jul. 19 2017 - 05:23 PM

These are not listing Oregon as a no-no state. Kinda pricey, but interesting

 

http://www.blackaces...pro-series-dtvs

 

Supposedly a 590 with an 8.5" barrel.







Forum Statistics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Information Center