Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ditto this - best advice.report the gun stolen and walk away from everything and just wait it out.
AND correct me if I am wrong but if he knew his brother couldn't pass a BGC then he couldn't even let him have it for the trigger replacement right?If you say you did not give the rifle to your brother then you did give a person known to you as not able to purchase a rifle
Oregon screws people hard on expungments of records so if he had other guns (I assume at least a few he passed a 4473) even if he can't pass a background it is (probably) legal as OSP blames feds, feds blame osp, but if he didn't somewhat do that process and had something that legitimate prohibits him yes that's in bad territory. Hypothetically I have meet people with expunged records who own guns but couldn't get it off OSP crap and they haven't had any issues in traffic stops. That said, this whole situation is not worth the trouble. If they do a 4473 on it when she sells it then it's legit out of your hair anyways. If you want to report it stolen do that but honestly cut your loses unless it's a irreplaceable gun worth potential legal issues.Am I missing something here? If the brother could not pass a BGC the rifle can not be his as the only way for the brother to own it at the time of purchase is through a 4473. OR if you are in Oregon as a gift from you. If you say you did not give the rifle to your brother then you did give a person known to you as not able to purchase a rifle a rifle.
It's not known why the BGC for the brother failed.Am I missing something here? If the brother could not pass a BGC the rifle can not be his as the only way for the brother to own it at the time of purchase is through a 4473. OR if you are in Oregon as a gift from you. If you say you did not give the rifle to your brother then you did give a person known to you as not able to purchase a rifle a rifle.
Good point.Keep in mind OSP doesn't give a reason for a denial. Its not a good sign, but it doesn't mean its a "legit" denial either.
Im more concerned why the FFL allowed the gun to transfer to a person that didnt order and "actually" pay for it. It could be because they are brothers but I don't see how that exception applies to the initial purchase. IIRC there is a case law of a father son convicted of straw purchasing this way.
Yep, there's a number of things going on.There are enough gray areas that I don't know if involving LE in any way, even filing a stolen report, is such a great idea. It would spur them into asking questions and you have no idea how they might choose to interpret the answers.
There is something questionable about how the FFL let this rifle out the door, the whole story sounds like a straw purchase.Good point.
A "by the book" FFL would have sent the rifle back to the seller on the buyer's dime.
The web entangles yet another player.
That may not always be true. LE still has to have proof the original owner was somehow connected to the crime. It's commonplace for firearms to have had multiple owners and 4473's aren't always required. Gifting to family for one, but from the sounds of it, the neice took it out of state. Whatever state she's in may not require private party FFL transfers(?)If the OP is on the last BGC record, and the person sells the gun to someone without a BGC, who uses it in a crime thats not a good thing for the OP if he never reported it stolen.
I may be incorrect here (and if so will likely be corrected) but believe any state-to-state resident transfer of firearms has to go through an FFL (federal law). Now if this law is adhered to is another matter...Whatever state she's in may not require private party FFL transfers(?)
When a gun turns up in a crime scene and the SN is traced back to the last person who lawfully purchased it, they are now connected to the crime.LE still has to have proof the original owner was somehow connected to the crime.
The OP didn't say, but is the niece an OR resident? She may have just been transporting it to her home state(?) She was an OR resident, but moved... and all it takes is for her to swap out her OR driver's license for the new home state's to legally transfer a firearm within that state.I may be incorrect here (and if so will likely be corrected) but believe any state-to-state resident transfer of firearms has to go through an FFL (federal law). Now if this law is adhered to is another matter...
Exactly what I was saying. It's just step one when attempting to trace the firearm to a possible suspect but doesn't implicate the last owner of record without proof.When a gun turns up in a crime scene and the SN is traced back to the last person who lawfully purchased it, they are not connected to the crime.