I hope you're correct, but if Oregon passed some type of "universal" background check, it's hard to believe it didn't use some Bloomberg boilerplate.
I recently was listening to a podcast with one of the folks that's on this stuff full time (Gottlieb? Don't remember the name) was discussing the recently passed laws out west. Couldn't remember if they were talking Washington or Oregon, hence the and/or in my original post.
Anywho...in the examples I gave, you would be breaking the law in at least three of the previous examples, and maybe all four.
I've heard that Schummer's scheme would not make you a criminal if someone checked out your gun at your house, but you would be breaking the law if you let someone check out your gun if you were at their house.
Bottom line is these laws are:
1. Rediculous.
2. Will do nothing to stop crime.
3. Will, in fact, make a lot of previous law abiding citizens criminals.
4. The true BG's in society won't pay a bit of attention to such laws.
After all, they're too busy on other "enterprises" and aren't too concerned about breaking the law (multiple times) by holding their buddy's deer rifle while crossing a fence.