Clarification Needed on Oregon Carry Laws

[scott_see]

...I am not sure what Oregon law is about notifying LE about a concealed handgun. ....

You're not required to notify LE if you're carrying. That being said, I'm not sure what the deal is if they ask. But out of a matter of courtesy, it'd be wise to answer honestly.

 

[HB of CJ]

Didn't the Oregon Courts rule that a Peace Officer can NOT EVEN ASK if your are Concealed Carrying? He has no PC (probable cause) to ask. I think this deals with vehicles only. Not sure.

Now stumping for the new edition of Oregon Firearms Laws by The Oregon Federation Of Firearms group. OFF. In the past their updated booklets have been timely and very accurate. Yep.

My opinion only. I am not a lawyer. Respectfully.

 

[mjbskwim]

Fellow members -

Three close relatives attended a firearms training / carry class yesterday. The instructors were retired LEO (one State & one local) and two retired military from Army / Air Force. My relatives were already experienced shooters but took the class so they can apply for carry permits.

A couple of things stuck out when they were telling me about it. The discussion of NFA items came up and whoever was speaking about it kept calling the Tax Stamp a "Duck Stamp". Maybe he was trying to be funny or simply misspoke but he also stated if a person buys a MG with a suppressor it'd only require one $200 stamp for both NFA items. At that point I mentally began questioning nearly everything they'd been told.

They were told by one of the retired LEO's that if an officer asks you're legally required to inform them if you're carrying & that they can then inspect your weapon and run the s/n. I was under the impression (perhaps wrongly) the only time you're required to inform them is if you're being placed under arrest and if they ask you can refuse to answer. Refusal to answer would most likely cause an officer to go on defense however if I was stopped, based on the initial interaction I'd be inclined to volunteer that I was carrying. If they started off with what I call a "cop attitude" I wouldn't volunteer anything.

I'm not the 'carry a gun openly to assert my rights' kind of guy like you see on YouTube and those types ruin it for law abiding citizens. I bought Kevin Starrett's book a couple of years ago but it's in storage at the moment and I don't remember if my questions regarding informing LEO's was covered. I'd appreciate some knowledgeable responses and if possible Statute Citations if available. It's possible what I've considered to be my "rights" regarding these matters are based on hearsay and not actual law.

I have a lot of respect for courteous & professional LEO's but have known a couple of them quite well socially (in a state just south of OR) & they were not professional. One guy would start playing darts with my brother-in-law & I on Saturday mornings & we drank beer for hours. Then he'd go on duty at 4:00 PM & admitted a couple of times that his partner had to drive b/c he was too drunk. Not the norm but it taints a person's attitude after seeing it occur repeatedly.

Thanks in advance.

OK so why we're the LOE bothering talk about NFA stuff in this class? Why confuse the people?

 

[HB of CJ]

Particularly when the NFA rules can be very complicated. What the guy said about a MG with can only requiring one Tax Stamp is quite non correct. Very most likely non correct.

About the only exception I can think of is a pre '86 transferable integrally suppressed mg. Might be a few on the NFA roles. Everything else requires two tax stamps. The MG. The Can.

We were planning on building a short barreled M1 USGI Carbine with a Flemming registered M2 trigger housing and the new Elite Iron Battle Dog Can. That would be THREE STAMPS.

Build canceled. Too expensive.

Also I think, (not sure) that you are NOT obligated to tell an Oregon Officer anything about legally CC as long as you are not inside specific public buildings and ONLY if he asks. He needs PC?

My opinions only. I am not a lawyer. Respectfully.

All Oregon State Laws, US Code Laws And NFA Rules Apply.

 

[L84Cabo]

166.380 Examination of firearm by peace officer; presentation of concealed handgun license. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a peace officer may examine a firearm possessed by anyone on the person while in or on a public building to determine whether the firearm is a loaded firearm.

(2) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun may present a valid concealed handgun license to the peace officer instead of providing the firearm to the peace officer for examination. [1969 c.705 §3; 2015 c.605 §1]

Note, section (2) was amended in 2015. Prior to this, you could be arrested for refusal to allow inspection.

Do note that the law specifies the officer has the right to check if the weapon is loaded. There's nothing in here about having the right to run the serial number. I'm not suggesting you get into an argument with an officer if he decides to run your serial number. I'm only pointing out that he has no legal basis to do it...unless there's another law somewhere??

Also, it would appear that there is no legal requirement to proactively notify in the state of Oregon per this...

A Rundown of "Duty To Inform" Laws in All 50 States - USA Carry

Note that it appears that you are required to inform if ASKED by the officer but, again, not proactively on your part. With that said, in some some states the Issuing Agency will make this a condition of issuing the permit. California is like this for example. Some sheriffs require you to inform and some don't. I have no idea if various counties in Oregon are the same. I would always suggest you check things with the Agency that issued your permit if you have questions.

 

[Hawaiian]

There is no duty to inform in Oregon. Counties can not override this with their own regulations.
That said, the Washington County Sheriff has confirmed this, however he said that his officers would appreciate it if you did inform them as a courtesy, although it is not required. I support LEO so I will inform them as a courtesy.

 

[bolus]

Not sure if it has been mentioned, but when they pull you over they can see you have a CHL by the license plate lookup. Whether or not you tell them you have a CHL does not matter since they already know.

 

[Osarion]

Re informing LEO that you are carrying:

Very interesting but it doesn't really fit a scenario where you've simply been pulled over by the police for a broken tail light and are trying to avoid a serious misunderstanding.

 

[wired]

I dont get pulled over often but police officers walking up to my car are usually writing the ticket on their way up. I dont volunteer any information other than answer to questions asked. If they ask if I am carrying I will answer truthfully. If they ask if I know how fast I was going I say "yes". If they ask if I know why I got pulled over I tell them "because that is your job". I dont get out of tickets much and I'm fine with that. I'm not an LEO supporter so ...

 

[MrMillspecer]

I dont get pulled over often but police officers walking up to my car are usually writing the ticket on their way up. I dont volunteer any information other than answer to questions asked. If they ask if I am carrying I will answer truthfully. If they ask if I know how fast I was going I say "yes". If they ask if I know why I got pulled over I tell them "because that is your job". I dont get out of tickets much and I'm fine with that. I'm not an LEO supporter so ...

.....,...The body in the trunk remained unfound ?

 

[Kevin Starrett]

Fellow members -

Three close relatives attended a firearms training / carry class yesterday. The instructors were retired LEO (one State & one local) and two retired military from Army / Air Force. My relatives were already experienced shooters but took the class so they can apply for carry permits.

A couple of things stuck out when they were telling me about it. The discussion of NFA items came up and whoever was speaking about it kept calling the Tax Stamp a "Duck Stamp". Maybe he was trying to be funny or simply misspoke but he also stated if a person buys a MG with a suppressor it'd only require one $200 stamp for both NFA items. At that point I mentally began questioning nearly everything they'd been told.

They were told by one of the retired LEO's that if an officer asks you're legally required to inform them if you're carrying & that they can then inspect your weapon and run the s/n. I was under the impression (perhaps wrongly) the only time you're required to inform them is if you're being placed under arrest and if they ask you can refuse to answer. Refusal to answer would most likely cause an officer to go on defense however if I was stopped, based on the initial interaction I'd be inclined to volunteer that I was carrying. If they started off with what I call a "cop attitude" I wouldn't volunteer anything.

I'm not the 'carry a gun openly to assert my rights' kind of guy like you see on YouTube and those types ruin it for law abiding citizens. I bought Kevin Starrett's book a couple of years ago but it's in storage at the moment and I don't remember if my questions regarding informing LEO's was covered. I'd appreciate some knowledgeable responses and if possible Statute Citations if available. It's possible what I've considered to be my "rights" regarding these matters are based on hearsay and not actual law.

I have a lot of respect for courteous & professional LEO's but have known a couple of them quite well socially (in a state just south of OR) & they were not professional. One guy would start playing darts with my brother-in-law & I on Saturday mornings & we drank beer for hours. Then he'd go on duty at 4:00 PM & admitted a couple of times that his partner had to drive b/c he was too drunk. Not the norm but it taints a person's attitude after seeing it occur repeatedly.

Thanks in advance.

While it is not uncommon for police to believe you are required to inform them you are armed, and they also believe they can inspect your gun, this is simply not true except for the provision that if you are in a public building a police officer may inspect your firearm to see if it is loaded. However a recent change in the law now allows a person with a CHL the option of providing the CHL instead of allowing the gun to be inspected. None of this makes any sense. A person who does not have a CHL may not be in a public building with a gun loaded or not. A person with a CHL may have one loaded.

We brought this up over and over during the hearings for the change. We pointed out that the simple solution was to simply repeal the nonsense law.

In its original form, the bill that made the change would have REQUIRED you to show a CHL. But we got that removed. Now, while there is an option to provide the gun OR show the CHL, there is nothing in the statute that compels you to do either:

166.380 Examination of firearm by peace officer; presentation of concealed handgun license. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a peace officer may examine a firearm possessed by anyone on the person while in or on a public building to determine whether the firearm is a loaded firearm.

(2) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun may present a valid concealed handgun license to the peace officer instead of providing the firearm to the peace officer for examination. [1969 c.705 §3; 2015 c.605 §1]

_____________________

Outside of public buildings there is no statute that requires you to volunteer any info. In fact, you are really never required to talk to the police at all. You may not LIE to a cop, but you don't have to answer his questions.

In fact, now in Oregon, (whether they know it or not) police have very limited authority to even ask you if you have a gun.

Cops must have good reason to ask if people have guns on them, Oregon Supreme Court rules

By the way, the upstanding central figure in this story went on to many more crimes.

Now none of this addresses what you SHOULD do. That's up to you. This is just what the laws say.

 

[KC289]

They already know that you have or do not have a CHL prior to contact. Therefore, if you have a CHL, they are going to assume that you are carrying. If you do not have a CHL, they are going to assume that you could be. Officers awareness will be about the same. Sure wouldn't want to get caught saying that you were not armed if you are. If you are a jerk during contact, you will change the tone of the stop. Just be polite and answer the questions. If you feel it was not appropriate, the time to voice your concerns is in a complaint to the department not at the time of the stop. Just my opinion.

 

[billstaf]

I've had my Oregon CHL for about 9 years now and carry everywhere every day. In all that time I've only been stopped by the cops (traffic violation) once. I presented my ODL and my CHL to the cop at the same time, mentioned that I was carrying, and kept my hands on the steering wheel.
This happened in Lincoln City, Oregon with the Lincoln City PD. The cop was very polite. he asked me what I was carrying and where on my person. When I told him, he thanked me and sent me on my way with a polite warning and no ticket.
I know some cops have the "bad bubblegum with a badge" attitude, but I think many of them are just good guys doing a tough job. A little calm politeness can go a long way in an encounter with LEOs.

 

[PiratePast40]

As a practical matter, I don't feel very comfortable handing a loaded gun out the window of my car to anyone. Even if he's LEO, it doesn't mean he's familiar with your gun. Try it yourself sometime. Sit in the car with your seat belt on and start messing with a loaded weapon on your belt. Then check out the position of a LEO during a traffic stop.

I would be letting him know that I don't feel comfortable with the safety aspects of him fingerbanging your loaded gun while standing behind you with your head at the same level as his belt.

 

[gimpy51]

There was a case a few years back where a guy got pulled over for a traffic offense. He was not asked about a weapon. I don't remember if he got a ticket but before it was all over, the cop found out the guy was armed. Cop flipped and made it a huge issue for not immediately informing the cop. Went to trial, driver lost. Went on appeal, guy won because there is nothing in the OR law that requires notice.
Portland Port Authority made their facility a soft target. Ticketed someone. Went to court and appeal, the Port Authority lost. The OR law makes it law that others cannot will-nilly restrict.
Can't CC in the higher courts. But in Klamath Falls, we only have a local court. Specifically left out of the law. The judge can restrict CC in his/her courtroom, but not the courthouse.
We have schools, colleges and Universities that claim no gun zones. But they do not have the legal right to change the laws.
I respect the LEO in his duties, until they cross a line. I try to tell them what they need to know. Beyond that, I speak in generalities.
I respect equality. I'm more than willing to answer pertinent questions, but when they become more personal than business, the auto respect ends.
I am not concerned about them liking me. We both have work to do, let's get on our way.
I'm old enough, there ought to be some respect toward me. I have far more contacts and far more life experience than the young. I'm also more dangerous just because the Captain is more likely to take my call.
I have respect for the law, not necessarily the enforcer.

 

[IronMonster]

Kind of unrelated.

I once got pulled over and got a ticket (for an illegal turn). Without a single word said by either the officer or myself. Nada, Bubkis.

Zero communication. I handed him my stuff. He left and came back with a ticket which I signed and took and he left. Zero words said

 

[HB of CJ]

Thank you Kevin.

 

[gimpy51]

I was towing a trailer home when I had a blow out after dark. An officer came up behind and protected me to get to a safer place to pull off and fix the tire. We arrived at safety, the officer watched over us (nice and protectively) I pulled off my jacket and exposed my weapon when I had to work the jack and T-bar. The same way I would have had I been at home. He never blinked an eye or asked any questions at all. When finished, I put my jacket back on and we both drove our separate ways.

I think we need to keep in mind, there is a different community vibe when living in the country. Different in the big cities. Any rural area is kind of like the Alaska State Troopers attitude, they figure everyone has a gun or two in their vehicle. It's legal and expected. The question need not even come up unless a problem arises. In the country, that is how it seems to be.

 

[Skier]

Fear of losing value is my biggest stumbling block from buying a full auto. My fear is I go spend $30,000 on a M16 and a month later Trump will reverse the Hughes amendment of FOPA. And I'll have a $30,000 rifle worth $1500

Interesting you should mention that... Just noticed this:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/repeal-1986-hughes-amendment

 

[Skier]

None of this makes any sense. A person who does not have a CHL may not be in a public building with a gun loaded or not. A person with a CHL may have one loaded.

Could they not open carry in a public building? Or, is it possibly in violation of one law to carry a gun without a CHL in a public building, but violating yet another law if it is loaded?