Oregon Does ORS 166.260 Specifically Exempt CHL Holders from ORS 166.250?

[Koda]

And ORS 166.262 which is actually relevant to the Sheriffs as it applies to ORS 166.250 and 166.260

this was all I saw in OSSAs reply.



Whats interesting is ORS166.262 actually refers to CHLs being exempt from carrying "a firearm"...
so that actually supports the CHL can be used to include other firearms like rifles.

ORS 166.262 – Limitation on peace officer’s authority to arrest for violating ORS 166.250 or 166.370

A peace officer may not arrest or charge a person for violating ORS 166.250 (Unlawful possession of firearms) (1)(a) or (b) or…

oregon.public.law

 

[CamoDeafie]

But to deviate, my SBR is too big to conceal. I carry concealed for the purpose of maintaining a hidden firearm.

Gun porn
View attachment 1457674

So's is my 6.5 Grendel 12" SBR... especially with the Adco Mirage ..

 

[solv3nt]

So's is my 6.5 Grendel 12" SBR... especially with the Adco Mirage .. View attachment 1457675View attachment 1457676View attachment 1457677

Is that an SBR in your pants or are you just happy to be here?















Happy to be here sir!

 

[solv3nt]

So's is my 6.5 Grendel 12" SBR... especially with the Adco Mirage ..

12"!?!?!?! Mine is only 8".....

 

[solv3nt]

I suddenly feel grossly inadequate standing next to @CamoDeafie .

 

[CamoDeafie]

this was all I saw in OSSAs reply.
View attachment 1457671


Whats interesting is ORS166.262 actually refers to CHLs being exempt from carrying "a firearm"...
so that actually supports the CHL can be used to include other firearms like rifles.

ORS 166.262 – Limitation on peace officer’s authority to arrest for violating ORS 166.250 or 166.370

A peace officer may not arrest or charge a person for violating ORS 166.250 (Unlawful possession of firearms) (1)(a) or (b) or…

oregon.public.law

Indeed. The deliberate usage of the term "firearm" in both ORS 166.250 (1) (a) and ORS 166.262 is no accident

 

[solv3nt]

Indeed. The deliberate usage of the term "firearm" in both ORS 166.250 (1) (a) and ORS 166.262 is no accident

 

[CamoDeafie]

12"!?!?!?! Mine is only 8".....

Only 4" shorter than the legal "rifle" (16") carbine that I also have

 

[solv3nt]

It doesn't matter where it says anything.

 

[solv3nt]

Only 4" shorter than the legal "rifle" (16") carbine that I also have

I'll see your four and raise you eight.

 

[Yarome]

No you didn't. What you said was

"It's not an OR statue. It is a legal principle/standard established in the 19th century in the case of Vaughn v. Menlove... applicable to all law interpretation."

The bold part is mine, and you may have intended to say "first" but it's not in there. And I did 'edify ' myself, and what I came up with is that it is not applicable to all law interpretation and really only applies to civil / liability issues

You're correct. I meant "established" to mean... "first".... vs... "re"-establshed, "second"-established or "further"-established. I thought it was a given that "established" meant... "first". My bad!

(Isn't that kind of like saying, "my hot water heater"?? )

So it is your contention that "reasonable understanding" should be confined only to civil/liability issues and "unreasonable understanding" may apply to the interpretation of any other U.S. law..... gotcha!!

Sorry, but I'm done with that, buddy. Enjoy your day.

 

[CamoDeafie]

I'll see your four and raise you eight.

Don't have anything shorter in an AR platform.. but I do have the P85 with a 4.5" barrel

 

[CamoDeafie]

It's like Halloween candy. Fullsize or bigger is always better to have than fun sized or smaller in terms of barrel lengths and pleasure

 

[solv3nt]

So to sum up, @RX-79G considers Persons not affected by to be ambiguous.. what is your opinion on "shall not be infringed"? Do you actually own any guns?

 

[solv3nt]

It's like Halloween candy. Fullsize or bigger is always better to have than fun sized or smaller in terms of barrel lengths and pleasure

Mine is bigger than yours.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Mine is bigger than yours.
View attachment 1457682

Double stamped? Niiice. I'm deaf so I like mine to be louder... and that goes for women too

 

[solv3nt]

Double stamped? Niiice. I'm deaf so I like mine to be louder... and that goes for women too

Well the stamp plays double duty.




So..... If my CHL doesn't apply to an SBR, would it apply to a suppressor?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

So it is your contention that "reasonable understanding" should be confined only to civil/liability issues and "unreasonable understanding" may apply to the interpretation of any other U.S. law..... gotcha!!

No, it is my understanding that the courts in the United States confine it to only civil/liability issues and my opinion doesn't matter

Not much of a gotcha if you ask me

 

[solv3nt]

No, it is my understanding that the courts in the United States confine it only to civil/liability issues and my opinion doesn't matter

Not much of a gotcha if you ask me

So.... Back to the topic. Do you have any ORS that says 166.260 Persons not affected by ORS 166.250 doesn't apply?

 

[solv3nt]

166.250 Unlawful possession of firearms. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section or ORS 166.260, 166.270, 166.273, 166.274, 166.291, 166.292 or 166.410 to 166.470, a person commits the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm if the person knowingly: