First Time OC: Seaside, OR - Advice?

[swoop]

I OC'd along side Jack yesterday and it was my first time too. I had it inside but clearly visible (butt sticking out) of my purse. I have to say I didn't like it. I much prefer concealed carry but I don't yet have my Oregon CHL either. It made me nervous to OC but I think mostly it was the awkwardness in which I had to carry it to keep it "open" I couldn't attach to my pants as they were capris with no belt and not snug/strong enough to hold a revolver.

So, any females out there have advice on how to OC with no belt, and girlie clothing??

Check out (The cornered cat .com) I think you will find Kathy Jackson to be very informative.

 

[JackThompson]

Sobering words Darkknight.

I'm taking my Oregon class on September 5th, and will be applying for my Oregon CHL on the 6th. I'm not looking to be a court case.

I have however had an awesome time on vacation here in Seaside.

Day 3, morning started with a conversation with the young fella working at the desk in our hotel. He asked me about open carry in Oregon and I explained about my Washington CPL and that it wasn't honored in Oregon.

Turns out he was a police officer in Florida and relocated with his family, but the job he was moving to Seaside for got filled before he could get up here.

He's now looking for work as a LEO all up and down the coast and hopes to have something soon. He said I was the first person he saw since he moved up here that was OCing. I guess Florida is much more strict about their carry laws. That's too bad.

At my favorite place in Seaside Pig n Pancake about to have some buckwheat pancakes!

 

[JackThompson]

Ok. Pancakes down. Marion berry coma slowly kicking in.

So anyway,
What started as a vacation that I wanted to keep my
protection carried legally and with minimum hassle, turned into just that, but also gave me the opportunity to show some people that perfectly normal American adults and family men with little doggies can carry a firearm responsibly.

Overall I think it's been a good thing for me and MrsThompson, and a positive experience for gun carriers in general.

 

[hermannr]

Open Carry in Oregon is NOT legal with an out of state Concealed Carry License. You don't need to get arrested to try a case in court. People who do not live here and understand Oregon law should not go around on this or any other forum making false statements that will eventually end up getting some idiot, that follows their advice, thrown in jail and lose their 2A rights, here and their state of residence. I would especially like to see Hermannr come to downtown Portland, with his WA CPL and open carry a loaded firearm through the city. How about Pioneer Square on Sat. does that work for you Hermannr. If your so willing to freely give advice on the subject, then let's settle this. No more bickering back and forth on the forum, just prove you are right once and for all. Just make sure you wear clean underwear and bring bail money. It is only a misdemeanor so you should be able to post bail with the court.

Been to Portland many times, have relatives that live in Portland..Gresham too...used to live in Seaside many years ago...give you an idea that I may have studied a bit of OR law? That and I have carried (very definately prefer OC, only conceal is it is cold and i have a coat) since July of 1970. As for Astoria? Yes, it has been in the OC forums, WA res stopped in Astoria for loaded OC...He and his wepaon went home, no charges.

May I add, special for you Darknight...even though I have been in Portland many times (We particularly like the gardens at the Portland Zoological Gardens), I have never been stopped or talked to by LE there for any reason. I do think that the police in Astoria are very polite though.

 

[FireFighterChen]

Open Carry in Oregon is NOT legal with an out of state Concealed Carry License. You don't need to get arrested to try a case in court. People who do not live here and understand Oregon law should not go around on this or any other forum making false statements that will eventually end up getting some idiot, that follows their advice, thrown in jail and lose their 2A rights, here and their state of residence. I would especially like to see Hermannr come to downtown Portland, with his WA CPL and open carry a loaded firearm through the city. How about Pioneer Square on Sat. does that work for you Hermannr. If your so willing to freely give advice on the subject, then let's settle this. No more bickering back and forth on the forum, just prove you are right once and for all. Just make sure you wear clean underwear and bring bail money. It is only a misdemeanor so you should be able to post bail with the court.

Got an ORS stating OC is illegal in Oregon? I know there are specific cities (Beaverton Portland Area) with stricter control, but 98% of Oregon does not have those restrictions. It would seem only you have come here and given a false statement, and followed it up with a bit of fear mongering to try and scare people into not exercising their rights.

I moved to WA a year ago, and thus my OR permit is invalid. I was going through the process of getting my out of state permit, but decided it's my statement that I do not pay for the privilege to carry, instead I will use my RIGHT to carry and carry openly. I carry openly in my new home state WA, never had a problem.

There are a few states that grant reciprocity to Oregon and you only need a permit in certain restricted cities.

Maybe I a misunderstood you, but OR does not have reciprocity for any other state's permit. Concealed Handgun, License to Carry - Oregon Licenses, Permits and Registrations I see other states will honor OR, but no permit besides an OR resident/non resident permit is sufficient for those restricted cities.

So, what is the motivation to open carry? To me it makes absolutely no sense.

1. Deterrence
2. Normalization
3. My Right
4. Comfort
5. Speed/1-hand draw

I concealed until I started to open carry when I moved to WA and had to wait for my permit...now it makes no sense for me to go back to concealed.

 

[hermannr]

Got an ORS stating OC is illegal in Oregon? I know there are specific cities (Beaverton Portland Area) with stricter control, but 98% of Oregon does not have those restrictions. and scare people into not exercising their rights.

Maybe I a misunderstood you, but OR does not have reciprocity for any other state's permit. Concealed Handgun, License to Carry - Oregon Licenses, Permits and Registrations I see other states will honor OR, but no permit besides an OR resident/non resident permit is sufficient for those restricted cities.

I concealed until I started to open carry when I moved to WA and had to wait for my permit...now it makes no sense for me to go back to concealed.

I agree, it makes no sense to CC. I have OC'd here in WA (and some other states, including OR) for over 40 years, never been a problem..

However, I must disagree with you on the special restrictions local government can enact under the provisions of ORS 166.173. The exemption is for "anyone with a license to carry a concealed weapon" That exemption is not restricted to an OR CHL, it include any license to carry a concealed weapon...or Astoria's ordnance puts it "issued by any lawful authority". It is only valid for open carry, not concealed carry, and it only addresses the extra restriction that a local government may enact. It does not allow for open carry into a public building as defined in ORS 166. That requires an OR CHL issued under 291 and 292.

 

[FireFighterChen]

There are a few states that grant reciprocity to Oregon and you only need a permit in certain restricted cities.

I agree, it makes no sense to CC. I have OC'd here in WA (and some other states, including OR) for over 40 years, never been a problem..

However, I must disagree with you on the special restrictions local government can enact under the provisions of ORS 166.173. The exemption is for "anyone with a license to carry a concealed weapon" That exemption is not restricted to an OR CHL, it include any license to carry a concealed weapon...or Astoria's ordnance puts it "issued by any lawful authority". It is only valid for open carry, not concealed carry, and it only addresses the extra restriction that a local government may enact. It does not allow for open carry into a public building as defined in ORS 166. That requires an OR CHL issued under 291 and 292.

See even I can learn something new everyday. So just to hammer this out, with my WA permit, I can open carry everywhere in OR as if I had an OR permit?

Can you please post the ORS so I can print it out, I can't seem to find it with those exact wordings.

166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places. (1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(a) A law enforcement officer in the performance of official duty.
(b) A member of the military in the performance of official duty.
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
(d) A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building or court facility under ORS 166.370.
(e) An employee of the United States Department of Agriculture, acting within the scope of employment, who possesses a loaded firearm in the course of the lawful taking of wildlife. [1995 s.s. c.1 §4; 1999 c.782 §8; 2009 c.556 §3]

166.173 (2)(c)

That is what I presume you were speaking of. I found it I believe.

Edit: After reading it over and speaking with some other OR residence and WA residence...it seemed the general opinion was that the ORS stating (c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun, still means it needs to be an OR permit. Without an OR permit you are not licensed to carry a concealed pistol in OR, so does that disqualify you as exempt to OC as well?

 

[hermannr]

See even I can learn something new everyday. So just to hammer this out, with my WA permit, I can open carry everywhere in OR as if I had an OR permit?

Can you please post the ORS so I can print it out, I can't seem to find it with those exact wordings.

166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places. (1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(a) A law enforcement officer in the performance of official duty.
(b) A member of the military in the performance of official duty.
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
(d) A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building or court facility under ORS 166.370. (e) An employee of the United States Department of Agriculture, acting within the scope of employment, who possesses a loaded firearm in the course of the lawful taking of wildlife. [1995 s.s. c.1 §4; 1999 c.782 §8; 2009 c.556 §3]

166.173 (2)(c)

That is what I presume you were speaking of. I found it I believe.

I highlighted the two that are pertenant to the discussion.

2(c) states that "a person lcensed to carry a conceal weapon"...(no restrictions,,,any license to conceal works)

2(d) This exemption is totally different...it specifically requires an OR CHL (if you read 370 and follow the links)

So, can you OC in OR with a WA CPL as if you had an OR CHL...almost, but not quite...

You can OC anywhere you can carry with an OR CHL EXCEPT!....a public building (as defined in ORS 166.360) You do need an OR CHL to comply with ORS 166.370.

This only works for OC...as exempted by ORS 166.250(3) (openly in a holster on your hip) or ORS 166.260. There can be no attempt to conceal.

Concealed carry, or Open Carry into a public building is reserved to persons licensed under ORS 166.291 and 292. (that is, an Oregon CHL.)

 

[FireFighterChen]

I highlighted the two that are pertenant to the discussion.

2(c) states that "a person lcensed to carry a conceal weapon"...(no restrictions,,,any license to conceal works)

2(d) This exemption is totally different...it specifically requires an OR CHL (if you read 370 and follow the links)

So, can you OC in OR with a WA CPL as if you had an OR CHL...almost, but not quite...

You can OC anywhere you can carry with an OR CHL EXCEPT!....a public building (as defined in ORS 166.360) You do need an OR CHL to comply with ORS 166.370.

This only works for OC...as exempted by ORS 166.250(3) (openly in a holster on your hip) or ORS 166.260. There can be no attempt to conceal.

Concealed carry, or Open Carry into a public building is reserved to persons licensed under ORS 166.291 and 292. (that is, an Oregon CHL.)

What is your reasoning behind this part:

2(c) states that "a person licensed to carry a concealed weapon"...(no restrictions,,,any license to conceal works)

I am not licensed to carry a concealed weapon in Oregon. Is there a definition of license? Or where that license has to be valid/issued? Can they say it was implied to be an OR license since it's in an OR statute?

Gosh it's so confusing and I am probably over thinking it...let me try and explain it again and you tell me if I have it right. Red is my way of describing it in layman terms.




166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places. (1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015. Allows cities to make ordinances that restrict loaded possession of firearms within their city limits.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun. Any license to carry a concealed handgun exempts the carrier from the ordinances, not just licenses defined in 166.290 and 166.291.


166.250 (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section or ORS 166.260, 166.270, 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:
(a) Carries any firearm concealed upon the person;


166.250 (3) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section. So openly carried in a belt holster is not considered (166.250 (1)(a)) knowingly concealed.


166.260 Persons not affected by ORS 166.250. (1) ORS 166.250 does not apply to or affect:
(h) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun. Specifically requires an OR concealed handgun license is needed to (166.250) conceal carry.


166.360 Definitions for ORS 166.360 to 166.380. As used in ORS 166.360 to 166.380, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) "Capitol building" means the Capitol, the State Office Building, the State Library Building, the Labor and Industries Building, the State Transportation Building, the Agriculture Building or the Public Service Building and includes any new buildings which may be constructed on the same grounds as an addition to the group of buildings listed in this subsection.
(2) "Court facility" means a courthouse or that portion of any other building occupied by a circuit court, the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court or the Oregon Tax Court or occupied by personnel related to the operations of those courts, or in which activities related to the operations of those courts take place.
(3) "Loaded firearm" means:
(a) A breech-loading firearm in which there is an unexpended cartridge or shell in or attached to the firearm including but not limited to, in a chamber, magazine or clip which is attached to the firearm.
(b) A muzzle-loading firearm which is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball, shot or projectile in the barrel or cylinder.
(4) "Public building" means a hospital, a capitol building, a public or private school, as defined in ORS 339.315, a college or university, a city hall or the residence of any state official elected by the state at large, and the grounds adjacent to each such building. The term also includes that portion of any other building occupied by an agency of the state or a municipal corporation, as defined in ORS 297.405, other than a court facility.
(5) "Weapon" means:
(a) A firearm;


166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school. (1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.

According to 166.360 and 166.370 I need a (166.290 and 166.291) OR concealed handgun license to carry openly or concealed in public buildings.

 

[hermannr]

What is your reasoning behind this part:

2(c) states that "a person licensed to carry a concealed weapon"...(no restrictions,,,any license to conceal works)

I am not licensed to carry a concealed weapon in Oregon. Is there a definition of license? Or where that license has to be valid/issued? Can they say it was implied to be an OR license since it's in an OR statute?

Gosh it's so confusing and I am probably over thinking it...let me try and explain it again and you tell me if I have it right. Red is my way of describing it in layman terms.




166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places. (1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015. Allows cities to make ordinances that restrict loaded possession of firearms within their city limits.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun. Any license to carry a concealed handgun exempts the carrier from the ordinances, not just licenses defined in 166.290 and 166.291? No implied meaning here?


166.250 (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section or ORS 166.260, 166.270, 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:
(a) Carries any firearm concealed upon the person;


166.250 (3) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section. So openly carried in a belt holster is not considered (166.250 (1)(a)) knowingly concealed.


166.260 Persons not affected by ORS 166.250. (1) ORS 166.250 does not apply to or affect:
(h) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun. Specifically requires an OR concealed handgun license is needed to (166.250) conceal carry.


166.360 Definitions for ORS 166.360 to 166.380. As used in ORS 166.360 to 166.380, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) “Capitol building” means the Capitol, the State Office Building, the State Library Building, the Labor and Industries Building, the State Transportation Building, the Agriculture Building or the Public Service Building and includes any new buildings which may be constructed on the same grounds as an addition to the group of buildings listed in this subsection.
(2) “Court facility” means a courthouse or that portion of any other building occupied by a circuit court, the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court or the Oregon Tax Court or occupied by personnel related to the operations of those courts, or in which activities related to the operations of those courts take place.
(3) “Loaded firearm” means:
(a) A breech-loading firearm in which there is an unexpended cartridge or shell in or attached to the firearm including but not limited to, in a chamber, magazine or clip which is attached to the firearm.
(b) A muzzle-loading firearm which is capped or primed and has a powder charge and ball, shot or projectile in the barrel or cylinder.
(4) “Public building” means a hospital, a capitol building, a public or private school, as defined in ORS 339.315, a college or university, a city hall or the residence of any state official elected by the state at large, and the grounds adjacent to each such building. The term also includes that portion of any other building occupied by an agency of the state or a municipal corporation, as defined in ORS 297.405, other than a court facility.
(5) “Weapon” means:
(a) A firearm;


166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school. (1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.

According to 166.360 and 166.370 I need a (166.290 and 166.291) OR concealed handgun license to carry in public buildings. Does this mean the firearm must be concealed in a public building? Or it can be open or concealed?

The City of Astoria makes it clearer in 5.010(C)(3) "Any person having a valid permit issued to the person by lawful authority to carry or use concealed firearms;"
http://www.astoria.or.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=vXiABwd4i9k=&tabid=2002&mid=6163&language=en-US

Says nothing about only a carry permit being a Permit/license issued under ORS 166.291 and 292.

As to the public building: no, ORS 166.360 does not mean you must carry concealed in a public building, it means you must have an Oregon CHL (the 291 and 292 reference) to carry into a public building. Just because you have an OR CHL does not mean you cannot OC, it only means you MAY conceal. Same as the WA CPL, it only means you MAY conceal, NOT that you must conceal. (as when you are wearing a coat because it is cold)

As you already know, OR does not recognize any other states license to conceal...for purposes of concealed carry in the state of Oregon...however, that only effects concealed carry, and carry into public buildings. Oregon does recognise other states license/permit to carry for purposes of being exempt from local restrictions on loaded open carry.

 

[FireFighterChen]

The City of Astoria makes it clearer in 5.010(C)(3) "Any person having a valid permit issued to the person by lawful authority to carry or use concealed firearms;"
http://www.astoria.or.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=vXiABwd4i9k=&tabid=2002&mid=6163&language=en-US

Says nothing about only a carry permit being a Permit/license issued under ORS 166.291 and 292.

As to the public building: no, ORS 166.360 does not mean you must carry concealed in a public building, it means you must have an Oregon CHL (the 291 and 292 reference) to carry into a public building. Just because you have an OR CHL does not mean you cannot OC, it only means you MAY conceal. Same as the WA CPL, it only means you MAY conceal, NOT that you must conceal. (as when you are wearing a coat because it is cold)

As you already know, OR does not recognize any other states license to conceal...for purposes of concealed carry in the state of Oregon...however, that only effects concealed carry, and carry into public buildings. Oregon does recognise other states license/permit to carry for purposes of being exempt from local restrictions on loaded open carry.

Got it, I will edit my previous post to fix the very last part. I figured it was the same as everywhere else, it gives you the option to conceal if you want, but I was just making 110% sure.

Everything else looks ok? I know I shouldn't rely on police/sheriff departments, but I have a few contacts that I will get their opinion as well.

So here's my issue still...does WA have authority in OR? Does a WA police officer have authority in OR jurisdiction? Does a license issued by an authority in WA fulfill the requirement? Or does it have to be an authority recognized by OR?

 

[hermannr]

Got it, I will edit my previous post to fix the very last part. I figured it was the same as everywhere else, it gives you the option to conceal if you want, but I was just making 110% sure.

Everything else looks ok? I know I shouldn't rely on police/sheriff departments, but I have a few contacts that I will get their opinion as well.

So here's my issue still...does WA have authority in OR? Does a WA police officer have authority in OR jurisdiction? Does a license issued by an authority in WA fulfill the requirement? Or does it have to be an authority recognized by OR?

I would not ask a LEO, I would ask a lawyer (licensed to practice in OR, and versed in firearm laws there) if I wanted to be 100% sure.

 

[FireFighterChen]

I contacted Oregon Firearms Federation and they contacted a lawyer. This is what they add to say.

First email:

Well wel have lawyers, but I am pretty confident that the cannot answer the question, although I will forward it to them. The reason I don't think they can answer it is because they would have to be guessing just like you or I would be.

The exact letter of the law says "a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun." As you pointed out, it does not say licensed in Oregon. So it would be up to the courts. The courts would have to decide what the legislature intended. And you simply never know with the courts.

They might very well say, "Well in other places, the legislature specifically said 'A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun'. So when they DON'T say that they mean licensed anywhere" But I would not want to be the one to test that.

Kevin Starrett



Second email:

Follow up. Here is what I got from our lawyers.

> Kevin,
>
> I am just now working with a client with a Washington State CHL who was in Portland with a Concealed/Loaded firearm (2 misdemeanors). He thought about fighting this (on the arguments you presented), but with a mandatory minimum 30 days on the loaded firearms, we were able to work a ‘diversion like' program for him. In looking into the statute (and the similarly worded Portland code 14A.60.010), I believe the DDA would argue that ‘license' has to refer to only an Oregon license as Oregon has no reciprocity with any state. Therefore the State in crafting their statute could have only taken into account Oregon licenses as all other licenses are invalid here.
> Now we would argue a more rigid reading of the statute to its text alone, and that it should be interpreted broadly in favor of the defense, but I don't know if too many in our judiciary branch would buy into our arguments on gun policies. Additionally, the legislatures are aware that there are different kinds of licenses and could have stated Oregon only but they did not do that, and their silence speaks to that argument.
> All that's to say I think it's an argument, but maybe not one that would be accepted, unless there is some legislative history to the contrary. Did you have any luck determining jurisdiction for the Coast Guard? I could not find much.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Shawn A. Kollie
> Attorney at Law


So... be careful.

Kevin Starrett

So, I guess who wants to be the guinea pig? My best bet is to open carry as usual and just avoid those cities...shouldn't be too hard except for Portland where my family goes out to eat often.

Special thanks to OFF, they did a great job at contacting me and getting me the information I asked. Great bunch of people there.

 

[hermannr]

I contacted Oregon Firearms Federation and they contacted a lawyer. This is what they add to say.

First email:

Well wel have lawyers, but I am pretty confident that the cannot answer the question, although I will forward it to them. The reason I don't think they can answer it is because they would have to be guessing just like you or I would be.

The exact letter of the law says "a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun." As you pointed out, it does not say licensed in Oregon. So it would be up to the courts. The courts would have to decide what the legislature intended. And you simply never know with the courts.

They might very well say, "Well in other places, the legislature specifically said 'A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun'. So when they DON'T say that they mean licensed anywhere" But I would not want to be the one to test that.

Kevin Starrett



Second email:

Follow up. Here is what I got from our lawyers.

> Kevin,
>
> I am just now working with a client with a Washington State CHL who was in Portland with a Concealed/Loaded firearm (2 misdemeanors). He thought about fighting this (on the arguments you presented), but with a mandatory minimum 30 days on the loaded firearms, we were able to work a ‘diversion like' program for him. In looking into the statute (and the similarly worded Portland code 14A.60.010), I believe the DDA would argue that ‘license' has to refer to only an Oregon license as Oregon has no reciprocity with any state. Therefore the State in crafting their statute could have only taken into account Oregon licenses as all other licenses are invalid here.
> Now we would argue a more rigid reading of the statute to its text alone, and that it should be interpreted broadly in favor of the defense, but I don't know if too many in our judiciary branch would buy into our arguments on gun policies. Additionally, the legislatures are aware that there are different kinds of licenses and could have stated Oregon only but they did not do that, and their silence speaks to that argument.
> All that's to say I think it's an argument, but maybe not one that would be accepted, unless there is some legislative history to the contrary. Did you have any luck determining jurisdiction for the Coast Guard? I could not find much.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Shawn A. Kollie
> Attorney at Law


So... be careful.

Kevin Starrett

So, I guess who wants to be the guinea pig? My best bet is to open carry as usual and just avoid those cities...shouldn't be too hard except for Portland where my family goes out to eat often.

Special thanks to OFF, they did a great job at contacting me and getting me the information I asked. Great bunch of people there.

Thanks for the post. Too bad the WA CPL holder does not want to fight it..as there is a chance the argument that any concealed license may hold true..is shown by Portland's willingness to compromize.

That the lawyer says he is not sure what would happen with the judiciary presently in place, also can make sense,,,,,especially when you see ID and OK, same wording of their state constitutions as providing for the right to bare arms..totally different and opposite conclusions. See ID "in re Brickley" and for OK "Pierce v state" (1929)

O BTW: Astoria is not a problem...they did not even charge the WA CPL holder.

 

[FireFighterChen]

Thanks for the post. Too bad the WA CPL holder does not want to fight it..as there is a chance the argument that any concealed license may hold true..is shown by Portland's willingness to compromize.

That the lawyer says he is not sure what would happen with the judiciary presently in place, also can make sense,,,,,especially when you see ID and OK, same wording of their state constitutions as providing for the right to bare arms..totally different and opposite conclusions. See ID "in re Brickley" and for OK "Pierce v state" (1929)

O BTW: Astoria is not a problem...they did not even charge the WA CPL holder.

Yea, so its still a gamble at this point...the big different though is the guy in trouble right now was concealing it. That's a whole different ball game legally, which it shouldn't be, but it is.

Sigh...time heals everything. Do you think if we get WA to recognize OR, they would reciprocate?

 

[AlphaCoyote]

1. A Washington CPL has no effect in Oregon anywhere for any reason. You might as well leave it at home when you cross the border. No reciprocity for any purpose.

2. OC is not outlawed in Oregon, so you can do it, no matter what state or country you come from. You don't need a law telling you that. It's the absence of a statute restricting OC that makes it so. But the State has granted localities certain complex rights to restrict OC. So when you move from place to place within Oregon, you have to know what the local ordinances say. Some cities and towns have restrictions on OC -- or even vehicle carry.

 

[FireFighterChen]

1. A Washington CPL has no effect in Oregon anywhere for any reason. You might as well leave it at home when you cross the border. No reciprocity for any purpose.

2. OC is not outlawed in Oregon, so you can do it, no matter what state or country you come from. You don't need a law telling you that. It's the absence of a statute restricting OC that makes it so. But the State has granted localities certain complex rights to restrict OC. So when you move from place to place within Oregon, you have to know what the local ordinances say. Some cities and towns have restrictions on OC -- or even vehicle carry.

Yea, but the cities with complex rights to restrict loaded open carry have to exempt those with a license to carry concealed, but they don't say that license is defined by 166.290 and 166.291 like the other portions of carrying a firearm. The wording in 166.173 is different than in 166.250-260. So unless there is an implied meaning in the law, do the two laws have different meanings? In essence, all laws have different meanings, because depending who is the judge, it has a different meaning.

At least that is what I am trying to figure out. It seems even attorneys of law in OR can't really give a straight answer about it either. Hopefully it works its way out, one way or the other, and hopefully OR WA can have reciprocity at some point...like at the point where the 2A is fully reinstated.

 

[hermannr]

Yea, but the cities with complex rights to restrict loaded open carry have to exempt those with a license to carry concealed, but they don't say that license is defined by 166.290 and 166.291 like the other portions of carrying a firearm. The wording in 166.173 is different than in 166.250-260. So unless there is an implied meaning in the law, do the two laws have different meanings? In essence, all laws have different meanings, because depending who is the judge, it has a different meaning.

At least that is what I am trying to figure out. It seems even attorneys of law in OR can't really give a straight answer about it either. Hopefully it works its way out, one way or the other, and hopefully OR WA can have reciprocity at some point...like at the point where the 2A is fully reinstated.

You might find this interesting: <broken link removed>

This bill was put forward in 2009, and did not pass because of the usual suspects, but it gives some clarification to ORS 166.173(2) and is the reason behind my spout, as I understand this part was only clarification, not a real change...there was quite a bit of real change in the rest of it though.

I didn't realize the WA CPL holder was concealed...different matter entirely...that part is state law, not local option.

 

[ocarolan]

OC is not outlawed in Oregon, so you can do it, no matter what state or country you come from. You don't need a law telling you that. It's the absence of a statute restricting OC that makes it so. But the State has granted localities certain complex rights to restrict OC.

Don't forget, loaded carry is prohibited on an "ATV" unless you have a CHL (ORS 821.240).

And before you dismiss this, remember how Oregon defines an ATV. We include dirt bikes, jeeps and (potentially) any 4x4 vehicle, while it is being operated "off a highway". Yes, a Subaru Outback on a dirt road might qualify:



801.193 “Class II all-terrain vehicle.” “Class II all-terrain vehicle” means any motor vehicle that:

(1) Weighs more than a Class I all-terrain vehicle;

(2) Is designed for or capable of cross-country travel on or immediately over land, water, sand, snow, ice, marsh, swampland or other natural terrain; and

(3) Is actually being operated off a highway or is being operated on a highway for agricultural purposes under ORS 821.191.



(Props to OFF for getting the CHL exception to this in 2011, and clarifying what "unloaded" means.)

 

[hermannr]

Don't forget, loaded carry is prohibited on an "ATV" unless you have a CHL (ORS 821.240).

And before you dismiss this, remember how Oregon defines an ATV. We include dirt bikes, jeeps and (potentially) any 4x4 vehicle, while it is being operated "off a highway". Yes, a Subaru Outback on a dirt road might qualify:



801.193 "Class II all-terrain vehicle." "Class II all-terrain vehicle" means any motor vehicle that:

(1) Weighs more than a Class I all-terrain vehicle;

(2) Is designed for or capable of cross-country travel on or immediately over land, water, sand, snow, ice, marsh, swampland or other natural terrain; and

(3) Is actually being operated off a highway or is being operated on a highway for agricultural purposes under ORS 821.191.



(Props to OFF for getting the CHL exception to this in 2011, and clarifying what "unloaded" means.)

Thanks for the good laugh...I guess I cannot bring my Polaris Ranger EV to Oregon with me...I'll never be able to meet the equipment requirements...I have no muffler...it's an EV (electric). They make no provision for them.

I also like the ag exemption...only applies to the owner, I would guess a ranch hand cant use the ATV to get back and forth to the fields.

Meddling city fools, have no idea what is going on. happy I'm living in WA now.