Open carry in a vehicle.

[browntown]

Get your chl just to be safe, but honestly just take it out of the holster and put it in the seat next to you.

 

[NK777]

I own a Jeep Liberty , so If I'm going target shooting in the hills is it ok to keep everything in plain sight in the back of my Jeep ? (ammo, guns) or can they be in their respective cases ? this is getting very confusing. I hope to get my CWP soon, that would make it easier to transport "things" while on the road. I don't know about the rest of you but having my "toys" in plain sight isn't a very comfortable feeling for me.

Even with a CHL you can't have rifles loaded and concealed in Oregon. CHL (Concealed Handgun License) is not a CWP (Concealed Weapons Permit) so you can't just load anything you want then put it out of sight. Oregon allows a CHL not a CWP that some other states issue. Washington I believe is the same except they call a CHL a CPL (Concealed Pistol License) instead.

I'm pretty sure if you wanted you can still carry a loaded rifle/shotgun in a gun rack in plain view if you want but I'm with you. I'm not to keen on advertising my guns to potential thieves.

Brian

Edit: Better check on this as well before you try it out. I am not certain about it's legalities 100%

 

[tionico]

Hey, ain't all these arcane and stupid laws, well, stupid? Whatever happened to the "right to keep and bear arms"? Does getting into a vehicle suddenly void the Constitution? Oh wait, all the handgun, permit, purchasing restrictions already do that. So what's one more niggly restriction?

As I recall, best clear that weapon placed on the dash before you cross the Columbia into Washington. Seems, unless you have the CPL, having a LOADED weapon in a vehicle is a big no no this side the river. On the other side, though, until I get my OR permit, I'll need to remember to unholser/unconceal my pistol before I cross to the south. Forgetting, or being in ignorance, of the arcane rules and regs could easily make one a criminal for doing what is legal at home, and/or doing what seems reasonable and logical. Makes me wish all the harder those sellouts in Congress hadn't wimped out, and had passed the national reciprocity law. Maybe next year.......

 

[tionico]

Oh, and Cocktailer.... you are TOO MUCH!!! Only three survived... indeed!!


thanks for the laugh at the end of a long day.

 

[the4thshake]

Somethin' else to throw out there...

How about a loaded rifle or shotgun in a gunrack?

 

[CEF1959]

Somethin' else to throw out there...

How about a loaded rifle or shotgun in a gunrack?

If it's in plain sight, it's OK, except in those local jurisdictions (like Portland) that prohibit loaded firearms in public. The Oregon Court of Appeals has ruled that your vehicle is in public for purposes of the gun laws.

It probably is also OK to have a concealed long gun in your vehicle. ORS 166.250 prohibits possessing a handgun that is concealed in a vehicle but readily accessible, but that prohibition doesn't apply to long guns.

The only reason I say "probably" rather than "definitely" is that ORS 166.250 also prohibits carrying any firearm (long or hand) concealed upon your person. As far as I know, the question whether having a concealed long gun in your car counts as having it on your person is an open question. Having a gun in a suitcase you are carrying has been held by Oregon courts to be on the person, so who knows how a court would come out on the vehicle question.

If you have a CHL, ORS 166.260 says that none of those prohibitions applies.

 

[el gringo loco]

As far as I know, the question whether having a concealed long gun in your car counts as having it on your person is an open question. Having a gun in a suitcase you are carrying has been held by Oregon courts to be on the person, so who knows how a court would come out on the vehicle question.

I don't know that the case law differentiates between a long gun and a handgun, but if the gun is concealed in the car and readily accessible to the driver, Oregon courts have considered it carrying concealed. I'm sure this comes up with handguns much more often than rifles. I doubt very many judges are going to look at the type of gun and will be more concerned with whether it is "readily accessible."

 

[tionico]

If you have a CHL, ORS 166.260 says that none of those prohibitions applies.


the main reason I decided to get the CPL in Washington, a similar thinking applies as in Oregon. The CWP makes all those stupid, arcane, impossible to keep straight, laws of no effect. Anyone who messes about with arms ought to have it, if for no other reason than it makes it far more difficult for law enforcement to make one out to be a criminal when doing "normal" or "reasonable" things.

Out hunting, come back to the car late, tired, dark, starving, cold, wet.... toss the rifle/shottie on the floor behind the front seat of your van, climb in, start it up, drive off to find some tucker.... pulled over for a taillamp out, end up with a felony rap, no gun priviledges....... no gun.....

you'd think the mere possession of such an evil device as a firearm (or bow/arrow, large knife, numchuks) is on the same level as child molestation, bank robbery, running down a pedestrian....... what will it take to elect some lawmakers who can use some sense?

If a guy was going to USE that loaded, "concealed" weapon for harm, do you really think he'd not, merely because the all-wise legislators have deigned to make it contrary to law to do so?

Once more, tne innocents are made criminals, and the criminals are not deterred.

 

[spengo]

Well I've never been pulled over with guns in the car yet, but when I'm going to and from my range or a shooting spot usually I just shove all my guns in the back seat, they are all in cases of course (big plastic case won't fit in the trunk of my little car). Ammunition and magazines are in a backpack I use as a range bag. I know there is some gray area as to whether or not the magazines should be loaded, but I generally just ignore it and have them loaded anyway. I can't imagine an officer having an issue with this in the event I do get pulled over. I don't have a CHL or hunting license, but again, I can't imagine there being an issue if I tell the officer I'm on my way to go shoot, whether it's at the range I go to or some random shooting spot.

 

[tionico]

Spengo, that is, hopefully, the way a "reasonable" officer would handle the situation. BUT-- read the post labelled "on the scanner", popped up in the last day or so, where a man was out shooting moles in his own yard, was reported as "dangerous and not cop friendly", was arrested, spent the weekend in jail, now has a thousand dollar lawyer's bill, his guns in custody, and oh by the way, all charges dropped. (seems to ME that, once charges are dropped like that, ALL should be restored to situation pre-arrest.

I'd not take ANY chances.... adhere to the smallest letter of the law... or get a CHL. All it would take would be one uppity young punk with stars in his eyes to haul you off, like our mole-killing friend above, and your life turns inside out for a while. Stupid, unconstitutional, unreasonable... but welcome to liberal/left-wingnut America.

 

[tionico]

Oh, and bye the bye, the person who complained on the mole-hero is a woman with a California driving license. New "import" from the land of, well, I don't need to go there, you know how they think down there. Importing their uppity and paranoid "values"....

seems all those bumper stickers "don't californicate the Northwest" got ignored.

 

[CEF1959]

I don't know that the case law differentiates between a long gun and a handgun, but if the gun is concealed in the car and readily accessible to the driver, Oregon courts have considered it carrying concealed. I'm sure this comes up with handguns much more often than rifles. I doubt very many judges are going to look at the type of gun and will be more concerned with whether it is "readily accessible."

It's a fair point you make, but the Oregon statute clearly differentiates between handguns and longguns. Concealed carry of any firearm "on the person" is a crime, whether long gun or handgun. But the statute regarding vehicles only makes it a crime to have a "handgun" concealed in the vehicle and readily accessible.

A cased rifle in the backseat wouldn't violate the prohibition on having a concealed handgun readily available in a vehicle. Whether it would count as having a firearm concealed on the person is a question that I do not believe any Oregon court has addressed. If you have a citation to such an Oregon case, I'd be very interested to have it.

 

[spengo]

Spengo, that is, hopefully, the way a "reasonable" officer would handle the situation. BUT-- read the post labelled "on the scanner", popped up in the last day or so, where a man was out shooting moles in his own yard, was reported as "dangerous and not cop friendly", was arrested, spent the weekend in jail, now has a thousand dollar lawyer's bill, his guns in custody, and oh by the way, all charges dropped. (seems to ME that, once charges are dropped like that, ALL should be restored to situation pre-arrest.

I'd not take ANY chances.... adhere to the smallest letter of the law... or get a CHL. All it would take would be one uppity young punk with stars in his eyes to haul you off, like our mole-killing friend above, and your life turns inside out for a while. Stupid, unconstitutional, unreasonable... but welcome to liberal/left-wingnut America.

Still got a few more months before I can apply for CHL. I've never really had an issue with police. I treat everyone with a certain level of respect when I first meet them. If the cop proves himself to be a douche then sure I'll be a douche back but in my experience so far they have all been fine. Just remember to hide that radar detector on my dash before I stop.

I got stopped on my bike once in Tigard when I had a disassembled recurve bow and some arrows sticking out of my backpack on my way to that indoor archery range off 99W. Apparently according to that cop bows need to be in a case too. He allowed me to continue on my way after telling me though. ¯\(°_o)/¯

A cased rifle in the backseat wouldn't violate the prohibition on having a concealed handgun readily available in a vehicle.

What about a cased handgun in a backpack in the back seat?

 

[CEF1959]

What about a cased handgun in a backpack in the back seat?

Prohibited in Oregon unless one of the exceptions applies (CHL, peace officer, going to or from the range at which you are a member, licensed hunter or fisherman going to or from a hunting expedition, etc.). ORS 166.250 forbids a concealed handgun in a vehicle if it's readily accessible. A backpack in the backseat is readily accessible.

 

[spengo]

Prohibited in Oregon unless one of the exceptions applies (CHL, peace officer, going to or from the range at which you are a member, licensed hunter or fisherman going to or from a hunting expedition, etc.). ORS 166.250 forbids a concealed handgun in a vehicle if it's readily accessible. A backpack in the backseat is readily accessible.

Well that's what I mean, going to or from the range at which I am a member, or out to a shooting spot for a meet and shoot or something.

What if I put the backpack in the trunk? That fits even if the plastic rifle cases don't.

 

[New Oregonian]

Stupid, unconstitutional, unreasonable... but welcome to liberal/left-wingnut America.

its sad this is what the country has become

 

[Oldfart]

ORS 166.250 Unlawful possession of firearms. (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) ....

(b) Possesses a handgun that is concealed and readily accessible to the person within any vehicle...

Then there is this:

ORS 166.250(3) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section.

I discussed this situation with a retired police officer once and pointed out that - according to 166.250(1)(b) - the handgun must be concealed AND readily accessible before it becomes a violation. He agreed. I then pointed out 166.250(3) which defines a holstered handgun as being NOT concealed. He chucked and said I was absolutely correct but that few rank and file police officers were as knowledgable about those laws.

In effect, it is perfecly legal to carry (except in some cities) an openly holstered, loaded firearm in your car. But expect to have to go to court to make your point. Most police operate on the principle that:
Police Officer + Gun = Good, and
Civilian + Gun = Bad.

 

[coctailer]

I own a Jeep Liberty , so If I'm going target shooting in the hills is it ok to keep everything in plain sight in the back of my Jeep ? (ammo, guns) or can they be in their respective cases ? this is getting very confusing. I hope to get my CWP soon, that would make it easier to transport "things" while on the road. I don't know about the rest of you but having my "toys" in plain sight isn't a very comfortable feeling for me.

You may want to call the Police and ask for yourself. That way you can be 100% sure.

 

[CEF1959]

I wouldn't trust a call to the police to yield the correct answer, let alone one you can be 100% certain about. As Oldfart just pointed out, rank and file cops don't usually have a very detailed understanding of the criminal code, even though they wouldn't typically admit that. Like me when I was 17, they're sure about everything, even when they're wrong. And the DA in Crook County isn't going to let you off just because you tell him some cop in Yamhill County said on the phone it was OK.

 

[el gringo loco]

It's a fair point you make, but the Oregon statute clearly differentiates between handguns and longguns. Concealed carry of any firearm "on the person" is a crime, whether long gun or handgun. But the statute regarding vehicles only makes it a crime to have a "handgun" concealed in the vehicle and readily accessible.

A cased rifle in the backseat wouldn't violate the prohibition on having a concealed handgun readily available in a vehicle. Whether it would count as having a firearm concealed on the person is a question that I do not believe any Oregon court has addressed. If you have a citation to such an Oregon case, I'd be very interested to have it.

After reading the statute again, I cannot believe I never noticed that it differentiates between handguns and long guns on the vehicle portion.

ORS 166.250(3) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section.

I believe that the intent of this section of the statute was to ensure that, with an open carry situation, the design of the holster would not become an issue as to whether or not the gun was concealed. By this I mean: if the design of the holster was such that it obscured the view of the entire firearm, but the holster itself was visible, an individual could not be charged with possessing a concealed gun. If the whole shebang is concealed, you better have a CHL.