Open carry in Hood River and Wasco Counties?

[FZRider]

I've been trying to find a definitive answer but not having much luck. WA resident, do not have my CHL unfortunately. Going to be in Hood River and Wasco counties. As best I as I can tell I'm good to go with OC there. Not a big fan of OC but would rather OC than NC.
Thanks in advance.
Dave

Read More

 

[Member 5605]

While not a complete Gospel list, this is a good reference:

http://www.oregonfirearms.org/chl-central/local-gun-codes

 

[FZRider]

So my take is while driving through Multnomah county it needs to be unloaded and unavailable but I'm fine to OC in Hood River and Wasco counties?

 

[phatdoughnut]

Wasco county, probably okay. HR? As long as you aren't downtown you will be fine. Down town is like Portland. Everyone would freak out.

 

[FZRider]

Thanks phat!

 

[phatdoughnut]

Np

 

[Koda]

So my take is while driving through Multnomah county it needs to be unloaded and unavailable but I'm fine to OC in Hood River and Wasco counties?

you also have to unload all magazines...

 

[ZigZagZeke]

So my take is while driving through Multnomah county it needs to be unloaded and unavailable but I'm fine to OC in Hood River and Wasco counties?

Be a little careful around the river in Maupin. The rafting customers and the fly fishermen include a lot of Portland Liberals. You might upset a few people.

 

[decklin]

you also have to unload all magazines...

No you do not. Read their preemption law. It specifically covers things like magazines.

 

[decklin]

I've been trying to find a definitive answer but not having much luck. WA resident, do not have my CHL unfortunately. Going to be in Hood River and Wasco counties. As best I as I can tell I'm good to go with OC there. Not a big fan of OC but would rather OC than NC.
Thanks in advance.
Dave

If you're going to OC then chat with the experts. Go to an open carry forum. Most of the guys on NWFA have never OC'd and never will. Their knowledge is speculative at best and as you've already seen they give incorrect information about the law.
Here's a link.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?121-Oregon

 

[Koda]

No you do not. Read their preemption law. It specifically covers things like magazines.

The OP asked about travelling thru Mult. Co. without an Oregon CHL, not if he wanted to be the next case law subject and challenge the county law in court. The state preemption law only applies to Oregon CHLs.

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/166.173

 

[decklin]

The OP asked about travelling thru Mult. Co. without an Oregon CHL, not if he wanted to be the next case law subject and challenge the county law in court. The state preemption law only applies to Oregon CHLs.

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/166.173

The op asked for the law. You offered conjecture while I offer fact.

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/166.170

 

[Koda]

The op asked for the law. You offered conjecture while I offer fact.

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/166.170

doesn't the Oregon state preemption legislation also authorize counties and cities to further regulate firearms exclusive of CHL holders according to 166.173?

I'm asking because I'm curious to learn more, not claiming to be an expert. both of these laws come from the state legislation.

 

[decklin]

doesn't the Oregon state preemption legislation also authorize counties and cities to further regulate firearms exclusive of CHL holders according to 166.173?

I'm asking because I'm curious to learn more, not claiming to be an expert. both of these laws come from the state legislation.

Only to an extent. For example a city may say it's illegal to OC a loaded gun but they may not ignite the state definition of loaded.
A magazine is a component of a firearm. Preemption says they may not regulate components.
It specifically says the city, or who ever, may only regulate the carry of a loaded firearm and only if the person does not have an Oregon CHL.

Here's an excerpt from the law:

******************************************
166.170 State preemption.[/b]
(1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components there of, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly.
[/b] (2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void. [1995 s.s. c.1 §1]


166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places.[/b]

(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.[/b]
(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. [1995 s.s. c.1 §4; 1999 c.782 §8]
*******************************************


A magazine is not a firearm. It is a component.

 

[Koda]

A magazine is not a firearm. It is a component.

Thank you for clarifying your explanation makes sense. I think when Mult. Co. first enacted the law (its fairly new law if I recall) a city in the county challenged it... I cant remember the outcome, I think it was Troutdale.

My only concern here would be giving someone the advice they didn't need to do something when in fact they would have to take it to the state courts to challenge the charge against them. Fact is, Mult. Co. and the City of Portland, both have an ordinance against loaded magazines constitutional or not until its repealed. Its good to know the law is an overreach though and can be challenged.

http://multnomah.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?meta_id=38224&view=&showpdf=1

 

[decklin]

Thank you for clarifying your explanation makes sense. I think when Mult. Co. first enacted the law (its fairly new law if I recall) a city in the county challenged it... I cant remember the outcome, I think it was Troutdale.

My only concern here would be giving someone the advice they didn't need to do something when in fact they would have to take it to the state courts to challenge the charge against them. Fact is, Mult. Co. and the City of Portland, both have an ordinance against loaded magazines constitutional or not until its repealed. Its good to know the law is an overreach though and can be challenged.

http://multnomah.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?meta_id=38224&view=&showpdf=1

Absolutely. Seattle tries the same stuff up here. First it was a carry ban on parks. The state told them they didn't have the authority. Seattle tried to appeal three times.
Next they enacted an ammunition tax. They're back in court.