Open carry in Portland

[CharlesAFerg]

The way I read, it is still OK to Loaded (openly) carry with a CHL technically. Am I reading correct? This stuff can have you chasing your tail.

The ordinance is before pre-emption, and I am speaking of people without a CHL. Both loaded open and concealed carry is legal downtown with a permit.

Without a permit, the only legal way to carry is openly, without a magazine in the weapon or any ammunition in or in the same container as the magazine.

Carry mags in one pocket, ammunition in the other, and a holstered firearm.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

The ordinance is before pre-emption, and I am speaking of people without a CHL. Both loaded open and concealed carry is legal downtown with a permit.

Without a permit, the only legal way to carry is openly, without a magazine in the weapon or any ammunition in or in the same container as the magazine.

Carry mags in one pocket, ammunition in the other, and a holstered firearm.

Let's not confuse "legal" with "permitted." It is legal to open carry in PDX, but it will not be permitted. You will most likely be arrested.

 

[CharlesAFerg]

Or just get a CHL, and you are covered 100% of the time everywhere in the state except jails, courtrooms, and the secure portion of the airport.

"Secure" portion of the airport. What a joke.

What the ****? Why wouldn't the OFF help? This seems like exactly the type of thing they would help with.

Edit to add:
I researched, and it seems disturbing the peace is a misdemeanor only, so its little more than a ticket and a few days in jail. You could fight this pretty easily, and the penalty isn't much for losing.


I'm still a little surprised that OFF wouldn't help, or some lawyer wouldn't take it pro-bono for the chance to get cash from the city for illegal detainment/etc...

I know, you wish it were the case, because it technically is NOT legal. We need to organize a peaceful protest of our own.

Let's not confuse "legal" with "permitted." It is legal to open carry in PDX, but it will not be permitted. You will most likely be arrested.

Like I've said before, it's the same as Beaverton, Tigard, etc... All the guys on opencarry.org don't seem to get it through their thick skulls that you WILL attract attention. I say so through experience.

 

[Trlsmn]

"Secure" portion of the airport. What a joke.




I know, you wish it were the case, because it technically is NOT legal. We need to organize a peaceful protest of our own.




Like I've said before, it's the same as Beaverton, Tigard, etc... All the guys on opencarry.org don't seem to get it through their thick skulls that you WILL attract attention. I say so through experience.

In this case the difference between idealism and reality is handcuffs.

 

[Doc In UPlace]

Originally Posted by CharlesAFerg
"Secure" portion of the airport. What a joke.

Perhaps we could benefit from some ideas that would improve the current security situation in order to rescue it from this joke-dom? I'll gladly pass them along to the TSA regional POC Nico Melendez here in Seattle if you'd like.

 

[CharlesAFerg]

In this case the difference between idealism and reality is handcuffs.

Well, I think it's more about cash. The handcuffs are temporary, and so is the detention, even the charges. The money is what you will never get reverted back to normal, even if you did NOTHING legally wrong at all.

Overall, though, don't mistake disturbing the peace with open carrying. You cannot be charged with that for simply open carrying, that's a very illegal charge.

Perhaps we could benefit from some ideas that would improve the current security situation in order to rescue it from this joke-dom? I'll gladly pass them along to the TSA regional POC Nico Melendez here in Seattle if you'd like.

I'd rather not discuss it.
Security is perfect at the airport, criminals and firearms never get through that net.

 

[gunnoob75]

Sounds to me like an Illegal arrest if I were to carry my gun, loaded, in portland.

I wouldn't even bother hiring a lawyer for that.

 

[Trlsmn]

Sounds to me like an Illegal arrest if I were to carry my gun, loaded, in portland.

I wouldn't even bother hiring a lawyer for that.

I would.

 

[Doc In UPlace]

The statute was posted on the last page. Copy it and carry legally with your CHP seems like the answer.

 

[NWMoss]

D. It is unlawful for any person who possesses a firearm, clip or magazine in or upon a public place, or while in a vehicle in a public place, to refuse to permit a police officer to inspect that firearm after the police officer has identified him or herself as a police officer. This Section does not apply to law enforcement officers or members of the military in the performance of official duties, nor persons licensed to carry a concealed handgun or persons authorized to possess a loaded firearm, clip or magazine while in or on a public building or court facility.

So, if you have a CHL and an officer asks to inspect your firearm, what do you do?

 

[clearconscience]

Well even though it's legal. I think your asking for trouble carrying in the open. Just because it's technically legal doesn't make it smart.

Let me ask this, if you see someone you want to rob and they have a gun on their hip, are you going to go up and ask for their wallet? Or shoot them in the back and take their wallet?
That has happened before. The best thing a person has for self defense is the element of surprise.

And come on, I haven't met a single Police Officer that knew anything about concealed carry laws. They treat you like a criminal until they check you out and you have the documents to show it's legal.

Having said that. I fully support our Law Enforcement. Some may be jerks, but if you had to deal with the trash out there and do it with a smile, you'd be a jerk too. They have a crappy job and get paid trash. They put their life on the line everyday to protect YOU and your family.

They don't stand behind our flag, they stand in front.

Let's help them.

 

[NWMoss]

I meant while carrying concealed, for instance in a traffic stop.

 

[Gray Peterson]

I leave this thread for months and now the amount of FUD in here is quite amazing.

I can tell you from personal dealings with the Portland police that you WILL be arrested if you are caught open carrying in Portland.

We went back and forth with them about this a year or two ago regarding open carry during a parade and was told in no uncertain terms that any person open carrying inside city limits would be arrested for disturbing the peace. No exceptions would be made for the parade.

The lawyers pretty much said there was nothing we could do unless we wanted to get arrested and spend the money to fight the system. They also added to not expect any financial help from any of the pro-gun groups.

OK, first off, you need to quit spreading the FUD that Portland Police Bureau is feeding you.

If they were going to arrest you for disturbing the peace, why did they not not arrest ME for open carrying in Portland repeatedly? I open carried at Pride Northwest 2007 as a spectator at the parade, my Springfield XD 40, in holster. NOT ONE COP EVEN HASSLED ME.

Quit being cowed by Portland Police Bureau. Until you folks start doing what we do in Washington State and the folks over at PAFOA in Pennsylvania do, which is to sue the officers and the departments responsible for bad stops, EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY DO SO, these officers will never learn.

 

[Gray Peterson]

So, if you have a CHL and an officer asks to inspect your firearm, what do you do?

You hand them your CHL and tell them that you're statutorily exempt from the loaded check. The Portland law makes it clear that the loaded check does not apply to you. Technically the loaded check violates the 4th amendment and the Oregon State Constitution, but if you're not willing to sue for them going beyond their boundaries, your only recourse is statutory law.

 

[clearconscience]

Now were starting to sounds like the hippies that cry about free speech cause they can't burn our flag.
Why is it not enough to make our point and educate people. Now we have to get our 15 mins of fame sue everybody and win lots of money.

This is the reason this country is in shambles. It should be enough just to earn our rights. If someone violates our rights then those should be punished. But why should we sue everyone that does something we don't like.
A cop harasses you about carrying open in public, GOOD!
I would rather some arrogant cop harass me and then next guy that may be carrying illegally, and catch him then have that guy rob my family.

We support our troops in far away lands, how about the Law here at home?

 

[Gray Peterson]

Well even though it's legal. I think your asking for trouble carrying in the open. Just because it's technically legal doesn't make it smart.

Let me ask this, if you see someone you want to rob and they have a gun on their hip, are you going to go up and ask for their wallet? Or shoot them in the back and take their wallet?
That has happened before. The best thing a person has for self defense is the element of surprise.

Because thieves tend to murder people for their wallets?

And come on, I haven't met a single Police Officer that knew anything about concealed carry laws. They treat you like a criminal until they check you out and you have the documents to show it's legal.

If the firearms control laws of Washington and Oregon are too complicated for certain officers (Both states combined have nothing on California's gun laws, btw), then they need to find a new line of work post haste before they get slapped with a 6 figure federal civil rights lawsuit. As open carry is well known by court decisions to be legal in Washington, and by statutory law in Oregon, the federal judiciary isn't going to accept waiving their personal immunity because "they didn't know" or "couldn't have known". They are supposed to be LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. Not OPINION ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, or "I THINK THIS IS LAW" ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, or otherwise legislate from a squad car.

 

[Trlsmn]

Now were starting to sounds like the hippies that cry about free speech cause they can't burn our flag.
Why is it not enough to make our point and educate people. Now we have to get our 15 mins of fame sue everybody and win lots of money.

This is the reason this country is in shambles. It should be enough just to earn our rights. If someone violates our rights then those should be punished. But why should we sue everyone that does something we don't like.
A cop harasses you about carrying open in public, GOOD!
I would rather some arrogant cop harass me and then next guy that may be carrying illegally, and catch him then have that guy rob my family.

We support our troops in far away lands, how about the Law here at home?

We don't need to earn our rights we are not subjects, we need to have our rights respected. It's not a cops job to hassle us, it's his job to enforce the law in a lawful manor which includes not violating our rights. I would rather be treated with the same respect I give cops, not talked down to in an arrogant manor, and for the most part this has been my experience with cops, but on two occasions I have seen cops out of control and there is no excuse for it, you either do your job right or get a job without the responsibility of a police officer.

 

[Gray Peterson]

Now were starting to sounds like the hippies that cry about free speech cause they can't burn our flag.

Texas v. Johnson settled that that situation 20 years ago. There are constitutional amendments that have been proposed to overturn that decision. The proper method for law enforcement agencies to be able to arrest people for burning the flag is to push for that constitutional amendment and not enforce it until AFTER it is ratified, not arrest someone for disturbing the peace and let the charge get tossed out later, just to "teach them a lesson".

Why is it not enough to make our point and educate people. Now we have to get our 15 mins of fame sue everybody and win lots of money.

Because some officers refused to be educated on the subject even though they are handed a piece of paper and made to sign (in one ear, and out the other), some departments refused to train their officers that open carry is legal, and sometimes the only way to get their attention to cost them a lot of money.

This is the reason this country is in shambles. It should be enough just to earn our rights. If someone violates our rights then those should be punished. But why should we sue everyone that does something we don't like.

Again, you conflate the general "sue happy" nature of the legal system with civil enforcement of civil liberties of individuals. As the States Attorneys generally refuse to enforce criminal statutes on law enforcement officers who abuse their power, the only recourse a civilian like yourself and I have recourse on is through the civil court system.

A cop harasses you about carrying open in public, GOOD!
I would rather some arrogant cop harass me and then next guy that may be carrying illegally, and catch him then have that guy rob my family.

From the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in the case of Commonwealth v. Hawkins (1996):

The Commonwealth takes the radical position that police have a duty to
stop and frisk when they receive information from any source that a suspect has a gun.
Since it is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Pennsylvania,
it is difficult to see where this shocking idea originates, notwithstanding the
Commonwealth's fanciful and histrionic references to maniacs who may spray
schoolyards with gunfire and assassins of public figures who may otherwise go
undetected. Even if the Constitution of Pennsylvania would permit such
invasive police activity as the Commonwealth proposes -- which it does not --
such activity seems more likely to endanger than to protect the public.
Unnecessary police intervention, by definition, produces the possibility of
conflict where none need exist.

Not to mention, criminals that would rob your family in the street would NOT openly carry it before drawing. They are criminals and cowards, and they conceal their weapon before drawing it. This is the reason why the idea of concealed carrying of weapons and firearms was regarded in American history as a very bad thing, and only in the last 25 years did the states of the US start to understand that there are certain circumstances where concealment is better.

 

[Trlsmn]

Let me ask this, if you see someone you want to rob and they have a gun on their hip, are you going to go up and ask for their wallet? Or shoot them in the back and take their wallet?
That has happened before. The best thing a person has for self defense is the element of surprise.

A criminal that sees your gun on your hip is not going to shoot you and take your wallet he is going to find the easiest target to rob and the guy with the open carry firearm is at the bottom of his list.

 

[Gray Peterson]

<broken link removed>

<broken link removed>

<broken link removed>