Open carry spots

[MP Sgt]

What locations are barred from open carry in Oregon (Eugene)? Where did you find this law?

Read More

 

[fd15k]

What locations are barred from open carry in Oregon (Eugene)? Where did you find this law?

There don't seem to be any prohibitions for Eugene. If there were any, you would have to check the Municipal Codes.

<broken link removed>

 

[branson4020]

You mean a list of public places? I'm sure there is no official list of private places, like stores, shopping malls, etc.

 

[odinforever2000]

Be careful. There are places that you will want to avoid like those mentioned for concealed carry. While Epd does know about open carry they still may stop and question you.

 

[hermannr]

With a CHL, no places you cannot go OC that you cannot go CC. No CHL? Stay unloaded in Portland, Beverton, Salem area, and, oh yes, Astoria. Eugene is not one of them. There is a list around here somewhere. Used to be a map where the VA political add is now on OCDO. (the link fd15k works. On OCDO (Opencarry.org) the Oregon forum, top sticky, about post 20 has a .pdf. Not persfert, but helps a lot.)

 

[odinforever2000]

Also If a place doesn't like you open carrying they may tell you to leave.

 

[fd15k]

With a CHL, no places you cannot go OC that you cannot go CC. No CHL? Stay unloaded in Portland, Beverton, Salem area, and, oh yes, Astoria. Eugene is not one of them. There is a list around here somewhere. Used to be a map where the VA political add is now on OCDO. (the link fd15k works. On OCDO (Opencarry.org) the Oregon forum, top sticky, about post 20 has a .pdf. Not persfert, but helps a lot.)

That looks to be correct.

5.010 Carrying Loaded Firearm Unlawful.
(A) No person shall knowingly carry a firearm, loaded or unloaded, in a park,
school ground or public building.
(B) No person on a public street or in a public place shall knowingly carry a
firearm upon the person, or in a vehicle under the person's control or in
which the person is an occupant, unless all ammunition or missile has
Page 5 &#8211; 3
5.010
Astoria Code
5.025
been removed from the chamber and from the cylinder, clip or magazine.
(C)
Subsections (A) and (B) of this section shall not apply to:
(1) (2) Any government employee authorized or required by the employee's
employment or office to carry or use firearms; or
(3) Any person having a valid permit issued to the person by lawful
authority to carry or use concealed firearms;
(4) Any person whose primary business duty is the protection of financial
institutions; or
(5) Any person whose primary business duty involves transporting for
hire money, securities, negotiable instruments or similar commodities;
or
(6)
(D)
A peace officer acting within the scope of the officer's duty:
Any person justified in using deadly, physical force under the
provisions of ORS Chapter 161.


http://www.astoria.or.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=vXiABwd4i9k=&tabid=2002&mid=6163&language=en-US

 

[Member 5605]

<broken link removed>

(though being aware of local laws is a must as some information could be out of date. Don't trust others for information you should know.)
Be prepared to be questioned. Better yet, get your CHL. End of story.

I personally am sick of seeing videos of people intentionally trying to pick a fight with who knows the laws and OC'ing just for an adrenaline rush.

I can go daily, to work, to the store, restaurant, (no post office), parts stores, home depot, (not the hospital because the sign on the door says NO)... and have no issues.

 

[hermannr]

This is not an intentional "pick a fight"..but I want to open discussion on a point about Oregon Carry again, and we can use Astoria's law as written for the example. OK?

We have Astoria's 5.010 posted above and the link to the whole town code also thanks to fd15k.

He has also highlighted the part I wish to discuss: 5.010(C) does not apply to....(3) Any person having a valid permit issued to the person by lawful authority to carry or use concealed firearms;

I like to discuss this because you OR guys are so uptight about your exclusive CHL, you do not see the forest for the trees. Point: Oregon does not recognize any other states permits for Concealed Carry, there is no argument with that point....However....

When it comes to OC in towns and cities with restrictions, the requirement changes....To be exempt of the loaded OC in towns like Astoria, all you need is ANY permit to carry that is valid...not just the OR CHL.

I will repost Exemption (C)(3) again with my highlights: (3) Any person having a valid permit issued to the person by lawful authority to carry or use concealed firearms;

Says nothing about having to be a OR CHL, ANY permit by ANY lawful authority is valid to carry loaded, in a Loaded carry OC restricted municipality.

BTW: There is no mention that the license must comply with the ORS statute ORS 166 or 167. (ORS 166.173 If I remember correctly) is worded the same way, that is why Astoria's, and Portland's etc, are worded as they are. (thanks fd15k)

 

[fd15k]

I will repost Exemption (C)(3) again with my highlights: (3) Any person having a valid permit issued to the person by lawful authority to carry or use concealed firearms;

Says nothing about having to be a OR CHL, ANY permit by ANY lawful authority is valid to carry loaded, in a Loaded carry OC restricted municipality.

Nice observation! Though it's impractical to use - many OR LEOs don't even know about OR CHL exemption to OC restrictions, I'd expect them
to understand how "letter of the law" works even less. I wouldn't recommend being a "test case" to anybody

BTW: There is no mention that the license must comply with the ORS statute ORS 166 or 167. (the pre-emption ORS (166.170? If I remember correctly) is worded the same way, that is why Astoria's, and Portland's etc, are worded as they are.

166.170 is general state preemption for things that local governments aren't authorized to do. Regulation of OC seems to be granted
to local governments under 166.173:

166.173¹
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 (General definitions).

(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 (Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility).

(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]

Also found this thread discussing the issue, though not providing any answers :

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...on-CHL-(iis-there-a-loophole-for-other-state)

 

[Adam12]

<broken link removed>

(though being aware of local laws is a must as some information could be out of date. Don't trust others for information you should know.)
Be prepared to be questioned. Better yet, get your CHL. End of story.

I personally am sick of seeing videos of people intentionally trying to pick a fight with who knows the laws and OC'ing just for an adrenaline rush.

I can go daily, to work, to the store, restaurant, (no post office), parts stores, home depot, (not the hospital because the sign on the door says NO)... and have no issues.

 

[odinforever2000]

I am all for people educating the public about open carry. Alot of people do not know that it is legal to open carry, Especially in Eugene and Springfield. Its sad to have to tell them a person is not "a bad guy" because they chose to wear a firearm in a holster on there hip.As a community we think is ok when we see a uniform and a gun, but regular clothes and a gun sets off unnecessary alarms in people and that shouldn't happen. Those people who wish to do harm to others wont let you see there firearm until its already being fired.

 

[Adam12]

As someone who comes from both sides of the issue, I can attest that SOME LEO don't know the law but MOST do. That being said, many people who THINK they know the law, don't. LawMAKERS intentionally or unintentionally make these laws confusing to give lawyers an out either way- for or against a firearms carrier. So, between LEO's interpretation of the law's intent and word, and the DA's interpretation, it can be a coin toss sometimes.

Nice observation! Though it's impractical to use - many OR LEOs don't even know about OR CHL exemption to OC restrictions, I'd expect them
to understand how "letter of the law" works even less. I wouldn't recommend being a "test case" to anybody



166.170 is general state preemption for things that local governments aren't authorized to do. Regulation of OC seems to be granted
to local governments under 166.173:

166.173¹
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 (General definitions).

(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 (Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility).

(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]

 

[hermannr]

Nice observation! Though it's impractical to use - many OR LEOs don't even know about OR CHL exemption to OC restrictions, I'd expect them
to understand how "letter of the law" works even less. I wouldn't recommend being a "test case" to anybody

However, it is nice to know you have a defense should you be stopped in a restricted carry muni. and you do not have (or cannot because your CPL is from a non-contigous state) an OR CHL. Consider someone that lives in say AZ, (or any other non-contigous state) but visits OR on a regular basis?

 

[fd15k]

However, it is nice to know you have a defense should you be stopped in a restricted carry muni. and you do not have (or cannot because your CPL is from a non-contigous state) an OR CHL. Consider someone that lives in say AZ, (or any other non-contigous state) but visits OR on a regular basis?

Yeah, I can see that.

 

[Hairtrigger]

<broken link removed>

(though being aware of local laws is a must as some information could be out of date. Don't trust others for information you should know.)
Be prepared to be questioned. Better yet, get your CHL. End of story.

I personally am sick of seeing videos of people intentionally trying to pick a fight with who knows the laws and OC'ing just for an adrenaline rush.

I can go daily, to work, to the store, restaurant, (no post office), parts stores, home depot, (not the hospital because the sign on the door says NO)... and have no issues.

Agreed. There is no valid need for open carry in the general public in this day and age. Why push it? Look what happened in the peoples republic of California for example. The recent vote concerning firearms on campus here in OR was too close for comfort. Makes me think a knee jerk reaction by our elected officials against open carry is possible.

Slim

 

[fd15k]

Agreed. There is no valid need for open carry in the general public in this day and age. Why push it? Look what happened in the peoples republic of California for example. The recent vote concerning firearms on campus here in OR was too close for comfort. Makes me think a knee jerk reaction by our elected officials against open carry is possible.

Slim

I can easily give you one: political expression.

 

[hermannr]

Agreed. There is no valid need for open carry in the general public in this day and age. Why push it? Look what happened in the peoples republic of California for example. The recent vote concerning firearms on campus here in OR was too close for comfort. Makes me think a knee jerk reaction by our elected officials against open carry is possible.

Slim

I disagree totally. There is every need for OC...it is called "normalization". People do not see CC, so it does not reinforce the concept that more than just LE CAN legally carry. When you walk down the street, or shop when OCing, people will see that SD weapons are NOT restricted to LE only. The more people the become comfortable with that concept, the easier it will be for the general non-carry public to accept that normal Joe Citizen can protect himself (and maybe them)

The true Gun Grabber, ninny nannies make up less than 10% of the population...the rest of the population is ambivilent, or supportive. The LE people that are anti-OC, in most cases just want to be part of an exclusive "club" (more like gang) and they want you to have to jump through the hoops they had to before they could carry for their jobs...those types don't want anything that could deminish the "exclusiveness" of their little club...It's job security and a power thing...just like the politicos...it's a power thing..Protect me oh mighty saviour...

 

[Mattiosmaximos]

Personally I got my CHL to avoid uncomfortable situations with LEO's. I wouldn't open carry unless I was somewhere in the woods away from people. I like to be unnoticed.
However, I fully support a persons right to CO. Also I would hate to lose the right to do so if I felt the need.
I plan on getting the extension from what is it Utah? That allows you to CC in 30+ states.
As I do travel often and like the feeling of added security. Both with the gun and the license.

 

[Member 5605]

Do take notice though and make sure you read some of the fine print regarding other states and what states they accept. Some say they only accept "residents" of that state's licenses.... thus making an out of stater invalid.


I am for the open carry, while it may have been taken wrong. I'll shake somebody's hand if I see them expressing themselves. Meanwhile I'll keep along the sidelines, unnoticed.