Question about concealed/open carry in the woods

[Skier]

I recently went up to Brown's camp (Tillamook State Forest area) with my wife to do a little camping/ATV'ing/shooting and when riding, I had my pistol with me concealed by my jacket... A least most of the time, unless my jacket got hiked up while riding. My thinking was that "It wouldn't be a problem to Open Carry in this area, but in the interest of keeping my firearm from getting all muddy, I'd keep it concealed, but if it became visible at times, it shouldn't matter much, since OC was fine, AND I have my CC permit with me, so legally, it should not be a problem either way... Figuring I was fine legally, I found myself curiously wondering (question 1) would an instance where my pistol was visible or partially visible be probable cause enough to stop me and ask to see my CC permit (which I had with me, of course). Just curious about that...

Then, I was recently chatting with someone who CC's regularly and even sells CC clothing/accessories, and I mentioned these circumstances and they seemed to think that legally, if I was CC'ing and it became visible then that could be legal trouble... That didn't make any sense to me, since I could legally O/C as well, so I don't see what the problem could possibly be... I could understand maybe having some people complaining or getting scared and calling the police if I was in downtown Portland if my legally CC'd pistol was accidentally noticed (e.g. a gust of wind blowing my jacket up, revealing it briefly), but even there I wouldn't think it would be a legal issue, rather just a public fear issue, so especially up at Brown's Camp where people expect to see guns, I wouldn't even expect a fear issue, let alone a legal issue... (question 2) Anyone know the details are on any legal issue that might arise regarding a CC weapon becoming visible (specifically in OR, which is an open carry state, with a few minor exceptions in certain areas where you need a CC permit to even OC)? Thanks.

Read More

 

[Martini_Up]

Seeing that you're carrying in the forest should not be PC to ask for your identification nor your CPL. I've had a silenced 11.5" M-16's slung over my shoulder while talking to deputies at BC and they never asked for ID, CPL or to see my federal forms for the MG/Suppressor. They did ask if my MG was papered properly which I said, 'yes, sir'.

If you're CC and someone sees it does not mean you broke the law.

 

[solv3nt]

<broken link removed>

 

[Mark W.]

Under the circumstance's you lay out you would be legal under a number of different ways. Since it would be perfectly legal to carry concealed because you have a permit. Because it would be legal to carry concealed as you were involved in an outdoor activity. And it would be legal for you to walk around in the same area with the handgun either in your hand or on your hip.

The point here is I don't see a way you would be breaking a law.

 

[freestoneangler]

I could understand maybe having some people complaining or getting scared and calling the police if I was in downtown Portland if my legally CC'd pistol was accidentally noticed (e.g. a gust of wind blowing my jacket up, revealing it briefly), but even there I wouldn't think it would be a legal issue, rather just a public fear issue....

Downtown Portland is one of the primary places one should CC. If someone has a problem with you legally doing so, politely tell them to go bubblegum themselves

 

[gaijinsamurai]

My occasional choice for CC/OC when hiking the Coastal Range. I can slip the Uzi behind the Maxpedition when I see fit. If it was chambered in .45 ACP, it would be perfect.

 

[The Heretic]

IIRC, Oregon is an open carry state - i.e., it is legal, but frowned on in the city and in some cities it is illegal (open carry is not covered by the preemption clause?).

If you have a CC permit than just because it becomes visible doesn't make it illegal - I don't understand why someone would think that.

Out in the woods, open carry is fine. If you are hunting or fishing, with a license, then concealed carry is okay even without a permit: "Licensed hunters or fishermen, while engaged in hunting or fishing or going to and from a hunting or fishing expedition."

So I think you are covered fine, but that doesn't mean all LEOs understand the law - many do not.

 

[Koda]

my own anecdotal experience is your fine. Oregon is an OC state and legal without a CHL anywhere outside of city limits/urban growth boundary (not certain which one...). Since you have a CHL you can also CC anywhere outside city limits as well as OC inside city limits (local ordinances apply). What I am uncertain about is transitioning between the two carry modes while inside city limits, but that's another subject. Specifically to public lands outside of city limits you can transition, "print", reveal... all you want with your CHL of course.

take a look at ORS 166.240 and 166.250
<broken link removed>

 

[lowly monk]

http://www.oregon.gov/odf/tillamookstateforest/docs/TargetShooting_OARs.pdf
Oregon's Only No Compromise Gun Lobby Wishes You A Happy New Year! - Oregon Firearms Federation

 

[fd15k]

would an instance where my pistol was visible or partially visible be probable cause enough to stop me and ask to see my CC permit (which I had with me, of course). Just curious about that...

I am not a lawyer, but I believe it would be a PC. Act of carrying concealed is prohibited under ORS 166.250. If your firearm is accidentally exposed from concealment, you were / are carrying concealed,
which is illegal unless you are in possession of a valid CHL. That authorizes LEO to investigate such act by checking your CHL. Once you are confirmed to be authorized to CC, the encounter would end, unless
other possible violations may be detected (such as carrying under influence of alcohol).

 

[Koda]

Once you are confirmed to be authorized to CC, the encounter would end, unless
other possible violations may be detected (such as carrying under influence of alcohol).

I'm not condoning anything but what violation, what law prohibits carrying under the influence of alcohol?

 

[fd15k]

I'm not condoning anything but what violation, what law prohibits carrying under the influence of alcohol?

My assessment is based on the fact there is a provision to grant LEO authority to revoke a CHL under certain circumstances :

166.293
(4) Any peace officer or corrections officer may seize a concealed handgun license and return it to the issuing sheriff if the license is held by a person who has been arrested or cited for a crime that can or would otherwise disqualify the person from being issued a concealed handgun license. The issuing sheriff shall hold the license for 30 days. If the person is not charged with a crime within the 30 days, the sheriff shall return the license unless the sheriff revokes the license as provided in subsection (3) of this section.

I might be wrong (would have to search for specific statutes), but it's possible that public intoxication would suffice. Ultimately, if the situation prompts for CHL revocation, then it's not valid,
and carrying concealed is not authorized.

 

[drew]

My assessment is based on the fact there is a provision to grant LEO authority to revoke a CHL under certain circumstances :



I might be wrong (would have to search for specific statutes), but it's possible that public intoxication would suffice. Ultimately, if the situation prompts for CHL revocation, then it's not valid,
and carrying concealed is not authorized.

I don't think you'll find a statute criminalizing public intoxication in OR.
<broken link removed>

 

[Koda]

I might be wrong (would have to search for specific statutes), but it's possible that public intoxication would suffice. .

nothing in the ORS you quoted states anything about being intoxicated. However it seems logical that if your arrested for anything then your gun and CHL will be seized.

In Oregon its legal to lawfully CCW in bars without dining...

 

[U201491]

If you are on an atv or mc or snowmobile.


http://www.oregonfirearms.org/08-02-11-hb-2792-becomes-law

 

[Darknight]

Under the circumstance's you lay out you would be legal under a number of different ways. Since it would be perfectly legal to carry concealed because you have a permit. Because it would be legal to carry concealed as you were involved in an outdoor activity. And it would be legal for you to walk around in the same area with the handgun either in your hand or on your hip.

The point here is I don't see a way you would be breaking a law.

It is not just any outdoor activity. It is hunting and fishing and on your way to and from hunting, fishing and a shooting club.

 

[Darknight]

I am not a lawyer, but I believe it would be a PC. Act of carrying concealed is prohibited under ORS 166.250. If your firearm is accidentally exposed from concealment, you were / are carrying concealed,
which is illegal unless you are in possession of a valid CHL. That authorizes LEO to investigate such act by checking your CHL. Once you are confirmed to be authorized to CC, the encounter would end, unless
other possible violations may be detected (such as carrying under influence of alcohol).

If the firearm or enough of it to identify it as a firearm was visible during the leo observation, then there would be no investigation as it would be oc at that point.

 

[Darknight]

Downtown Portland is one of the primary places one should CC.

Why?

 

[fd15k]

nothing in the ORS you quoted states anything about being intoxicated. However it seems logical that if your arrested for anything then your gun and CHL will be seized.

In Oregon its legal to lawfully CCW in bars without dining...

I must be mistaken then

 

[fd15k]

I must be mistaken then

I dug a bit further, and I think this might qualify :

Notwithstanding ORS 166.291(1), and subject to review as provided in subsection (5) of this section, a sheriff may deny a concealed handgun license if the sheriff has reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant has been or is reasonably likely to be a danger to self or others, or to the community at large, as a result of the applicant's mental or psychological state or as demonstrated by the applicant's past pattern of behavior involving unlawful violence or threats of unlawful violence.