Unite and support your brother in arms

[BillM]

Did anybody go to the 6PM meeting in Monmouth?? How about a report?

 

[Mutoman]

After reading the article in the Western Oregon Journal, if the arrest was under ORS166.370, then they can only legally find the student not guilty. ORS166.370 only deals with carrying firearms in a public place, there is no reference to student or employee in these regulations.

Be it wishful thinking on my part, it only seems reasonable that this citizen is safe of incarcination, however his college days may be numbered.

 

[clearconscience]

I'm not familiar with the law that forbids you from carrying, if you have a CHL, on Public Transportation, in public buildings, banks, schools, work etc.

Please direct me to this law.

Here is what I found in regards to (Portland) making this sort of law:

ORS 166.173 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.

(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.​

Has this been somehow superseded?

Please let us know!

I was actually told that by the CHL office, I specifically asked because I used to ride Trimet to work and was in several situations I had wished I had my firearm with me, However, after reading laws and looking at the OFF website I believe I was wrong, you are correct.
Honestly this is the reason I love this forum, it's the first forum I belong to and now I tell everyone. I've learned so much from all the members here. SO THANK YOU!
There really are some great and well educated people on here and I sincerely appreciate the information and help I've received.

 

[NWMoss]

I was actually told that by the CHL office, I specifically asked because I used to ride Trimet to work and was in several situations I had wished I had my firearm with me, However, after reading laws and looking at the OFF website I believe I was wrong, you are correct.
Honestly this is the reason I love this forum, it's the first forum I belong to and now I tell everyone. I've learned so much from all the members here. SO THANK YOU!
There really are some great and well educated people on here and I sincerely appreciate the information and help I've received.

I didn't look at Vancouver... for some reason I assumed your post was for PDX...

So as long as you have CHL that is accepted in Oregon, you should be good on Trimet here... Unless you were refering to public transport in WA. I wonder what the laws are there...

I always make sure I ask real polite-like... I've been wrong before!

 

[PromptCritical]

I could not attend, but here's what a friend of mine said:

There was actually a good turnout, quite a few people there.
The room they did it in was kinda small, so there's no way we all would have fit in there. They took people in one at at time and talked to them.
From the sounds of it, the administration didn't need to ask any questions, because they already had their minds made up. They had decided that the student was guilty. When asked what he was guilty of, they replied "That's not relevant"

Now they're going to decide what his punishment is.

Well, ain't that just swell.

 

[Bend]

A letter to my State Rep, use it if you want.

Sir-

You and I have discussed State gun rights several times and you have helped me and many others by supporting positive bills on the subject. I am writing now about the travesty concerning a Marine veteran with a Concealed Handgun License and Western Oregon University. The Marine has been arrested while complying with Oregon law. The details, Western Oregon University policy and Oregon law on the incident can be found in the following article, especially in the comment section:

http://www.westernoregonjournal.com...story_id=66ba8d4a-3bb6-4ac0-8f92-cf55de1cebed

Although this incident may be resolved by the time you can address it, this should never happen again at any college or university in Oregon. I hope there is a way you can aid in investigating and fixing this sad state of affairs. When the esteemed Oregon University system can bend the law with self interpretation of our State Laws, everyone in the State loses.

Respectfully;

 

[wildcard97]

The way I read this:

166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school. (1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.
(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, a person who intentionally possesses:
(A) A firearm in a court facility is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony. A person who intentionally possesses a firearm in a court facility shall surrender the firearm to a law enforcement officer.
(B) A weapon, other than a firearm, in a court facility may be required to surrender the weapon to a law enforcement officer or to immediately remove it from the court facility. A person who fails to comply with this subparagraph is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony.
(b) The presiding judge of a judicial district may enter an order permitting the possession of specified weapons in a court facility.
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(a) A sheriff, police officer, other duly appointed peace officers or a corrections officer while acting within the scope of employment.
(b) A person summoned by a peace officer to assist in making an arrest or preserving the peace, while the summoned person is engaged in assisting the officer.
(c) An active or reserve member of the military forces of this state or the United States, when engaged in the performance of duty.
(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
(e) A person who is authorized by the officer or agency that controls the public building to possess a firearm or dangerous weapon in that public building.
(f) Possession of a firearm on school property if the firearm:
(A) Is possessed by a person who is not otherwise prohibited from possessing the firearm; and
(B) Is unloaded and locked in a motor vehicle.
(4) The exceptions listed in subsection (3)(b) to (f) of this section constitute affirmative defenses to a charge of violating subsection (1) of this section.
(5)(a) Any person who knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, discharges or attempts to discharge a firearm at a place that the person knows is a school shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.
(b) Paragraph (a) of this subsection does not apply to the discharge of a firearm:
(A) As part of a program approved by a school in the school by an individual who is participating in the program; or
(B) By a law enforcement officer acting in the officer’s official capacity.
(6) Any weapon carried in violation of this section is subject to the forfeiture provisions of ORS 166.279.
(7) Notwithstanding the fact that a person’s conduct in a single criminal episode constitutes a violation of both subsections (1) and (5) of this section, the district attorney may charge the person with only one of the offenses.

....is that school property is specifically mentioned in the State statutes, meaning the person arrested was at fault.

I may be misinterpreting the law, as I am NOT a lawyer, but I would not carry on a campus after reading that.

 

[kevlar]

Under section d a ccw carrier is exempt and may carry
Section f only applies to non ccw carriers

 

[Bend]

I could not attend, but here's what a friend of mine said:

Well, ain't that just swell.

A friend of mine that was there chimes in-

"Whole thing was a kangaroo court start to finish. Any politburo would
have been proud. Don't even know where to start on this one. NIghtmare."

ETA: Post WOU court OFF Alert update.

 

[SheepDog223]

Try reading it like this........

166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school. (1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, a person who intentionally possessesA) A firearm in a court facility is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony. A person who intentionally possesses a firearm in a court facility shall surrender the firearm to a law enforcement officer.
(B) A weapon, other than a firearm, in a court facility may be required to surrender the weapon to a law enforcement officer or to immediately remove it from the court facility. A person who fails to comply with this subparagraph is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony.
(b) The presiding judge of a judicial district may enter an order permitting the possession of specified weapons in a court facility.
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(a) A sheriff, police officer, other duly appointed peace officers or a corrections officer while acting within the scope of employment.
(b) A person summoned by a peace officer to assist in making an arrest or preserving the peace, while the summoned person is engaged in assisting the officer.
(c) An active or reserve member of the military forces of this state or the United States, when engaged in the performance of duty.
(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
(e) A person who is authorized by the officer or agency that controls the public building to possess a firearm or dangerous weapon in that public building.
(f) Possession of a firearm on school property if the firearm:
(A) Is possessed by a person who is not otherwise prohibited from possessing the firearm; and
(B) Is unloaded and locked in a motor vehicle.
(4) The exceptions listed in subsection (3)(b) to (f) of this section constitute affirmative defenses to a charge of violating subsection (1) of this section.
(5)(a) Any person who knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, discharges or attempts to discharge a firearm at a place that the person knows is a school shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.
(b) Paragraph (a) of this subsection does not apply to the discharge of a firearm:
(A) As part of a program approved by a school in the school by an individual who is participating in the program; or
(B) By a law enforcement officer acting in the officer's official capacity.
(6) Any weapon carried in violation of this section is subject to the forfeiture provisions of ORS 166.279.
(7) Notwithstanding the fact that a person's conduct in a single criminal episode constitutes a violation of both subsections (1) and (5) of this section, the district attorney may charge the person with only one of the offenses.


I talked to Independence police today on the phone. Told them about how our neighboring P.D. had decided to handle this situation and asked the sgt to help me understand this section of the ors and show me how he understood it. We walked through it three times and he seemed to not believe it. He said that can't be right and that there must be another conected law or something that wasn't showing and that he would call me back with an answer. Of course we all know what the result was going to be right? Wrong. He called back half an hour later and said I was right. Now Indy P.D. won't be making the same mistake that monmouth is going to get raked over the coals for.

 

[edhill]

update
https://www.oregonfirearms.org/
02.10.09
MARINE VETERAN KICKED OUT OF SCHOOL FOR POSSESSING FIREARMS

WOU STUDENT TRIED,CONVICTED AND SENTENCED.

The WOU student who was falsely arrested and charged with possession of a firearm in a public building, had all his criminal charges dropped by the Polk County DA tonight.
The DA admitted no wrongdoing on his part, or on the part of the police who arrested Jeff Maxwell for a "crime" that does not exist.
In a statement released to OFF's attorney, the DA said "I believe the Monmouth Police Department issued the citation in good faith and that there was an arguable violation. However, a careful reading of the statute and the facts led me to conclude the charge was not in the best interest of justice."
"Not in the best interest of justice." There was NO CRIME. But it gets worse. Much worse.

The college still got to "try" Jeff Maxwell. And they did tonight.
The tribunal that tried Marine veteran Jeffery Maxwell laughed after suspending him from Western Oregon University and sentencing him to:
a "psychological evaluation stating he is not a threat to himself of others" and
a mandatory "ten page paper" " with references, "citing, but not limited to:
1) the importance of following the law,even through civil disobedience.
2) the importance of accepting responsibility for one's actions
3) and recognizing the impact possession of weapons on college campuses has on others."
So, Maxwell has been told his lawful possession of a firearm on campus is evidence of mental illness and he must "confess his sins." Welcome to the new Politburo. Maxwell may as well been judged by the Hitler youth for his "thought crimes."
Jeffery Maxwell's "jury" were four unnamed students and one staff member of WOU.
The "prosecutor" was Patrick Moser [email protected] "Acting Coordinator of Campus Judicial Affairs"
Maxwell asked to have his "trial" open to the public, which is his right, but was denied.
The tribunal was told repeatedly that they lacked the authority to impose a rule dealing with firearms. But the children who sat in judgment of the veteran were not interested in the law or the facts. They were only interested in attacking and embarrassing a man who had committed no crime but had chosen to exercise his right to protect himself and others.
The "trial" was a sham. No one present even seemed to know what the "charge" was. When confronted by the fact that the school has no authority to make rules about firearms, they said that was "not relevant." Then they said they were not charging Maxwell with having a firearm. When asked what they WERE charging him with, they seemed to not know. They then said they were charging him with having a "knife and a rifle in his car." When told they had no authority to make rules about guns in his car, they said THAT was not "relevant."
The children who sat on Maxwell's "jury" and their staff advisors seemed to have no idea what they were actually charging Maxwell with. But they had no problem sentencing him. Gun owners, and all Americans should be outraged.

OFF is committed to continuing Maxwell's defense. We are shocked and disgusted by the treatment he received by the staff and the students of WOU,
We ask your continued support of our legal battle for Jeff Maxwell. We promised Jeff what he promised the men he served with. We will not leave him behind.

 

[SheepDog223]

Sir, you are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own law.

Read the below Oregon Revised Statutes that I have highlighted in bold print for you to easily understand. In addition to this there is another law effecting this mislead ordeal, stating that nobody other than the state has the authority to add or subtract laws. If the state defines a public building, then that's the definition and WOU can't say otherwise. If the state hands out concealed carry permits and states where you can and cannot carry your handgun, then that's where you can and cannot carry your handgun. I'm sure a person in your position is more than well aware of the laws in effect here and you think that you are protecting your students. The but here is that in every place that a whack job shooting has occurred when it's in a gun free zone it's been a massacre, and every time it's been in a gun friendly zone a few people get winged and light casualties occur resulting in the death of a person who made many wrong decisions that day. I urge you to look and the facts and laws, keeping your opinion as your own.

CC. [email protected]

CC. [email protected]

CC. [email protected]





166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school. (1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.

(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, a person who intentionally possesses:

(A) A firearm in a court facility is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony. A person who intentionally possesses a firearm in a court facility shall surrender the firearm to a law enforcement officer.

(B) A weapon, other than a firearm, in a court facility may be required to surrender the weapon to a law enforcement officer or to immediately remove it from the court facility. A person who fails to comply with this subparagraph is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony.

(b) The presiding judge of a judicial district may enter an order permitting the possession of specified weapons in a court facility.

(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:

(a) A sheriff, police officer, other duly appointed peace officers or a corrections officer while acting within the scope of employment.

(b) A person summoned by a peace officer to assist in making an arrest or preserving the peace, while the summoned person is engaged in assisting the officer.

(c) An active or reserve member of the military forces of this state or the United States, when engaged in the performance of duty.

(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.

(e) A person who is authorized by the officer or agency that controls the public building to possess a firearm or dangerous weapon in that public building.

(f) Possession of a firearm on school property if the firearm:

(A) Is possessed by a person who is not otherwise prohibited from possessing the firearm; and

(B) Is unloaded and locked in a motor vehicle.

(4) The exceptions listed in subsection (3)(b) to (f) of this section constitute affirmative defenses to a charge of violating subsection (1) of this section.

(5)(a) Any person who knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, discharges or attempts to discharge a firearm at a place that the person knows is a school shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.

(b) Paragraph (a) of this subsection does not apply to the discharge of a firearm:

(A) As part of a program approved by a school in the school by an individual who is participating in the program; or

(B) By a law enforcement officer acting in the officer's official capacity.

(6) Any weapon carried in violation of this section is subject to the forfeiture provisions of ORS 166.279.

(7) Notwithstanding the fact that a person's conduct in a single criminal episode constitutes a violation of both subsections (1) and (5) of this section, the district attorney may charge the person with only one of the offenses.

(8) As used in this section, "dangerous weapon" means a dangerous weapon as that term is defined in ORS 161.015. [1969 c.705 §§2,4; 1977 c.207 §2; 1979 c.398 §2; 1989 c.839 §22; 1989 c.982 §5; 1991 c.67 §39; 1993 c.625 §1; 1999 c.782 §7; 1999 c.1040 §4; 2001 c.666 §§24,36; 2003 c.614 §6]

 

[SheepDog223]

Monmouth P.D. 503-838-1109

WOU security 503-838-8481

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Sen. Jeffery A. Merkley (DEM)
District: 0S1
United States Senate
B-40B Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3753
Fax: (202) 228-3997
WebSite: http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/senators/one_item_and_teasers/merkley.htm
E-Mail: [email protected]


Sen. Ron Wyden (DEM)
District: 0S2
United States Senate
230 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-0001
Phone: (202) 224-5244
Fax: (202) 228-2717
WebSite: http://wyden.senate.gov
E-Mail: http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/


Federal Representative
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Kurt Schrader (DEM)
District: 005
United States House of Representatives
1419 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5711
Fax: (202) 225-5699
WebSite: http://schrader.house.gov/
E-Mail: <broken link removed>


State Senator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sen. Jackie Winters (REP)
District: 010
900 Court Street NE
Suite S-212
Salem, OR 97301-4067
Phone: (503) 986-1710
Fax: (503) 986-1987
WebSite: https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/winters/
E-Mail: [email protected]


State Representative
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Vicki Berger (REP)
District: 020
900 Court Street NE
Suite H-488
Salem, OR 97301-4062
Phone: (503) 986-1420
Fax: (503) 986-1612
WebSite: <broken link removed>
E-Mail: [email protected]

 

[SheepDog223]

Monmouth P.D. 503-838-1109

WOU security 503-838-8481

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Sen. Jeffery A. Merkley (DEM)
District: 0S1
United States Senate
B-40B Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3753
Fax: (202) 228-3997
WebSite: http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/senators/one_item_and_teasers/merkley.htm
E-Mail: [email protected]


Sen. Ron Wyden (DEM)
District: 0S2
United States Senate
230 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-0001
Phone: (202) 224-5244
Fax: (202) 228-2717
WebSite: http://wyden.senate.gov
E-Mail: http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/


Federal Representative
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Kurt Schrader (DEM)
District: 005
United States House of Representatives
1419 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5711
Fax: (202) 225-5699
WebSite: http://schrader.house.gov/
E-Mail: <broken link removed>


State Senator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sen. Jackie Winters (REP)
District: 010
900 Court Street NE
Suite S-212
Salem, OR 97301-4067
Phone: (503) 986-1710
Fax: (503) 986-1987
WebSite: https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/winters/
E-Mail: [email protected]


State Representative
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rep. Vicki Berger (REP)
District: 020
900 Court Street NE
Suite H-488
Salem, OR 97301-4062
Phone: (503) 986-1420
Fax: (503) 986-1612
WebSite: <broken link removed>
E-Mail: [email protected]

 

[jimwsea]

Wildcard,

I read these statutes as six different conditions, a through f. Meeting any one of them would be acceptable for bringing a concealed weapon on campus.

Maxwell met (d) as he has a current CW permit.

Item (f) is a different condition that states you can keep a gun locked in your car as long as you are not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm (such as a criminal), but you cannot take it out of your car unless you meet (d).

Also --- Sgt. Dorn said that the Oregon University System policies trumps state law. That needs to be determined for sure. And has anyone seen these OUS policies?

Hutchinson said no firearms are allowed on campus...period. Can we see that in writing? What weight does that have vs state law?

 

[SheepDog223]

Also --- Sgt. Dorn said that the Oregon University System policies trumps state law. That needs to be determined for sure. And has anyone seen these OUS policies?

Hutchinson said no firearms are allowed on campus...period. Can we see that in writing? What weight does that have vs state law?[/QUOTE]


Both of these have no effect on state law. It's called state preemption. The state makes the laws and no city, county, township, or university gets to make further restrictions on that law. The reason for this is so you and I can drive, walk, ride, kayak, bike, hike, fly, hot air balloon, unicycle, hop, jump rope, skip.. (no, no skipping) through the state and know that state law is state law. (Sadly this hasn't been done with knife blade lengths.) Anyway... state preemption. The ous policies are in one or more of these 3 threads already. Just look for them.

 

[korntera]

I just sent an e-mail to the governor with a picture of Ted and Myself at a private political function. I think a pic like this...


Might add some sway to the E-Mail lol


EDIT: The gov doesn't have an E-mail online so I faxed it to him lol.

 

[jimwsea]

Thanks, Sheepdog. I went to another thread to find the link. Then on to OFF's website. Then on to Rep. Krieger's letter.

 

[Bend]

Wildcard,

I read these statutes as six different conditions, a through f. Meeting any one of them would be acceptable for bringing a concealed weapon on campus.

Maxwell met (d) as he has a current CW permit.

Item (f) is a different condition that states you can keep a gun locked in your car as long as you are not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm (such as a criminal), but you cannot take it out of your car unless you meet (d).

Also --- Sgt. Dorn said that the Oregon University System policies trumps state law. That needs to be determined for sure. And has anyone seen these OUS policies?

Hutchinson said no firearms are allowed on campus...period. Can we see that in writing? What weight does that have vs state law?

The Oregon University system is a State institution and should comply with State ORS' and OAR's. However, they have morfed the firearms OAR (derived for the firearm ORS) so badly that they have reversed the origional meaning. Sgt. Dorn is only reflecting his boss's wants. He is speaking way above his pay grade. Policy does not trump State law.

Hutchinson has yet to figure out that the same ORS that allows cops to come on campus armed does the same for CHL's.

Yes, its a mess. It will take some judges and lots of money to make it right.

 

[Bend]

My latest and probably last letter effort on the subject. You can use it at will.

I have read with interest the news reports regarding the case of Jeff Maxwell at Western Oregon University. I understand that Mr. Maxwell was in lawful possession of a firearm, but was arrested nonetheless. This is terribly concerning to me.

As I know you are aware, the Oregon Constitution, Article 1, Section 27, provides:

Section 27. Right to bear arms; military subordinate to civil power. The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power[.]

This is a clear and unequivocal right to bear arm for self defense. I understand that Mr. Maxwell is in lawful possession of a Oregon Concealed Handgun License and was then and is now authorized to possess a firearm on in a public building under ORS 166.370(3)(d).

Also, the University's firearms policy clearly recognizes the carry of firearms in accordance with the law. I have capitalized the word "law" for affect.

"Pursuant to OAR 580-022-0045, the Western Oregon University Campus Public Safety Department shall prohibit the possession of firearms, ammunition, explosives, dangerous chemicals, fireworks or related dangerous items on campus except where exclusively authorized by...LAW, or in the course of work (e.g., police, law enforcement services)."

Further, I understand that Mr. Maxwell has been severely disciplined by Western Oregon University for exercising this Constitutional right in a manner that fully complied with applicable law. On the facts presented, this is a clear violation of Mr. Maxwell's civil rights and actionable under 42 USC Section 1983.

I am terribly concerned about the conduct of Western Oregon University in this matter. I urge you to take corrective action immediately. This case is no different than any of the terrible raced based civil rights violations that occurred regularly in the last century. We, as a people, cannot afford to selectively protect constitutional rights. We must strive to preserve every one of them, even if doing so is distasteful or politically risky.