| Author | Post |
|---|
eBratt
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 11:01 pm |
|
I will be traveling through Oregon from Washington on my way out to Colorado for a job. I am good in Washington and once I hit Oregon, but don't have a permit that will cover me in Oregon. I understand that OC is a viable option in OR, even in your vehicle so long as it is visible.
So question #1: What is considered visible? A holster on your bet that isn't covered by a garment but may end up inadvertently covered by a seatbelt or the view of which may be blocked when an LEO is at your window? Or are we talking about on your dashboard visible?
Question #2: What is the Oregon definition of unloaded? Utah is simply nothing in the chamber with a loaded mag in the gun OK. Washington is nothing in the gun at all, the chamber or a mag, but a loaded mag on the belt is OK. What is Oregon?
Any other thoughts or considerations I need to take into account when OCing on the way through. At most, I'll be stopping for gas or a bite to eat. Not planning to do any tourist stuff or whatnot.
Much thanks.
|
pdxwarrior
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 23rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 74 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 11:44 pm |
|
I don't have any reference with me, but I believe this is discussed in the book written by Kevin Starrett. I'll see if I can't check this evening (or maybe someone will beat me to it).
1). Laying on the passenger seat should be considered visible and not concealed. You might be able to get away with a holster between the passenger seat and the console so it doesn't slide around like it might on a seat. Having it on your person (open carry) is usually considered visible and not concealed, but this may cause alarm to the officer stopping you. Either way, I would be sure to disclose the information immediately. It is not required in Oregon, but it surely wouldn't hurt - especially as an out of stater.
2). If you look at the various cities of Oregon that have Open Carry (non-licensed) laws, empty would be considered: Nothing in the chamber (or cylinder), magazine removed and no rounds in any magazine. For example, if you were walking around downtown Portland... pistol on hip, empty magazine in left pocket, loose rounds in right pocket. No confusion and no ability to argue that you just emptied it.
If you get a change to pick up a copy of Kevin's book I would recommend it. Here's the info: http://oregonfirearms.org/store/uorlbk.html
-pdx
A little more detail from the ORS:
166.250 Unlawful possession of firearms.
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section or ORS 166.260, 166.270, 166.274, 166.291, 166.292 or 166.410 to 166.470, a person commits the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm if the person knowingly:
(a) Carries any firearm concealed upon the person;
(b) Possesses a handgun that is concealed and readily accessible to the person within any vehicle; or
(c) Possesses a firearm and:
(A) Is under 18 years of age;
(B)(i) While a minor, was found to be within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court for having committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute a felony or a misdemeanor involving violence, as defined in ORS 166.470; and
(ii) Was discharged from the jurisdiction of the juvenile court within four years prior to being charged under this section;
(C) Has been convicted of a felony or found guilty, except for insanity under ORS 161.295, of a felony;
(D) Was committed to the Department of Human Services under ORS 426.130; or
(E) Was found to be mentally ill and subject to an order under ORS 426.130 that the person be prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm as a result of that mental illness.
(2) This section does not prohibit:
(a) A minor, who is not otherwise prohibited under subsection (1)(c) of this section, from possessing a firearm:
(A) Other than a handgun, if the firearm was transferred to the minor by the minor’s parent or guardian or by another person with the consent of the minor’s parent or guardian; or
(B) Temporarily for hunting, target practice or any other lawful purpose; or
(b) Any citizen of the United States over the age of 18 years who resides in or is temporarily sojourning within this state, and who is not within the excepted classes prescribed by ORS 166.270 and subsection (1) of this section, from owning, possessing or keeping within the person’s place of residence or place of business any handgun, and no permit or license to purchase, own, possess or keep any such firearm at the person’s place of residence or place of business is required of any such citizen. As used in this subsection, “residence” includes a recreational vessel or recreational vehicle while used, for whatever period of time, as residential quarters.
(3) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section.
(4) Unlawful possession of a firearm is a Class A misdemeanor. [Amended by 1979 c.779 §4; 1985 c.543 §3; 1989 c.839 §13; 1993 c.732 §1; 1993 c.735 §12; 1999 c.1040 §1; 2001 c.666 §§33,45; 2003 c.614 §8]
Last edited on Wed Oct 21st, 2009 11:48 pm by pdxwarrior
|
pdxwarrior
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 23rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 74 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 22nd, 2009 03:42 am |
|
Okay, at home now and referred to the book mentioned above. There is a fairly decent section on this in the book and I will not type it here. It does cover the laws regarding loaded/unloaded and concealed/not-concealed but also the vagueness in which the laws were written. Kevin also points out that the Oregon law defines open carry as not concealed.
However, I think Kevin's most important statement regarding this is: It's a good bet that if you are stopped and have a handgun that's accessible to you, and the police officer who stopped you can't see the gun, you can be charged with unlawful possession.
I stand by my earlier statement - inform the officer.
|
eBratt
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 23rd, 2009 07:06 am |
|
Ok, so hypothetical situation. I wear my XD in a Serpa CQC holster (big kydex style retention holster, definitely OC) while in my vehicle. Nothing covering the gun (like a jacket) except for perhaps a seatbelt going across part of it. If the officer approaches on the far side of the vehicle or isn't tall enough to see inside a truck and can't see my OC holster, I can be charged despite it being codified in law that belt holsters worn openly are not concealed?
That is as concerning as the urban legend reports I used to hear of officers arresting OCers because the holster was on the far side of the officer and thus "concealed" since the officer couldn't see it.
|
pdxwarrior
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 23rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 74 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 23rd, 2009 07:39 am |
|
I couldn't say for sure or confirm either way. From the sound of it, it would probably be at the officers discretion. This meaning they could cite you. However, you could probably fight this in court and possibly win - the problem here being court. Depending on the outcome and the judge, the officer could even get "slapped".
If Lonnie Wilson is around it would be interesting to hear any input/insight he has on this issue! (hint hint* where are you Lonnie?)
-pdx
|
pistolero57
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 12th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12th, 2009 09:25 pm |
|
eBratt wrote: Ok, so hypothetical situation. I wear my XD in a Serpa CQC holster (big kydex style retention holster, definitely OC) while in my vehicle. Nothing covering the gun (like a jacket) except for perhaps a seatbelt going across part of it. If the officer approaches on the far side of the vehicle or isn't tall enough to see inside a truck and can't see my OC holster, I can be charged despite it being codified in law that belt holsters worn openly are not concealed?
That is as concerning as the urban legend reports I used to hear of officers arresting OCers because the holster was on the far side of the officer and thus "concealed" since the officer couldn't see it.
Isn't the whole "open carry" versus "concealed carry" a conundrum? If the weapon's truly concealed then there is no way than a police officer will ever see it. Conversely if a police officer (or anybody else) sees it, it isn't really concealed, is it?
We really need to have open carry meets all around the Portland metro area, in any place where it can be done without a concealed carry permit, to raise public awareness.
The whole concealed carry permit idea is just a scam to trick legal owners to register their guns with authorities so that they can be tracked down later on.
|
pdxwarrior
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 23rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 74 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 17th, 2009 06:42 am |
|
pistolero57 wrote:
The whole concealed carry permit idea is just a scam to trick legal owners to register their guns with authorities so that they can be tracked down later on.
I have to admit I'm a bit confused by this statement. How does having a concealed permit (CHL in Oregon) translate to registering your guns with authorities.
There is no requirement to document what firearms you own when applying for a CHL. You do not need to provide any serial numbers, models and manufacturer information. Additionally, unlike some states, you do not need to specify what your carry pistol is.
Other than "registering yourself" there's no proof you even own a firearm.
|
Cremator75
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Nov 18th, 2009 01:03 am |
|
pdxwarrior wrote: dditionally, unlike some states, you do not need to specify what your carry pistol is.
I don't even have the gun I listed when I first got my permit 10 years ago, and my wife left it blank since she got the permit before her gun and they did not say a word.
|
Current time is 07:55 am | |
|
|
|
