Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Help getting OR chl

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Posts
    11

    Help getting OR chl

    I live in Vancouver Washington, pretty much 15 mins from downtown portland. I am in the Portland/ Oregon, area quite often with my children and would occasionally feel better to be prepared if the situation arises. And since there is no open carry without a CHL, that leaves me basically defensless. So i sent in an application to Washington county (Hillsboro/ Beaverton area) cause i heard from a couple people id have better luck somewhere other than Multnomah county. I explained that im in Oregon often tarvelling for my sons wrestling events to different cities and states almost every weekend, and had family in multiple parts of Oregon. They then called and denied my application because i dont have actuall business in Washington county that would cause me to be there at least 2 days a week, and or carrying large amounts of cash to be in fear for my safety. wtf. So I am going to try Multnomah county, and hope for better luck and try to write different reasoning why i feel the need for a CHL. Just curious if anyone has any pointers or has gone throiugh this that can point me to a better way of explaining why i should be allowed a CHL without sounding like i wana be a crimefighter. Any help would be appreciated.

  2. #2
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    While I am not an expert on Oregon law, I believe that the cause for denial was faulty - Oregon is a "shall issue" state with only a limited number of exceptions. Not being in the area 2 days per week is NOT one of those so enumerated.

    Oregon will only issue permits to people who are residents of states that border Oregon. Those states are Washington, California, Idaho and Nevada. A non-resident from the states listed can go to any sheriff in Oregon and apply. The sheriff's office from Grant county has been found to have very good customer service and appropriate policies. They can be found at: http://www.oregonsheriffs.org/grant/index.shtml.

    In 1989, Oregon also adopted a non-discretionary policy for issuance of handgun permits. The requirements were similar, though not identical to those we have already seen. The applicant must be over 21; must be a resident of the county where the application is made; must have no outstanding arrest warrants; must be "not free on any form of pretrial release"; must have demonstrated competence through any of a number of firearm safety classes; must have no felony convictions; must have no misdemeanor convictions or mental hospital commitments in the preceding four years; and must not be prohibited by a court from owning a firearm for mental illness

    http://rkba.org/research/cramer/shall-issue.html#c11
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  3. #3
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    While I am not an expert on Oregon law, I believe that the cause for denial was faulty - Oregon is a "shall issue" state with only a limited number of exceptions. Not being in the area 2 days per week is NOT one of those so enumerated.

    Oregon will only issue permits to people who are residents of states that border Oregon. Those states are Washington, California, Idaho and Nevada. A non-resident from the states listed can go to any sheriff in Oregon and apply. The sheriff's office from Grant county has been found to have very good customer service and appropriate policies. They can be found at: http://www.oregonsheriffs.org/grant/index.shtml.

    In 1989, Oregon also adopted a non-discretionary policy for issuance of handgun permits. The requirements were similar, though not identical to those we have already seen. The applicant must be over 21; must be a resident of the county where the application is made; must have no outstanding arrest warrants; must be "not free on any form of pretrial release"; must have demonstrated competence through any of a number of firearm safety classes; must have no felony convictions; must have no misdemeanor convictions or mental hospital commitments in the preceding four years; and must not be prohibited by a court from owning a firearm for mental illness

    http://rkba.org/research/cramer/shall-issue.html#c11
    For non-residents we are "May issue". Only residents get "shall issue" treatment. I would suggest applying in Grant County. As far as I know, sheriff Palmer will NOT deny you unless you should be denied (legitimately denied). He goes out of his way to help non-residents from contiguous states.

    ORS 166.291(8) The county sheriff may waive the residency requirement in subsection (1)(c) of this section for a resident of a contiguous state who has a compelling business interest or other legitimate demonstrated need.

    LINK TO ORS CHAPTER 166: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/166.html
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  4. #4
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    For non-residents we are "May issue". Only residents get "shall issue" treatment. I would suggest applying in Grant County. As far as I know, sheriff Palmer will NOT deny you unless you should be denied (legitimately denied). He goes out of his way to help non-residents from contiguous states.

    ORS 166.291(8) The county sheriff may waive the residency requirement in subsection (1)(c) of this section for a resident of a contiguous state who has a compelling business interest or other legitimate demonstrated need.

    LINK TO ORS CHAPTER 166: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/166.html
    Appreciate the clarification - at least I got the recommendation to apply in Grant County right and the OP has now been so directed.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Posts
    11
    Ok thanks for the replies, grant county is about 5 hours away so I will try multnomah county first and come up with some better reasoning. But if that doesn't work ill figure out a day to get to grant county, thank you.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Cremator75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    393

    Re: Help getting OR chl

    Give Grant county a call. I've heard he frequently goes to Vancouver or somewhere in WA just to do OR applications.
    Last edited by Cremator75; 01-23-2013 at 03:22 PM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    391
    So when is "contiguous" going to be replaced with "any"?

  8. #8
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by randian View Post
    So when is "contiguous" going to be replaced with "any"?
    The State of WA is contigous to the State Of Oregon. OR will issue Non-Resident permits only to states that border them, that is WA, ID, NV and CA.

    The county you apply in, as a WA resident, does not have to be next the applicants county in WA.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by hermannr View Post
    The State of WA is contigous to the State Of Oregon.
    As a resident of a non-contiguous state, that does not help me, hence my desire to change Oregon's rule from "contiguous" to "any", or universal reciprocity. As I recall, universal reciprocity got passed by the OR House and got a treacherous stab in the back in the Senate.

  10. #10
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by randian View Post
    As a resident of a non-contiguous state, that does not help me, hence my desire to change Oregon's rule from "contiguous" to "any", or universal reciprocity. As I recall, universal reciprocity got passed by the OR House and got a treacherous stab in the back in the Senate.
    You are likely to have better luck at the federal level as Oregon has far too many anti-gun legislators to make any headway on the subject. It is within the constitutional powers of Congress to enact national reciprocity. This power is described in Article 4, Section 1 of the Constitution.

    "Article IV
    Section 1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And Congress may by general laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

    While I'm not generally in favor of the federal government dictating what states do, Congress most certainly has the constitutional authority to require all states to recognize the licenses of other states. This is not limited to just marriage and drivers licenses, but also would include concealed carry licenses.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    --snip-- It is within the constitutional powers of Congress to enact national reciprocity. This power is described in Article 4, Section 1 of the Constitution.
    Please no national gun permit reciprocity.

    The power to give carries with it the power to deny/restrict - that camel has a cold nose.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    You are likely to have better luck at the federal level as Oregon has far too many anti-gun legislators to make any headway on the subject.
    How do you manage to keep shall-issue and OC?

  13. #13
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by randian View Post
    How do you manage to keep shall-issue and OC?
    It's a fight. But thankfully we have enough pro-gun types that make it into the legislature to fend off the idiots when they put up anti-gun legislation. We get them every year.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  14. #14
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by randian View Post
    How do you manage to keep shall-issue and OC?
    Mostly by the court and the Oregon State Constitution. BTW: as much flack as I will get from the Oregon guys for this...Read the law...carefully.

    ORS 166.250(3) says the th restrictions in this chapter "do not apply to a pistol carried openly on the hip". Also read ORS 166.173 Pay special attention to (2)(c) and (2)(d).

    Please note: the execption in (c) is not identical to the exception in (d). Exemption (d) requires a Oregon CHL...absolutely no question.

    Yes, when they attempted to clean up 166 back in 2009, they made the exemption in (c) to read abundantly clear...(c) is ment to mean any license to carry concealed by any any state or local government. (This is for OC only...we are not talking CC here with this exemption. Exemption (d) is for CC) Even without the change proposed in 2009, it still means the same, it is just not as clearly stated.

  15. #15
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Please no national gun permit reciprocity.

    The power to give carries with it the power to deny/restrict - that camel has a cold nose.
    The only thing the federal government has the legal power to do is to make the states recognize the lawful acts of the other states. I do not understand why you are afraid of this?

    As the last attempt showed...it would do nothing more than say...if you allow your citizens to carry with a permit, you must recognize the same from otehr states. No attempt to impose anything else (they have no constitutional right to impose more that that)

    We are not talking about a national permit, just a state permit being recognized just like your drivers license is recognized in all the states.

  16. #16
    Regular Member J1MB0B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    239
    Try Rainier in Columbia County. I got mine from them pretty quick.

  17. #17
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by hermannr View Post
    The only thing the federal government has the legal power to do is to make the states recognize the lawful acts of the other states. I do not understand why you are afraid of this?

    As the last attempt showed...it would do nothing more than say...if you allow your citizens to carry with a permit, you must recognize the same from otehr states. No attempt to impose anything else (they have no constitutional right to impose more that that)

    We are not talking about a national permit, just a state permit being recognized just like your drivers license is recognized in all the states.
    You are talking about enforced national reciprocity - please cite where the federal government has that authority.

    Driving licenses are NOT under a federal statute/mandate to be recognized in other states - the reciprocity is gained solely by agreement between the states.

    http://www.shafferengle.com/Traffic-...r-states.shtml

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_License_Compact
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  18. #18
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    You are talking about enforced national reciprocity - please cite where the federal government has that authority.

    Driving licenses are NOT under a federal statute/mandate to be recognized in other states - the reciprocity is gained solely by agreement between the states.

    http://www.shafferengle.com/Traffic-...r-states.shtml

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_License_Compact

    I see it in Article IV, Section 1 & 2 of the U.S. Constitution though I could be reading more into it than the Supreme Court would.

    Article. IV. Section. 1.
    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

    Section. 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.


    It's certainly a lot closer to point than the "commerce clause" which has been used to justify all manner of things including forcing people to participate in commerce (i.e. buying health insurance).
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  19. #19
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    I see it in Article IV, Section 1 & 2 of the U.S. Constitution though I could be reading more into it than the Supreme Court would.

    Article. IV. Section. 1.
    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

    Section. 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.


    It's certainly a lot closer to point than the "commerce clause" which has been used to justify all manner of things including forcing people to participate in commerce (i.e. buying health insurance).
    Thank you - you make my point that there is no cite, only the opinion of some that Privileges and Immunities would prevail as the deciding factor. In that there are different standards for a permit in the various states and even where reciprosity exists you are bound by the laws of the state in which you are standing, which set up standards should be the model? Would you have congress decide that for all of the states - one standard for all?

    I say nay. A thousand times nay! I do not want the ATF, Homeland Security or any federal agency in charge of concealed permits NOR keeping records of same = registration. Let the states work out their differences and come to some common ground as they wish. This has worked out well with driving licenses w/o direct application of federal pressure.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  20. #20
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Thank you - you make my point that there is no cite, only the opinion of some that Privileges and Immunities would prevail as the deciding factor. In that there are different standards for a permit in the various states and even where reciprosity exists you are bound by the laws of the state in which you are standing, which set up standards should be the model? Would you have congress decide that for all of the states - one standard for all?

    I say nay. A thousand times nay! I do not want the ATF, Homeland Security or any federal agency in charge of concealed permits NOR keeping records of same = registration. Let the states work out their differences and come to some common ground as they wish. This has worked out well with driving licenses w/o direct application of federal pressure.
    If the Constitution is not a valid citation to the laws of the land then the second amendment itself is worthless. I doubt many here would take that stance.

    When the Constitution says that, "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof", well I think that pretty much gives them authority to require states to recognize each others concealed carry licences (by whatever name they call them). I does NOT give them authority to create a new, federally issued license, nor to set the standards within a particular state. But I see it as saying that each state must recognize the license of the other states.

    The feds don't need to create a federal standard, individuals would simply need to comply with the concealed license standards of the state in which they found themselves. Just as we currently must obey the traffic laws even if they're different from the ones in the state where our drivers license is issued. Just as with our marriage licenses, and all manner of other Acts, Records, and Judicial Proceedings.

    ONLY if the feds tried to institute their own, controlling, system would they run afoul of the limitations of the Constitution, for THAT is not within their powers.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  21. #21
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Yet SCOTUS has chosen to not apply that standard when they had the opportunity to do so.

    It can be a long and tanged journey:
    http://nationalparalegal.edu/conlawc...tiesClause.asp
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    391
    A license is not an act, record, or judicial proceeding, and so is not required to be recognized.

    Since the Constitution forbids states from making agreements with each other (Article 1, section 10) without the consent of Congress, it required an act of Congress for the national driver's license compact to exist. Note that said Compact does a lot more than provide license reciprocity. There's data sharing, so tickets in one state still get you points on your license in your state.

    Technically, unless Congress has formally consented concealed carry reciprocity agreements between states are unconstitutional. Unilateral reciprocity ("we recognize all out of state permits" or "we recognize yours if you recognize ours") would probably be ok, since it doesn't require an agreement with the other state.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •