General Open Carry Question

I guess first off I am new to this forum having come here courtesy of our friends at FoxNews and their coverage of the Newport Buyback story.

Living in Oregon for ten years now and have had my CHL for as long as nine of those I think. Generally I carry concealed for a couple of reasons, first and foremost is I am not someone who likes to attract attention. Not meaning to disparage those who choose open carry just stating my personality is one that will defend myself when I have to but otherwise choose to avoid conflict. Also another reason I choose to carry concealed is that I've never made time to research legalities of open carry.

This brings me to my question, often times I carry on my belt and wear a long jacket. This usually isn't a problem when I am out and about however on the occasion when we stop for dinner or something I would always go through and remove my firearm and holster from my belt and lock it in my car out of concern for attracting undue attention when taking off my jacket in a restaurant. Should I be concerned or am I just being overly paranoid? Also with budget cutbacks locally for LE and such I am just in a mode of carrying more often.

Thanks.

Welcome! I enjoyed that FoxNews article, and not just because they quoted me.

Stick around, even if you don't think you want to open carry yet. As you read more and more experiences, you will remember them when a similar opportunity presents itself for you. The vast majority of open carriers are just like you and are NOT wanting to attract attention. Believe it or not, we are highly successful at it, too.

Taking your coat off in a restaurant (you'll soon get an idea of the restaurants in the minority of ones who are anti-carry, and choose to stop going there anyway) is one of the easy ways to start getting used to it. And when you do it obviously on purpose and sit back down to your beverage, anyone who does notice instantly assumes it's fine. It's not the gun that alarms them, but the assumptions they make about the person carrying it. Snappy dressers will be given virtually no attention at all.

OWelcome!

I can't tell you what to do or how to be, plus I'm not in Oregon but Wisconsin.

I open carry in the summer with an OWB holster. In the winter or cool weather I wear a jacket so concealed. I do NOT leave my firearm in my vehicle unless I am going somewhere that is prohibited. I have a gun safe bolted to the floor under my back seat in my truck. My wife is a school district administrator so I am at school some. Otherwise, I would avoid a business with a gun buster sign and patronize their competitor, if there was one. Our bank, for example, allows firearms but not the credit union across the street.

If I go to a restaurant or supper club, I take off my jacket and proceed on open carry. It has been such a non issue as to be a non issue. Honestly, people just don't pay attention to their surroundings. Too busy staring at their phones. I have noticed that people sitting down, and small children tend to notice more. So, as you walk past seated people in a restaurant it is at their eye level. I've never had anyone confront me on it, although I will admit getting some looks. I've had many a conversation, but nothing confrontational. I'm in a woodsy, hunting area, so I will admit a big city experience may be different.

I was at a supper club with my wife. Open carry, had a flashlight behind my holster. A guy asked me if I knew my flashlight was on? Never said a word about a firearm. As it should be.

Are you being paranoid? Don't know. Give it a try and see how it goes. I do get people asking me if "you can do that?" My response varies depending on what I think thier attitude is, but one of my responses is, If you have enough nerve! I would suggest think through your response to varies scenarios, maybe even do some role playing with a friend? Above all else, stay calm, don't get into a shouting match. You want the other guy to look like the irrational one.

Thanks for the responses. I call it paranoid which isn't probably accurate but just habits from my military service so I tend to analyze people when I go into restaurants and such but the point about most people being totally oblivious to their surroundings is certainly true.

Lastly it occurs to me that I failed to ask if there are any differences for bars and grills? Often I'll sit in the bar (to watch a football game, etc) but I don't drink if I carry which I believe is prohibited but if not just seems like common sense to me.

Thanks

I'll leave the legal question to the Oregon experts, but it's not "common sense."

Ever have wine with a steak dinner? Anyone bothered by the 6" serrated knife in your hands?

MAC702 said:

I'll leave the legal question to the Oregon experts, but it's not "common sense."

Ever have wine with a steak dinner? Anyone bothered by the 6" serrated knife in your hands?

Click to expand...

Fair enough, I'll call it personal preference.

Only 6 years working on submarine reactor plants, about a year of that spent underwater. So while a novice by comparison, I am fairly familiar with Oregon's laws.

You can open carry anywhere that you can conceal carry, and thanks to your CHL you are exempt from some silly city and county ordinances against carrying a loaded firearm. The difference being that if you forget and carry into somewhere you're not supposed to (eg. post office or NW Armory) you are more likely to be noticed and get in trouble for it. Here in Oregon "no guns" signs at local businesses don't carry force of law, but if they see your firearm and ask you to leave then you must or you will be trespassing.

To apply that to your restaurant example; you can legally open carry into any restaurant (or bar/tavern/etc) but must leave if asked to do so. Some businesses are required to post "no guns" signs by their insurance company but could care less themselves.

Thanks all for the help with this. After reading the responses here as well more reading in the forum in general I am much more comfortable with this, fortunately I am on the east side of the mountains and we tend to have less of the loony libs over here (downtown Bend not withstanding)...

GeorgeMasonFan said:

Thanks for the responses. I call it paranoid which isn't probably accurate but just habits from my military service so I tend to analyze people when I go into restaurants and such but the point about most people being totally oblivious to their surroundings is certainly true.

Lastly it occurs to me that I failed to ask if there are any differences for bars and grills? Often I'll sit in the bar (to watch a football game, etc) but I don't drink if I carry which I believe is prohibited but if not just seems like common sense to me.

Thanks

Click to expand...

What you are describing is not "paranoia" but "stiuational awareness". It is something many people must work hard to attain. Those of us with military training sometimes have that awareness from the nature of our military service.

As for most people being totally oblivious.....I've been talking with someone for 10 minutes to as much as half an hour when they suddenly take on a surprised look and ask "is that a gun".....not having seen it in previously.

With a CHL in Oregon you have largely carte blanche to carry (openly or concealed) anywhere you choose. Federal facilities (including things like recruiting offices), the post office, courts, etc. are just about (but not quite) the only places you can't carry. You might be interested to know that so long as you don't attempt to enter a TSA security area, you can even carry AT the airport and inside the non secure areas of the terminal.

As for bars and grills, I don't usually go to bars but I quite often have a beer with dinner at a a favorite restaurant. Never had any hassles and it is absolutely legal.....even if drunk though I wouldn't recommend carrying while drunk.

As others have said, private property owners can ask you to leave and if you don't it is trespassing. That said, if you have business in a state or local government building (that isn't a court or other prohibited place) they really can't do anything other than be a pain.

We-the-People said:

That said, if you have business in a state or local government building (that isn't a court or other prohibited place) they really can't do anything other than be a pain.

Click to expand...

Except that in a public building (eg. library or city hall) a "peace officer" may inspect the firearm to see if it is loaded or not per ORS 166.380. Talk about a useless law as they can't do anything to you unless you refuse the inspection.

SteveM said:

Except that in a public building (eg. library or city hall) a "peace officer" may inspect the firearm to so if it is loaded or not per ORS 166.380. Talk about a useless law as they can't do anything to you unless you refuse the inspection.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's what Oregon law currently says.

However, it is blatantly unconstittional under the federal fourth amendment. In order to inspect your firearm for loaded condition a seizure (detainment of the individual and then seizure of the weapon) under the fourth amendment (as defined by US Supreme Court stare decisis) must occur. In order for ANY detinment of seizure to be constitutional, an agent of the state must first have Reasonable Articulable Suspicion (RAS) that a crime is, has, or is abouto to occur (is "affot" per Terry v Ohio terminology) OR they must have consent of the individual involved.

That RAS must be "particularized" to an individual and the crime suspected.

166.380 has no requirement for consent or RAS in order to effect the detainment and seizure. It is therefore unconstitutional.

They get away with it because 1) people don't know their rights and 2) those that do usually know how expensive it is to be a "test case".

I am however, aware of at least one documented case in which an individual refused inspection (at the Capital) which was captured on audio (possibly video as well) and the officer backing down.

There is currently a bill before the legislature to change 166.380 so that preentation of a CHL removes the requirement to allow inspection. That however, would still be an unconstitutional detainment/seizure (seizure of the CHL) without the necesary RAS or consent.

Here is just ONE reason 166.380 would not survive constitutional scruitiny. It is unlawful to carry a firearm in any condition within a public building without a CHL. However, 166.380 (nor the bill before the legislature) gives the officer any authority to do anything other than inspect the weapon for loaded condition. Loaded condition is not an element of the crime of carrying in a public building as it is unlawful whether loaded or not unless one has a CHL. The law does NOT require the CHL to be in the carriers possession. Any law abiding citizen can easily obtain a CHL and there are over 200,000 active CHL's in the state of Oregon. Somewhere between 1 in 16 or 1 in 20 Oregonians has a CHL.

Quite simply, an officer cannot have the particularized suspicion that an individual with a firearm is committing a crime by carrying in a public building. Hence no detainment or seizure under Terry is constitutional unless the officer has far more to go on than mere possession of the weapon.

There are other cases that apply as well such as Florida v J.L. in which the Supreme Court has ruled that mer possession of a firearm, where it is lawful to do so (whether a permit is required or not) is not sufficient to justify a detainment or seizure under the fourth.