lukeshort wrote:What's the question that you're actually asking here? With the exception of the state of Vermont, every court which has ruled on the meaning of "bearing" arms as a personal right has stated that it is open carry, not concealed carry, which is protected by their state constitution.I'm new to this forum, but have read many of these posts and can't say that I alway's agree with the core ideals. I have changed my opinion on many issues concerning OC'ing. I realize now that it is the mere statement of "I can" for many of you. I can agree with this to an extent. Now to the question I have, and would like to hear as many views as possible, pro and con.
1) Isn't asking permission to carry a firearm, which is a right, voiding your personal authority of self governmentby recognizing a supposed higher authority for the right?
2) Doesn't this fall under threat, duress or cohersion, if it is a crime that exists under color of law only?
3) If the Constitution is superior to all laws, and this is what is sworn an oath to defend, is hypocracy the bases for subordinant laws?
To my knowledge, there's been no similar "right to keep and bear arms" cases involving openly carried handguns against city ordinance violations thus far in the state of Oregon.
At the moment, concealed carry is prohibited but excepted by license or other priviledge, but open carry is considered specifically not illegal.
However, another provision of law (ORS 166.173) "states" that cities have a power to restrict the loaded carrying of handguns (openly or concealed) unless such a person falls into an exemption. One of those is one licensed to carry a concealed handgun (though concealment is NOT required, I fought that issue with Portland, Beaverton, and a few others and won on that front).
That being said, I believe that ORS 166.173 is an unconstitutional delegation of power to the cities to ban something that's allowed by Article 1, Section 27 of the Oregon State Constitution, and I believe that the city ordinances thus far that regulate all carry or open carry are by themselves violation of the state constitution.
The problem is that I'm not in a position to personally challenge these ordinances. I already possess a CHL and therefor I have no standing to challenge.