Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: How does open carry apply to rifles and shotguns?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    My question about rifles relates somewhat to hunting seasons. The ODFW has rules saying during certain hunts in certain areas if you do not have the appropriate tags you can not carry certain firearms there. Would open carry supercede the rules of ODFW?
    One instance is presently I plan on checking out an area to hunt that I have not hunted for almost 30 years. I am going there only to check out the area for the upcoming elk season. I had not planned any hunting activities while I was there. There are a lot of cougar in the area and archery season for deer and elk will be going on at the same time. It is legal to hunt cougar with a rifle there at the same time as archery season. I have bought a cougar tag just to make sure I am legal.
    My question is can I legally carry any firearm {rifle, shotgun, handgun} as my personal protection from such things as cougars, bears, humans and not be forced to comply with ODFW laws?
    Hope this makes sense, as I am not the best at conveying my thoughts in written form.
    It just seems to me if I want to carry any kind of weapon in the wild and am only interested in personal protection I should not be forced to comply with any hunting laws and tag regulations.
    Any thoughts or insights? Thanks

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    160

    Post imported post

    Found this at the ODFW web site:

    http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources...mewebnoads.pdf



    In 2003, the Oregon Attorney General reviewed the statute and determined the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission) cannot limit what firearms can be carried or possessed during hunting seasons.

    In the same opinion, the Oregon Attorney General confirmed that the Commission has statutory authority to regulate where, when, how and by whom wildlife are taken by hunting.

    Also this:

    Requirements for weapons used to hunt with are independent of any weapon(s) the individual hunter may choose to carry while in the field hunting. Regulations regarding when a person may hunt for a particular species also still apply.

    Hope this helps you out

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    I am aware of those rulings. My question remains, if I am out in the wild carrying a rifle for personal protection, have no intention of shooting anything other than perhaps a rock. I do not have a tag for whatever big game season is currently running will I be breaking the law? I am not trying to start any arguments, just looking for clarification. Just trying to stay on the right side of the law, but not really understanding the law.
    The last quote makes me think I am perfectly legal to do that. Is that your understanding?
    Thanks for any input from anyone.
    Perhaps I should email ODFW and see what they say.
    Have anyone else been in this situation?


  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026

    Post imported post


    I'd say the FIRST quote nails it.

    In 2003, the Oregon Attorney General reviewed the statute and determined the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission) cannot limit what firearms can be carried or possessed during hunting seasons.


    I see no modifier here limiting and/or excluding this finding to 'hunters' or 'those engaged in hunting activities'.

    Probbably goes back to State Preemption. Since teh commision was not given 'specific authorization' to regulate the possession of firearms, such regulation is null and void. Kinda like the restriction on carried firearms in the non-sterile areas of PDX.



  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    160

    Post imported post

    flathorn wrote:
    I am aware of those rulings. My question remains, if I am out in the wild carrying a rifle for personal protection, have no intention of shooting anything other than perhaps a rock. I do not have a tag for whatever big game season is currently running will I be breaking the law? I am not trying to start any arguments, just looking for clarification. Just trying to stay on the right side of the law, but not really understanding the law.
    The last quote makes me think I am perfectly legal to do that. Is that your understanding?
    Thanks for any input from anyone.
    Perhaps I should email ODFW and see what they say.
    Have anyone else been in this situation?
    Yes, you've hit the nail on the head. The only thing the ODFW can do in regards to firearms is regulate what caliber you need to hunt a particular animal with. This is to makesure you don't cause undue suffering. Now, if you are out there, with a firearm for protection, and shoot something with a smaller caliber than ODFW requires but 'IT WAS COMING RIGHT FOR ME!!!' you are still protected under Oregon law (I think this is a good one, too; never new it existed until now):

    161.200 Choice of evils.[/b] (1) Unless inconsistent with other provisions of chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, defining justifiable use of physical force, or with some other provision of law, conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when:[/b]

    (a) That conduct is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury; and

    (b) The threatened injury is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding the injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought to be prevented by the statute defining the offense in issue.

    (2) The necessity and justifiability of conduct under subsection (1) of this section shall not rest upon considerations pertaining only to the morality and advisability of the statute, either in its general application or with respect to its application to a particular class of cases arising thereunder.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    Thanks for your help guys. I was getting ready to email ODFW about this when searching their site I found this info. It answers exactly what I was looking for. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources...s/firearms.pdf
    But while reading this I came across this information that prohibits carrying a firearm while operating an ATV or snowmobile unless the firearm is unloaded. (ORS 821.240)

    It had no provisions attached that I could find that would allow a person with CHL to carry loaded or unloaded either way while on an ATV or snowmobile.
    So new question is can I carry loaded if I have a CHL on an ATV or snowmobile?
    Any help with this one?
    I used to have a CHL, but when I looked at it last I discovered it had expired about a month before I looked at it. I guess I now have to take the class again to get re-licensed?
    Thanks again

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    160

    Post imported post

    flathorn wrote:
    Thanks for your help guys. I was getting ready to email ODFW about this when searching their site I found this info. It answers exactly what I was looking for. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources...s/firearms.pdf
    But while reading this I came across this information that prohibits carrying a firearm while operating an ATV or snowmobile unless the firearm is unloaded. (ORS 821.240)

    It had no provisions attached that I could find that would allow a person with CHL to carry loaded or unloaded either way while on an ATV or snowmobile.
    So new question is can I carry loaded if I have a CHL on an ATV or snowmobile?
    Any help with this one?
    I used to have a CHL, but when I looked at it last I discovered it had expired about a month before I looked at it. I guess I now have to take the class again to get re-licensed?
    Thanks again
    That one you can't get by EVEN WITH a CHL. It is a legislative law, therefore it isn't exempt from CHL holders since it is preempted. Sorry :?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    I beleive you can carry on an ATV if you have a disabled permit for hunting and fishing. I found this in the big game regulations. You can't shoot while moving you must be parked.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    160

    Post imported post

    Dannny L wrote:
    I beleive you can carry on an ATV if you have a disabled permit for hunting and fishing. I found this in the big game regulations. You can't shoot while moving you must be parked.
    That's true, I remember reading about that one in ODFW rules/regs/laws. The site for it should be listed in this thread.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    5

    Post imported post

    Seems really odd that I could drive my Suzuki Samurai down a one lane road with a loaded concealed handgun, but can't ride a 4 wheeler down the very same road and do the same. Providing I have a permit. How do these ridiculous laws get made , and how do we change them. I assume letters to members of state legislature?
    Thanks for all the replys I have had. I did email ODFW and got a nice response back confirming all that has been said.


  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Springfield, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    737

    Post imported post

    There were two different bills submitted during the last session of the Oregon Legislature (can't remember if it was House or Senate) to address firearms on ATVs. One was going to redefine unloaded firearm to meaning one without a round in the firing chamber (or under the hammer on a revolver). The other was going to exempt CHL holders from the restriction. Both of them went to Judiciary Committee and languished there until the end of the session .

    Hopefully it will get resubmitted during the next session and get fixed soon. Myself, I'm not too concerned about it until then. It's only a class B Traffic Violation (Max $360 ticket). We mostly ride the dunes, and I don't carry on my person out there (don't wanna get sand in it). When we ride the woods or mountains, as long as it's not too muddy, I'll be Carrying, loaded. Whether I have a round in the chamber depends on what I'm doing.

    First, if I'm carrying on my ATV and approached by a LEO, and if they have no Reasonable Articulatable Suspicion (RAS) I am committing, have committed, or will commit a crime, they have no legal power to examine my firearm to determine if it's loaded. Refusal to consent to a search (to hand over my firearm) is not RAS.

    Second, I'm not required to answer the question "is it loaded?" Refusal to answer is not RAS.

    Third, If they insist on disarming me (which I will not physically resist but will not consent to it) with no RAS of a crime, any evidence they find is inadmissable because it was an illegal search and seizure.

    If for some reason I still get ticketed, and the judge does not dismiss on the grounds of illegal search & seizure, I will argue in court the law is in violation of the Oregon Constitution (ArticleI Sec. 27, The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence (sic) of themselves...) because an unloaded firearm is useless for defense except as a club.

    ...I justhope I don't have to test it...
    ...Orygunner...



  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    160

    Post imported post

    Orygunner wrote:
    First, if I'm carrying on my ATV and approached by a LEO, and if they have no Reasonable Articulatable Suspicion (RAS) I am committing, have committed, or will commit a crime, they have no legal power to examine my firearm to determine if it's loaded. Refusal to consent to a search (to hand over my firearm) is not RAS.
    Hate to bring this to your attention, Orygunner, but you're forgetting about one thing:

    166.380 Examination of firearm by peace officer; arrest for failure to allow examination.[/b] (1) A peace officer may examine a firearm possessed by anyone on the person while in or on a public building to determine whether the firearm is a loaded firearm.[/b] (2) Refusal by a person to allow the examination authorized by subsection (1) of this section constitutes reason to believe that the person has committed a crime and the peace officer may make an arrest pursuant to ORS 133.310. [1969 c.705 §3]
    Yes, you do have to allow LEO to see whether or not the firearm is loaded and there is no preemption for CHL holders.



  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Springfield, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    737

    Post imported post

    DenWin wrote:
    Orygunner wrote:
    First, if I'm carrying on my ATV and approached by a LEO, and if they have no Reasonable Articulatable Suspicion (RAS) I am committing, have committed, or will commit a crime, they have no legal power to examine my firearm to determine if it's loaded. Refusal to consent to a search (to hand over my firearm) is not RAS.
    Hate to bring this to your attention, Orygunner, but you're forgetting about one thing:

    166.380 Examination of firearm by peace officer; arrest for failure to allow examination.[/b] (1) A peace officer may examine a firearm possessed by anyone on the person while in or on a public building to determine whether the firearm is a loaded firearm.[/b] (2) Refusal by a person to allow the examination authorized by subsection (1) of this section constitutes reason to believe that the person has committed a crime and the peace officer may make an arrest pursuant to ORS 133.310. [1969 c.705 §3]
    Yes, you do have to allow LEO to see whether or not the firearm is loaded and there is no preemption for CHL holders.

    I didn't forget it. Since I won't be riding my ATV in or on a "public building" (as defined by ORS 166.360) , it does not apply

    I'm not even sure why 166.380 exists. It's already illegal to possess a firearm in a public building (ORS 166.370) unless you have a CHL(or some othersthat are exempted, like LEOs). So if you possess it in a public building legally, what difference does it make if it's loaded or not? There's no state restrictions on whether firearms have to be unloaded anywhere (except ATVs), and a CHL exempts people from any city and state "unloaded" regulations in public places.

    So perhaps it should be changed to read: A peace officer may examine the Concealed Handgun License of a person possessing a firearm in or on a public building... Refusal to display a CHL constitutes reason to believe the person has committed a crime.

    ...Oh, I dunno, I MIGHT ride my ATV in a public building someday...
    ...Orygunner...

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    160

    Post imported post

    Orygunner wrote:
    I didn't forget it. Since I won't be riding my ATV in or on a "public building" (as defined by ORS 166.360) , it does not apply

    I'm not even sure why 166.380 exists. It's already illegal to possess a firearm in a public building (ORS 166.370) unless you have a CHL (or some othersthat are exempted, like LEOs). So if you possess it in a public building legally, what difference does it make if it's loaded or not? There's no state restrictions on whether firearms have to be unloaded anywhere (except ATVs), and a CHL exempts people from any city and state "unloaded" regulations in public places.

    So perhaps it should be changed to read: A peace officer may examine the Concealed Handgun License of a person possessing a firearm in or on a public building... Refusal to display a CHL constitutes reason to believe the person has committed a crime.

    ...Oh, I dunno, I MIGHT ride my ATV in a public building someday...
    ...Orygunner...
    Oh, touche, I guess I didn't read that one closely enough And if you do ride it through a public building, let me know, I'd LOVE to hear how that one turns out :P

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    32

    Post imported post

    I'd like to know the answer to this question in general. like, what if, when i went downtown, i felt like slinging my AK variant over my shoulder...legal? seems like. get hassled by cops? almost certainly.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Springfield, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    737

    Post imported post

    machron1 wrote:
    I'd like to know the answer to this question in general. like, what if, when i went downtown, i felt like slinging my AK variant over my shoulder...legal? seems like. get hassled by cops? almost certainly.
    Review the Oregon Revised Statutes for yourself and make that decision:

    http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/166.html

    I can find nothing prohibiting it, as long as you're not prohibited from owning one. You can carry a firearm just about anywhere, except in, on, or on the grounds adjacent to public buildings. (ORS 166.360 defines them, 166.370 tells where prohibited). If you have a CHL, it eliminates almost every prohibition.

    Be aware without a CHL you also need to lookout for city and county ordinances prohibiting loaded firearms in public places (CHL holders are exempt from those restrictions, too).

    There's more details, search through the Oregon threads and you'll find lots more good information.

    ...Orygunner...



  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    32

    Post imported post

    Yeah I can't find any ORS that specifically outlaws it, but PDX police are just about the most creative folks I've encountered when it comes to fabricating charges and reports, and pushing the boundaries of enforcement, so I don't think I'll be the test case for this anytime soon. Like the cops say, you might beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride :?.

    However, if something like 9/11 happens again, I'll definitely have it with me everywhere I go, like I did when 9/11 DID happen, just in case I run into Johnny Jihad with a WMD or something. I lived in Hillsboro at the time, where the police are actually normal people, so nobody seemed to mind...

  18. #18
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Post imported post

    So perhaps it should be changed to read:
    Don't give them any ideas.......As we all know some of these laws are bad enough now...


  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    flathorn wrote:
    I am aware of those rulings. My question remains, if I am out in the wild carrying a rifle for personal protection, have no intention of shooting anything other than perhaps a rock. I do not have a tag for whatever big game season is currently running will I be breaking the law? I am not trying to start any arguments, just looking for clarification. Just trying to stay on the right side of the law, but not really understanding the law.
    The last quote makes me think I am perfectly legal to do that. Is that your understanding?
    Thanks for any input from anyone.
    Perhaps I should email ODFW and see what they say.
    Have anyone else been in this situation?
    You have to be careful with that and where you are. In SC at night say you take a shortcut through the woods and are caught by a LEO. You can be charged with jacklighting and your gun and truck could be confiscated as well as you being fined. Having a rifle and ammo at night is enough to convict you for night hunting.

Posting Permissions

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