We-the-People
Regular Member
This thread IS NOT intended to address the reality of "the street" nor the fact that it would likely be a "test case" and very expensive.
This thread IS intended as a discussion of the possiblity that a "legal loophole" exists within Oregon firearms regulations such that we do in fact recognize other states licenses to carry concealed handguns. HOWEVER, that recognition is LIMITED to ORS 166.173 ONLY (local loaded carry ban ordinances). So, please take a look at my citations and argument. I would be very interested in know what the actual attorneys think and a particular State Researcher (Gray)
SO HERE WE GO
166.170 State preemption.
(1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly.
(2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void.
166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places.
(1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
NOTE: That while ORS 166.173 states that ordinances adopted under it (i.e. local ordinances banning loaded carry) do not apply to "(c) a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun" there is no mention that it must be an OREGON license. Elsewhere in the ORS, this is not the case and the licensing authority required to claim the exemption is identified (by ORS). Let's examine those.
166.260 Persons not affected by ORS 166.250.
(1) ORS 166.250 does not apply to or affect:
(h) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
166.262 (1) Limitation on peace officer’s authority to arrest for violating ORS 166.250 or 166.370. A peace officer may not arrest or charge a person for violating ORS 166.250 (1)(a) or (b) or 166.370 (1) if the person has in the person’s immediate possession a valid license to carry a firearm as provided in ORS 166.291 and 166.292.
166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school.
(1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while
in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
NOTE: ORS 166.291 and 166.292 are the Oregon CHL licensing procedures.
Courts place great emphasis upon the specific words used in regulatory statutes. ONLY in ORS 166.173 has the legislature chosen to merely require a license "to carry a concealed handgun" without listing any requirement for the licensing authority of that license (i.e. 166.291 & 292). That the rest of chapter 166 of the ORS DOES require that a concealed handgun license must be issued under ORS 166.291 & 292 is significant.
Therefore, the argument is that while Oregon requires a CHL issued by Oregon in order to:
(1) Be immune from 166.250
(2) Qualify for the protections of 166.262 (LEO can not arrest you for violation of 166.250 or 370) (of course we know how well that works)
(3) Be able to carry in a in public building via 166.370.
Significantly, Oregon law DOES NOT require a concealed handgun license to be issued under ORS 166.291 & 292 (i.e. Oregon CHL) to be exempted from any local ordinances promulgated via the authority of ORS 166.173 (only A license to carry concealed). Nor can the city of Astoria, or any other political subdivision of the state, increase the requirement as they do not have EXPRESS AUTHORITY to override the state statute that exempts people who are "licensed to carry a concealed handgun".
The above argument IS NOT expected to keep you from being contacted and arrested. It is merely an argument to be made in a court of law and it would be a TEST case.
This thread IS intended as a discussion of the possiblity that a "legal loophole" exists within Oregon firearms regulations such that we do in fact recognize other states licenses to carry concealed handguns. HOWEVER, that recognition is LIMITED to ORS 166.173 ONLY (local loaded carry ban ordinances). So, please take a look at my citations and argument. I would be very interested in know what the actual attorneys think and a particular State Researcher (Gray)
SO HERE WE GO
166.170 State preemption.
(1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly.
(2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void.
166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places.
(1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
NOTE: That while ORS 166.173 states that ordinances adopted under it (i.e. local ordinances banning loaded carry) do not apply to "(c) a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun" there is no mention that it must be an OREGON license. Elsewhere in the ORS, this is not the case and the licensing authority required to claim the exemption is identified (by ORS). Let's examine those.
166.260 Persons not affected by ORS 166.250.
(1) ORS 166.250 does not apply to or affect:
(h) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
166.262 (1) Limitation on peace officer’s authority to arrest for violating ORS 166.250 or 166.370. A peace officer may not arrest or charge a person for violating ORS 166.250 (1)(a) or (b) or 166.370 (1) if the person has in the person’s immediate possession a valid license to carry a firearm as provided in ORS 166.291 and 166.292.
166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school.
(1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while
in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.
(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:
(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
NOTE: ORS 166.291 and 166.292 are the Oregon CHL licensing procedures.
Courts place great emphasis upon the specific words used in regulatory statutes. ONLY in ORS 166.173 has the legislature chosen to merely require a license "to carry a concealed handgun" without listing any requirement for the licensing authority of that license (i.e. 166.291 & 292). That the rest of chapter 166 of the ORS DOES require that a concealed handgun license must be issued under ORS 166.291 & 292 is significant.
Therefore, the argument is that while Oregon requires a CHL issued by Oregon in order to:
(1) Be immune from 166.250
(2) Qualify for the protections of 166.262 (LEO can not arrest you for violation of 166.250 or 370) (of course we know how well that works)
(3) Be able to carry in a in public building via 166.370.
Significantly, Oregon law DOES NOT require a concealed handgun license to be issued under ORS 166.291 & 292 (i.e. Oregon CHL) to be exempted from any local ordinances promulgated via the authority of ORS 166.173 (only A license to carry concealed). Nor can the city of Astoria, or any other political subdivision of the state, increase the requirement as they do not have EXPRESS AUTHORITY to override the state statute that exempts people who are "licensed to carry a concealed handgun".
The above argument IS NOT expected to keep you from being contacted and arrested. It is merely an argument to be made in a court of law and it would be a TEST case.