Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Carrying Firearm on Bus?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Rogue Valley, OR
    Posts
    10

    Question Carrying Firearm on Bus?

    Does anyone know the legality of riding public transportation with a concealed firearm with a CHL? Or open carry with a CHL on a bus? I'm not sure if it's considered a public building or if it becomes an issue of trespassing when a rule of riding the bus is no firearms.

    The specific bus system I'm inquiring about is Rogue Valley Transportation District. RVTD.org

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by KOliverian View Post
    Does anyone know the legality of riding public transportation with a concealed firearm with a CHL? Or open carry with a CHL on a bus? I'm not sure if it's considered a public building or if it becomes an issue of trespassing when a rule of riding the bus is no firearms.

    The specific bus system I'm inquiring about is Rogue Valley Transportation District. RVTD.org

    Thanks!
    chl trumps, ride on
    *Disclaimer~ I am not an attorney, i do not give legal advice. Any opinion stated here is in no way meant to insinuate, imply, compel or encourage that you should do anything that is illegal either knowingly or otherwise. My answers however valid may not be complete or applicable to your individual situation. I strongly recommend that you do your own research, make your own decisions and hire an attorney for legal advice ~

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Rogue Valley, OR
    Posts
    10
    Teddybearfromhell, do you know if RVTD buses are considered public buildings? Or privately owned? If it's the latter, then carrying even with a CHL could result in a trespassing charge.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by KOliverian View Post
    Teddybearfromhell, do you know if RVTD buses are considered public buildings? Or privately owned? If it's the latter, then carrying even with a CHL could result in a trespassing charge.
    trespassing charge only applies IF you are asked to leave and DONT, or have been warned prior and return.
    *Disclaimer~ I am not an attorney, i do not give legal advice. Any opinion stated here is in no way meant to insinuate, imply, compel or encourage that you should do anything that is illegal either knowingly or otherwise. My answers however valid may not be complete or applicable to your individual situation. I strongly recommend that you do your own research, make your own decisions and hire an attorney for legal advice ~

  5. #5
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    Gtg.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
    I am no victim, just a poor college student who looks to the day where the rich have the living piss taxed out of them.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by KOliverian View Post
    Teddybearfromhell, do you know if RVTD buses are considered public buildings? Or privately owned? If it's the latter, then carrying even with a CHL could result in a trespassing charge.
    the buses are not buildings, they are buses and public
    *Disclaimer~ I am not an attorney, i do not give legal advice. Any opinion stated here is in no way meant to insinuate, imply, compel or encourage that you should do anything that is illegal either knowingly or otherwise. My answers however valid may not be complete or applicable to your individual situation. I strongly recommend that you do your own research, make your own decisions and hire an attorney for legal advice ~

  7. #7
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by KOliverian View Post
    Teddybearfromhell, do you know if RVTD buses are considered public buildings? Or privately owned? If it's the latter, then carrying even with a CHL could result in a trespassing charge.
    Even places that are posted as not allowing firearms, you are still allowed into lawfully. Until you are asked to leave and refuse to do so, that is considered trespassing.

    So no, even if they are considered privately owned (such as IKEA in PDX) carrying onto the buses would not result in a trespassing charge. That would only apply if you are stupid about leaving when asked.

    Otherwise, anything I can find says that it is public transportation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
    I am no victim, just a poor college student who looks to the day where the rich have the living piss taxed out of them.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Scappoose, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    394
    I think everyone should read this and how trespassing with a firearm could not have a not so nice outcome.

    http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A124901.htm

    I had a email with OFF and this was his response:


    -------------------
    Oregon considers some private property to be a “public place.” Movie theaters, malls, amusement parks even hotel lobbies. While they are “public places” they are still private property and the owners can post “no guns” signs and as far as I can tell, enforce them.

    I believe to a certain extent this is assumed because I know of no place in Oregon law that specifically says people can post “no guns” signs, but private property is private property. So Fred Meyers can post those signs and they are presumably enforceable.

    I should tell you that I know of no case law in Oregon about this from the standpoint of a place like a mall. In the case you sent, it was private property but NOT a public place. (By the way, a Multnomah County Judge has ruled that your front porch is a “public place.”)

    Oregon law does not address the posting of signs about guns in public places that are private property as far as I can see. I have looked over the several trespass statutes that I think are relevant, but cannot find anything that would apply to this issue.

    I do know of people who have been dragged out of movie theaters by cops for having guns when the place was posted, but there was no arrest. So I am making an assumption here to some extent.

    You can use this link to find trespass statutes: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/orsindex/t.pdf

    I could not find anything that directly addressed this. But I am fairly confident that the courts would not side with gun owners.

    --------------------

  9. #9
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/105.700

    Is the best I can do to narrow down the statute.

    Criminal trespass in Oregon is hard to prosecute. (reading the court case, I think the big mistake of the lawyer was not disputing the easy facts of proving criminal trespass)

    From what I know and understand, its not very well defined at all for anyone.. Going into the basic. Unless you are specfically asked to leave, you are not going to be cited, or arrested for trespassing unless you choose to hang around.

    Scenario is. Owner or agent of owner asks you to leave. You refuse. Police are called, and they will ask/force you to leave. Depending on how you treat the LEO here is where I think the stink could happen.

    Regardless. Its legal for you to be there, as you are following state law. You are not breaking any laws whatsoever until the land owner asks you to leave his land, area, etc.

    I am no lawyer. Unless there is something hiding in some ORS books somewhere I am unaware of.....
    Last edited by VW_Factor; 12-03-2011 at 10:45 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
    I am no victim, just a poor college student who looks to the day where the rich have the living piss taxed out of them.

  10. #10
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    The GI Ranch must have considerable influence

    Quote Originally Posted by Puddin99 View Post
    I think everyone should read this and how trespassing with a firearm could not have a not so nice outcome.

    http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A124901.htm

    I had a email with OFF and this was his response:


    -------------------
    Oregon considers some private property to be a “public place.” Movie theaters, malls, amusement parks even hotel lobbies. While they are “public places” they are still private property and the owners can post “no guns” signs and as far as I can tell, enforce them.

    I believe to a certain extent this is assumed because I know of no place in Oregon law that specifically says people can post “no guns” signs, but private property is private property. So Fred Meyers can post those signs and they are presumably enforceable.

    I should tell you that I know of no case law in Oregon about this from the standpoint of a place like a mall. In the case you sent, it was private property but NOT a public place. (By the way, a Multnomah County Judge has ruled that your front porch is a “public place.”)

    Oregon law does not address the posting of signs about guns in public places that are private property as far as I can see. I have looked over the several trespass statutes that I think are relevant, but cannot find anything that would apply to this issue.

    I do know of people who have been dragged out of movie theaters by cops for having guns when the place was posted, but there was no arrest. So I am making an assumption here to some extent.

    You can use this link to find trespass statutes: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/orsindex/t.pdf

    I could not find anything that directly addressed this. But I am fairly confident that the courts would not side with gun owners.

    --------------------
    I read the 2006 decision about the GI Ranch. They must have real pull in the area. I suspect there is more to the case. Elk are probably worth a lot of money to the Ranch, so this was more like poaching than tresspassing, I would guess.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Rogue Valley, OR
    Posts
    10
    On the RVTD website, there is a page called Bus Riding Rules:
    http://rvtd.org/bus_riding_rules.php

    This is where the "no firearms" rule is found, amidst some other rules like "Do not put your feet on the seats." and "No flammable or explosive materials or substances on bus." Obviously the latter is constantly violated by the plethora of folks who carry a lighter or even a cannister of hairspray. So.... the context of the "no firearms" rule seems to validate what has been said on this forum: that it is only an issue if the bus driver addresses it.

    BUT, below all the rules it reads:
    "* This information is part of Ordinance No. 8 governing use of District facilities. All parties wishing to use District facilities must abide by the rules set out in Ordinance No. 8 in its entirety."

    I located the city of Medford ordinance 8 here:
    http://www.ci.medford.or.us/Code.asp?CodeID=3424

    And I located the county ordinance 8 here:
    http://www.co.jackson.or.us/Code.asp?CodeID=8

    And I cannot for the life of me find anything relevant! Is there some other sector of government I don't know about with an Ordinance 8?

  12. #12
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748
    Quote Originally Posted by KOliverian View Post
    And I cannot for the life of me find anything relevant! Is there some other sector of government I don't know about with an Ordinance 8?
    I looked around and also couldn't find anything. Maybe calling RVTD on Monday and asking them if the ordinances are online would be the easiest way of finding them. If they're not online I'm sure they'll either provide you a copy or have a copy available somewhere for public viewing. Maybe the Medford library would have it?

    Either way though, my understanding is that state law regarding CHLs trumps local restrictions, so it wouldn't matter if you carried on the bus as long as you had obtained an Oregon CHL.

  13. #13
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    That "rule" doesn't carry force of law behind it. Worst they do, is ask you to leave.

    Both my wife and I understand there are places that we must be at times (we'd rather not) that have "rules" about firearms being prohibited. Concealed is concealed and we'll do it if need be. Worst that has ever happened if "made or OC'ing" where not wanted, is we're asked to leave. I have no problem with that.

    I end up having to ask people to leave our property (place of business) more often than I'd like for various reasons, usually for undue aggressive behavior. If they refuse, police are called. If they still refuse to leave after the police arrive, guess what? They are arrested for trespassing.

    I have not yet run into a situation in which a property owner, or agent of owner has called the police pre-emptivly under the context that they have made contact with me and asked me/us to leave. As some stories we've read have played out, the police will make contact and ask why you have not left. Story will be, well.. No one asked me/us, no problem, we'll leave. (And no, you don't have to give the police your name, birthdate, etc for their reports) After leaving I am sure the LEO will have some words to the party who had called about the false reporting of us refusing to leave.

    Its not really as scary as you can imagine it to be.

    Edit : You are not going to be arrested and charged with anything for NOT breaking the law.
    Last edited by VW_Factor; 12-04-2011 at 03:15 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
    I am no victim, just a poor college student who looks to the day where the rich have the living piss taxed out of them.

  14. #14
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Per ORS 166.170 ONLY the legislature can regulate firearms. Private property owners have their private property rights which is not legislation, but political subdivisions of the state do not have any such rights as the legislature has has seen fit to be the SOLE regulatory authority. Therefore, unless it is a city or county "loaded carry ban" which is authorized by the legislature under ORS 166.173, any rule promulgated by ANY political subdivision of the state is VOID...i.e. it isn't worth the paper it's written on.

    RVTD is a "District" governed by a "Board of Directors" elected by the citizens within the district. It is therefore, a political subdivision of the state and prohibited from regulating firearms. In fact, because it is neither a city nor county, it can not even promulgate a "loaded carry ban".

    WITHOUT A CHL:
    No locale within the Rogue Valley that I am aware of has a "loaded carry ban" and so without a CHL, you are generally LEGAL to carry on the RVTD BUSES though the RVTD BUILDINGS qualify as "public buildings" under ORS 166.360 and must be avoided. There could also be an issue depending on where the actual bus travels and/or stops (on the SOU Campus for instance) in which you would be required to have a CHL to be there and carrying. Know where the bus goes and where it stops to be sure you do not inadvertently violate 166.370 via the "public building" definition in 166.360. NOTE: Read the entire section of 166.360 as the last sentence can include a lot of places you might not think of.

    WITH A CHL:
    There is nothing unlawful about carrying on RVTD BUSES or into RVTD BUILDINGS, nor anywhere that I can imagine they would travel and/or stop (federal property??). Their "rule" is VOID and not worth the paper they wasted to print it unless you allow them to intimidate you into not carrying.


    RVTD BOARD INFO:
    http://www.rvtd.org/rvtd_board.php

    Until we get legislation in Oregon that is similar to that recently passed in Florida werein public office holders are held PERSONALLY liable, with decent sized fines, for unlawful anti-firearms rules/ordinances/etc., we will continue to have to deal with these impotent written policies. The city of Medford has one for its parks and has ignored my e-mails about the subject. That's okay, I ignore their rules.
    "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.

Posting Permissions

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