• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Oregon Open Carry Holster...


Active member
Aug 4, 2007
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Earlier this afternoon, I was reliably informed by someone "who knows what they're talking about" that the only way to "openly carry in Oregon without a permit was to carry the pistol in a hip holster and it's not covered by a jacket, shirt etc. That's the only form of carry that is legal without a permit. Shoulder rigs, etc are a no-go. "
The 'not covered by jacket or shirt is understandable, being covered is being concealed but....

Is this what the Oregon code says, or is someone reading something into the law that's not there?


Regular Member
Jul 13, 2014
Jefferson County, CO
It looks like the relevant wording is here:

166.250. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section or ORS 166.260, 166.270, 166.274, 166.291, 166.292 or 166.410 to 166.470, a person commits the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm if the person knowingly:
(3) Firearms carried openly in belt holsters are not concealed within the meaning of this section.
From what I read, it doesn't say that "only" belt holsters are allowed. Just that a belt-holstered weapon shall not be considered "concealed". I believe this is to reflect an idea somebody brought up in another thread this morning - that since a proper holster covers a good portion of the gun, and many jurisdictions don't allow concealment of any portion of the gun, this clause simple excludes the holster as "concealment". That way, you can openly carry with an obvious holster, but not be prosecuted just because it partially covers the gun.

It seems excessive wording to me, but you know there had to be some reason to include it that way. After all, they had to put a warning on clothing irons to NOT iron clothes while wearing them.

EDIT: Ugh...now that I think about it, he may be right. The wording specifically says "belt" holsters. You know - I think a 2A-friendly lawyer in Oregon is your best bet to find the correct interpretation.
Last edited: