Author: OFF

SHERIFFS ON BOARD WITH CHL RECIPROCITY

Today in the House Judiciary Committee, three bills of interest to gun owners were heard, But without question, the one that most gun owners will want to know about was HB 2463.

This bill recognizes the concealed handgun licenses of all other states.

At the request of OFF, an amendment was drafted that extended that recognition to Alaska and Vermont, which allow their residents to carry concealed without a license.

As you know, this type of legislation has been introduced many times in the past and has always generated resistance from the Oregon Sheriffs.

At today’s hearing, the representative of the Oregon Sheriffs stated that they no longer opposed recognizing the CHL’s of other states. This is a significant breakthrough in our efforts to have Oregon join the many states that allow non-residents to be safe while visiting .

We strongly urge you to contact the House Judiciary Committee and express your support for HB 2463. Please remind them that this bill not only helps non-residents, but will help Oregonians whose licenses would be recognized in many states if Oregon recognizes theirs. A sample message and contact information follow at the bottom of this page.

Oregon currently recognizes NO other state permits. This bill would change that and open up numerous other states to concealed carry by Oregon residents.

Five pro-gun bills requested by OFF have been introduced as well this week. You can see them on here. They are Senate Bills 567,568,569,573 and 603.  The sponsor for all these bills was Senator Brian Boquist. We will keep you informed on these bills’ progress.

One more note. We have received countless e-mails and phone calls about HR 45,

While this bill (in the US Congress) is troubling and extreme, there is no indication right now that it is going anywhere. If that changes, we will let you know immediately.

__________________________________________________________________

Dear Representative,

HB 2463 is a much needed change in Oregon law that would not only allow visitors to Oregon to protect themselves lawfully, but allow Oregon residents to have the same freedoms in many other states. I urge your support.

Yours,

_______________

___________________________________________________________________

House Reps Kim Thatcher and Jeff Barker have introduced legislation to protect the privacy of persons with concealed handgun licenses.

OFF has been working with legislators since prior to the session to get a bill introduced that would stop the malicious abuse of the records of license holders.

The Medford Mail Tribune started seeking these records after we assisted a Medford area teacher in her efforts to have her employer stop denying her rights as a CHL holder. (That case is currently on appeal)

The Tribune was attempting to get the names and private information of other teachers in the area. (The Tribune has editorialized against gun owners rights.) So far, the Sheriff has refused to disclose this information and a lawsuit is ongoing. (The court demanded that the Sheriff disclose the private information and the Sheriff has appealed.)

Recently an organization sought the lists to use for fundraising drives.

Now Representatives Thatcher and Barker have introduced HB 2727 (pdf)to put a stop to these abuses of privacy.We applaud their work on behalf of gun owners. Please let them  know you appreciate their efforts.

The bill has a lengthy list of cosponsors and is supported by the Oregon sheriffs across the state.

MARINE VETERAN KICKED OUT OF SCHOOL FOR POSSESSING FIREARMS

WOU STUDENT TRIED,CONVICTED AND SENTENCED.<

The WOU student who was falsely arrested and charged with possession of a firearm in a public building, had all his criminal charges dropped by the Polk County DA tonight.

The DA admitted no wrongdoing on his part, or on the part of the police who arrested Jeff Maxwell for a “crime” that does not exist.

In a statement released to OFF’s attorney, the DA said “I believe the Monmouth Police Department issued the citation in good faith and that there was an arguable violation. However, a careful reading of the statute and the facts led me to conclude the charge was not in the best interest of justice.”

“Not in the best interest of justice.”  There was NO CRIME. But it gets worse. Much worse.

The college still got to “try” Jeff Maxwell. And they did tonight.

The tribunal that tried Marine veteran Jeffery Maxwell laughed after suspending him from Western Oregon University and sentencing him to:

a “psychological evaluation stating he is not a threat to himself of others” and

a mandatory “ten page paper” ” with references, “citing, but not limited to:
1) the importance of following the law,even through civil disobedience.
2) the importance of accepting responsibility for one’s actions
3) and recognizing the impact possession of weapons on college campuses has on others.”

So, Maxwell has been told his lawful possession of a firearm on campus is evidence of mental illness and he must “confess his sins.”  Welcome to the new Politburo. Maxwell may as well been judged by the Hitler youth for his “thought crimes.”

Jeffery Maxwell’s “jury” were four unnamed students and one staff member of WOU.

The “prosecutor” was Patrick Moser moserp@wou.edu “Acting Coordinator of Campus Judicial Affairs”

Maxwell asked to have his “trial” open to the public, which is his right, but was denied.

The tribunal was told repeatedly that they lacked the authority to impose a rule dealing with firearms. But the children who sat in judgment of the veteran were not interested in the law or the facts. They were only interested in attacking and embarrassing a man who had committed no crime but had chosen to exercise his right to protect himself and others.

The “trial” was a sham. No one present even seemed to know what the “charge” was. When confronted by the fact that the school has no authority to make rules about firearms, they said that was “not relevant.” Then they said they were not charging Maxwell with having a firearm. When asked what they WERE charging him with, they seemed to not know. They then said they were charging him with having a “knife and a rifle in his car.”   When told they had no authority to make rules about guns in his car, they said THAT was not “relevant.”

The children who sat on Maxwell’s “jury”  and their staff advisors seemed to have no idea what they were actually charging Maxwell with. But they had no problem sentencing him. Gun owners, and all Americans should be outraged.

OFF is committed to continuing Maxwell’s defense. We are shocked and disgusted by the treatment he received by the staff and the students of WOU,

We ask your continued support of our legal battle for Jeff Maxwell. We promised Jeff what he promised the men he served with. We will not leave him behind.

Three gun related bills will be heard in the House Judiciary Committee on Feb.24th at 1pm in hearing room 357.

All three bills are positive changes for gun owners and we urge you to contact the House Judiciary Committee members and ask them to vote yes on all three bills. Also, please contact your own legislator if he or she is not a member of the committee and tell them that you support the bills and expect them to support the bills as well.

The three bills are;

HB 2463

This bill “Provides persons licensed to carry concealed handgun in another state with protections provided to persons with Oregon concealed handgun license.”

The value of this bill is obvious. With so many states now recognizing CHLs from other locations, Oregon is long overdue to get on board. We have made numerous attempts to achieve this in the past only to face legislative obstruction or vetoes. It’s time, and we urge its passage.

 

HB 2330

This bill is a bit more complicated, but very important to get Oregon law to make sense. Currently, a person who was convicted of only one felony, which did not involve a weapon or a homicide, can get his gun rights restored 15 years after being discharged from imprisonment, parole or probation. But, while that person can no longer be charged with “felon in possession” he would still be violating another statute that would make him guilty of misdemeanor unlawful possession of a firearm. Clearly this was never the intention of the legislature and is an error. This bill corrects that error and allows a person who made one mistake and has since led a law-abiding life to get his rights restored under Oregon law.

HB 2314

This bill requires that a person could not be convicted of unlawful firearms possession as the result of a past felony conviction, unless he knew of the felony conviction at the time he possessed the firearm. While this might seem like a no-brainer to many, the complicated machinations of the court very often leave a person unsure of what his conviction was actually for. In fact, we know of one case underway where a gun owner was charged with unlawful possession even though a previous charge had been reduced to a misdemeanor. The DA in the case is insisting that he was a “felon in possession” because the original charge was  a felony. The court reduced it to a misdemeanor, so naturally the accused person logically assumed he was not a “felon.”  The DA’s tortured interpretation of the law put this person in jeopardy, and this bill would correct these kinds of incidents.

Please contact the House Judiciary Committee and ask them to support these three bills.

A sample message and contact information follow:

__________________________________________________________________________

Dear Representative,

On Feb. 24th, you are scheduled to hear three bills in your House Judiciary Committee that would improve Oregon’s laws.

HB 2314 and HB 2330 clarify areas of Oregon law dealing with possession of firearms for persons with past felony convictions.  I strongly believe these bills would  provide needed corrections and improvements to Oregon law.

HB 2463 allows law-abiding visitors to Oregon to have the same access to self-defense they have in their own states.  With so many other states extending these rights to Oregonians, I believe it is long past time that Oregon reciprocated.

Please support all three of these important bills.

Yours,
_____________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Legislators Join OFF In Defense Of Lawful Gun Owners.

Representatives Kim Thatcher and Bruce Hanna joined OFF and the Oregon Firearms Educational Foundation today in defense of  a college student (and Marine Corps veteran) who was falsely arrested at Western Oregon University last week.

The student was charged with “possession of a firearm in a public building.” The college has barred him from classes and the state has charged him with the same crime. The student was involved in no unlawful activities nor was he engaged in any actions that would discredit a responsible gun owner. He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

There is one small problem. The student has a valid Oregon concealed handgun license. He is statutorily exempt from the prohibitions on gun possession in public buildings.

Apparently neither the college nor the Monmouth Police are acquainted with the law.

The student contacted us last week and we agreed to defend him against these charges, brought by people who seem incapable of reading.

The student is going to face a “hearing” at the college early next week and OFF and our attorney will be there. Our foundation has promised to defend the student and provide whatever legal assistance he requires.

This is an important case. Our foundation filed a lawsuit against the Oregon University System several years ago for the same attack on gun rights, but the court found that since the plaintiff had not been arrested or expelled, they would not consider the case.

This case is different. The WOU student was singled out and arrested in spite of the fact that he had committed no crime.

He has been trespassed off the school property and had his academic career damaged for a “crime ” that does not exist. We are committed to defending him.

It is ironic that at a time when when universities are begging for armed guards, some are also demanding that trained gun owners be disarmed.

No matter how this battle goes, it will be expensive. If you would like to make a tax deductible donation to our legal foundation to help us cover the costs of the student’s defense, we would be grateful for your help. You can donate here.

Please be sure to note that your donation is for OFEF so you receive a receipt for tax purposes.

What follows is an e-mail response from House Speaker Dave Hunt to people who have contacted him to express opposition to HB  2530.

HB 2530 would allow the Department of Human Services to dictate to foster parents, the manner in which they would be required to store, transport and use their firearms.

Hunt insists that the bill “in no way restricts a foster parent’s right to own guns.”  To no one’s surprise, Hunt has decided to play word games with the truth. Hunt seems to believe that gun owners can’t read.  The fact is, the bill turns over to the Department of Human Services, total dictatorial power to control the “storage, transportation and use of firearms and ammunition in the presence of children placed in a foster home.”

Somehow, Dave Hunt thinks that having a notoriously anti-gun state agency making rules about every aspect of gun ownership “in no way restricts a foster parent’s right to own guns.”

That’s like saying that you may own a car, but the state will tell you where, when and how often you can drive it, and then insist they are not restricting your right to own it. Looks like we are in for another long session of double talk.

It is simply absurd that the state would seek to discourage parents from caring for foster children by imposing rules that could very well leave those children defenseless in the case of a criminal attack. Hunt and his allies like to talk about “the children” but are clearly more interested in ramming through new restrictions on rights then they are in protecting Oregon’s neediest.

Please contact Hunt and tell him that you don’t want an agency that created rules forbidding toys that shot ping pong balls, making rules for every aspect of gun ownership. Tell him to can the double talk and kill the bill.

Contact info and a sample message follow.

________________________________________________________

Dear Speaker Hunt,

I have seen your response to voters who oppose HB 2530. I am disappointed that you would choose to play word games instead of addressing the problems with the bill. You claim that the bill will “in no way restrict a foster parent’s right to own guns.This is simply nonsense. If DHS creates the rules  regulating the storage, transportation and use of firearms and ammunition, “ownership” becomes meaningless.

Please stop using your office to placate anti-gun state agencies and stand up for the rights of foster parents.

Yours,

_______________________________

Dave Hunt  rep.davehunt@state.or.us
900 Court St. NE, H-269
Salem, OR 97301
Phone:
503-986-1440

From: Rep Hunt
To:XXX
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 4:18 PM
Subject: RE: NO HB 2530
Dear Mr.XXXX,

Thank you for contacting me with your concerns about House Bill 2530. Your feedback is important to me and helps inform the actions I take in the Legislature.

I share your commitment to protecting the right of Oregonians to own firearms. Let me assure you that this bill in no way restricts a foster parent’s right to own guns. The specific language of the bill says the following:
“The Department may not deny or revoke certification of a foster home on the basis that a person possesses firearms or ammunition or is licensed under ORS 166.291 and ORS 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun”
This language explicitly protects the right of foster parents to own guns. Specifically, House Bill 2530 relates to the storage of guns and related issues, but does not infringe on the right to own firearms.

It is the responsibility of the Department of Human Services to ensure that children in foster homes are safe. This bill would grant case workers the right to cite when guns are not stored appropriately. This bill gives them the ability to make rules around the proper storage of guns so that they are kept out of the reach of children.

Those who choose to be foster parents are giving the greatest possible gift to a child in need, a house and a safe place to stay. We have no intention of discouraging these generous individuals from continuing to do this meaningful work.

Thanks for writing me. I hope this clears up the intention of this bill. It is an honor representing you in the Oregon House of Representatives and I hope you will continue to write me about issues that are important to you.

Sincerely,

Dave Hunt
State Representative
Speaker of the House
http://www.state.leg.or.us

Representative Sara Gelser has introduced the first bill attacking the rights of gun owners, but her bill also attacks the rights of foster parents.

HB 2530 gives the Department of Human Services the right to dictate to foster parents how they can own firearms. In addition to being another attack against Oregon’s preemption statute, it is a slap in the face of all the Oregonians who open their homes to the state’s neediest children.

In October 2007, OFF met with legislators,staffers and bureaucrats to resolve the problem of DHS making unlawful rules for foster parents. At the time, DHS had rules so ridiculous and draconian, that a foster family could not have a toy that shot ping pong balls or marshmallows. Gelser wants to give DHS the right to create such rules again.

Because of the intercession of former House Rep. Jerry Krummel and his aide, Dawn Phillips, along with House Rep. Jeff Barker, DHS was forced to back down on its unlawful and dangerous mandates. But at the meeting was Representative Sara Gelser.

Her position then was that foster parents should not be allowed to have access to the firearms that might very well be used to save the lives of the children they had taken in.

At the meeting she was repeatedly asked to provide a single example of a foster family that had handled firearms irresponsibly. She could not provide even one.

Now she has sponsored a bill to attack the people who are stepping up to provide a home for children who would otherwise be at the mercy of the streets. This is unconscionable.

Please take a moment to contact House Speaker Dave Hunt and let him know that attacks on foster parents, at a time when we need as many foster parents as possible, are unwarranted and uncalled for.

Contact info and sample message follow:

_____________________________________

Dear Speaker Hunt,

Sara Gelser’s bill, HB 2530, is an insult to the people who have stepped up to care for Oregon’s most defenseless and needy children. It is hard to believe that in these times of economic crisis, the legislature would be considering  a bill that would discourage people from caring for children who desperately need a home. Please use your power as Speaker to stop HB 2530.

Sincerely,

_____________________________________

House Speaker Dave Hunt:
rep.davehunt@state.or.us
_______________________________________

Eric Holder, The New Chief Law Enforcement Officer.

Eric Holder was confirmed as the new US Attorney General today.

Holder is a vicious anti-gun partisan and a person who was happy to trade presidential pardons for some cold cash, or hoped for votes, to the Clintons.

This man will now be in charge of prosecuting gun owners.

Senator Leahy, a Vermont Democrat,made this astonishing comment:

“That strong, bipartisan vote in favor was a statement that members from both sides of the aisle recognize that Mr. Holder has the character, integrity and independence to be Attorney General,It is a statement that we all want to restore the integrity and competence of the Justice Department and to restore another critical component — the American people’s confidence in federal law enforcement.”

Every Democrat Senator and 17 Republicans voted in favor of turning over the Justice Department to a man who expedited “get out of jail free” cards to anyone with the loot to grease the Clinton machine and defended the murders of the Branch Davidians and the abduction of Elian Gonzalez.  Welcome to “integrity Obama style.”

The Clinton machine is back. Bring cash.

Both Oregon Senators, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley signed onto Holder’s confirmation.The entire vote count can be seen here.

1.29.09  HOLDER CONFIRMED BY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, FULL SENATE TO VOTE NEXT.

The confirmation of Eric Holder to be the chief law enforcement officer of America is profoundly disturbing.

His record of believing that Americans have no right to own a firearm, and his defense of such actions as the killing of the Branch Davidians, should make every gun owner, and every citizen, very fearful.

His history of exchanging pardons for payoffs should outrage every American. But unfortunately, few American Senators are concerned about standards. On the committee that approved Holder’s confirmation, only Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK) and John Cornyn (R-TX) voted against him.

He now has the public and vocal support of Arlen Specter and Orin Hatch. The NRA will not oppose his nomination and will not use this confirmation vote when it rates Senators.

This train is most certainly rolling.

Oregon now has two anti-gun senators. Ron Wyden’s antipathy towards guns and gun owners is legendary. Jeff Merkley has yet to amass a record as egregious as Wyden’s but has shown no interest in bucking his party’s line.There is little likelihood that either Senator will oppose Holder based on the concerns of gun owners.

But Holder’s problems go well beyond his hatred for gun rights. Please take a moment to contact Wyden and Merkley and remind them that Holder is a throwback to the endless corruption of the Clinton years. Holder is certainly not “change.”

A sample message and contact info follow:

_____________________________________________________________________

Dear Senator,

I am deeply troubled that the US Senate will soon be considering Eric Holder to be our next Attorney General.

The current administration was elected on a promise of “change.”  If enlisting beltway insiders who approved pardons for payoffs is “change” it’s change we can do without.

It makes no sense to decry the behavior of past administrations and then hire someone who is this ethically challenged. I will consider any vote for Eric Holder to be a vote against honest government.

Very truly yours,

____________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Ron Wyden   http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/   (webform)

Jeff Merkley   senator@merkley.senate.gov

The Wolves Are At The Door.

Obama is moving swiftly to build an administration that will reflect his statist worldview. The second Clinton administration is forming.

Gun hating Hillary Clinton (Billing records? What billing records?) has been confirmed as the new Secretary of State, and Timothy Geithner, a tax evader who spent 5 years at the Federal Reserve Bank, but had no clue about the collapse of our economy, is about to be the boss of the Treasury Department, charged with… repairing our economy.

If you’re not terrified, you’re not paying attention. But for gun owners, the news is far more ominous.

Clinton  Obama is determined to appoint, as head of the “Justice” department, a man whose unbridled hatred for gun owners is legendary. We simply must do everything we can to stop this nightmare from happening.

Obama’s pick for Attorney General, Eric Holder, is so completely a tool of the freedom-hating establishment that you can rest assured he will do all he can to eliminate gun rights in America. Holder was the second in command for Janet Reno when she ordered the murderous gassing, burning, and shooting of dozens of women and children at Waco.

He demonstrated his total lack of ethics when he expedited the pardon of a felon who just happened to toss a yacht load of money to the Clintons.  He bragged about the “compassionate” treatment Elian Gonzalez received at the point of a federal agent’s sub-machine gun.  He submitted briefs to the Supreme Court urging them to declare your right to own a firearm void. A confirmation of Holder is an express lane back to the days when innocents could be gunned down by government thugs with impunity.

Even people who don’t care about gun rights should be horrified that this person is in line to run the Justice Department.

Please, no matter how busy you are, take a few minutes to let your Senators know that you are outraged that they would consider this man for a job of such importance.
Let them know that the right hand man of Janet Reno is most certainly NOT “Change you can believe in.”
Several Republicans have postponed confirmation of Holder. They did not do this because Holder is a committed enemy of gun owners, but it still gives us a little precious time. Call or e-mail Senators Wyden and Merkley right now. The clock is running out on freedom.

A sample message and contact info follows:

_____________________________________________________________________

Dear Senator,

Eric Holder is not “change we can believe in.” He is more of the same ethically bankrupt, “favors for money” politics from the past.  I truly expect better from you and this administration. I urge you to vote  “NO” on Eric Holder’s confirmation.

Truly yours,

__________________

_______________________________________________________________________

Ron Wyden

Jeff Merkley

Clearly Obama is wasting no time promoting his gun grabbing agenda. The White House website already lists some of his plans:

“They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent. “

Eric Holder, Obama’s pick to run the Justice Department is nothing short of a nightmare for gun owners.

Holder has made a career out of attacking gun owners’ rights and believes you have no individual right to own a gun.  Now is the time to let Jeff Merkley, your new US Senator. know that you oppose Holder’s nomination and will consider any vote to confirm him an open assault on your rights. There is not much time. Please contact Merkley now.  Contact information and a sample e-mail follow.

_____________________________________________________________

 

Dear Senator Merkley,

Eric Holder has made no secret of his animosity towards gun owners and the Second Amendment. His behavior during the Clinton administration demonstrates that his judgment is guided by politics not principles.  A vote to confirm Holder is a vote against the rights of gun owners in your state. I urge you in the strongest possible terms to say “NO” to Eric Holder.

Very truly yours,

__________________

____________________________________________________________

B40B DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON DC 20510
DC Phone: 202-224-3753
E-mail: senator@merkley.senate.gov
Portland Senate Office
One World Trade Center
121 SW Salmon Street, Suite 1250
Portland, OR 97204
503-326-3386

Sarah Brady’s Wish List For Obama

Happy New Year.

As you know, the issue of concealed handgun licenses being made public has gotten a lot of attention lately.

The issue first surfaced as a result of the anti-gun, “Medford Mail Tribune” seeking all the CHL holders names in Jackson County in order to find out the names of any teachers who might have CHL’s. The Jackson County Sheriff refused to reveal the names and chose instead to protect the privacy of license holders.

As you might expect, the Tribune sued to get this information and won in court. The Jackson County Sheriff, in an effort to protect CHL holders from having their names, addresses and other personal information turned over to a newspaper with a vocally anti-gun agenda, appealed. That case is awaiting a hearing in Oregon’s Appeals Court.

Since then, an organization called “Oregon Gun Owners” has demanded the names and addresses of all CHL holders state wide and has used that information to send out fundraising letters in an attempt to build a database of gun owners.

As a result of that, many sheriffs are refusing to divulge this information. Even Clackamas County Sheriff, Craig Roberts, who turned over all the personal information on CHL holders to “Oregon Gun Owners” has changed his policy and is now asking CHL holders to inform him if they want their private information to be kept private. (A little late to be sure, but it’s a start.)

OFF is working with legislators on a bill to protect the privacy of CHL holders. We have received a draft and expect it to be introduced very early in the session which starts on Monday, January 12th. It may even be “pre-session filed.”

Now, Josephine County Sheriff Gil Gilberston has agreed to a meeting with concerned gun owners, and others. What follows is the information about the meeting that we have received from OFF member Damon Mancuso who was responsible for making this meeting happen.

“An Evening With Sheriff Gil Gilbertson
Should concealed handgun permit holders information remain private? Should the media be allowed to publish the names and address of permit holders?
Sheriff Gilbertson recently stated his opinion on this issue, and his strong belief in the Constitution, specifically the 2nd amendment.
This will be the central topic of discussion, as well as other 2nd amendment related issues, such as “restricted shooting districts”. This will be an open forum, with questions from the audience welcome. As time allows we will also discuss the ongoing funding issue, and the future of Josephine County Law Enforcement.
Plan on attending this informative meeting and learn more about this important issue, the Sheriff’s position, and how this affects you. “

Tuesday, January 13th
7:00pm-8:30pm
Redwood Grange
1830 Redwood Ave, Grants Pass

For info call 541-291-3158 or e-mail mancuso@grantspass.com

CHANGES MADE FOR BACKGROUND CHECKS

UPDATED JUNE 2011.

Since early 2011, we have received a spike in complaints about delays and denials once again.So the following information is out of date. Although OSP had improved their performance doing background checks, we are back where we started in terms of slow service and unjustified delays.  A bill we drafted in the 2011 legislative session which would have turned over background checks to the NICS system died in the Ways and Means Committee after state workers from the ID unit of OSP testified that if NICS handled the background checks they might lose their jobs and Oregon’s economy would collapse. The Oregon legislature caved.

For several years, OFF has received a large volume of correspondence from Oregonians who had been delayed for firearms purchases for reasons the buyers often could not understand.

It has always been OFF’s position that background checks and requests for permission to exercise a right turn that right into a privilege, but until we can do away with these unconstitutional burdens we believe it is important to prevent as many obstacles to gun possession as possible.

At our request, the Oregon State Police ID unit agreed to review their polices and procedures concerning background checks.

OFF had several meetings with the OSP ID Unit and we are pleased to be able to report substantial progress and cooperation from the Oregon State Police.

OSP has rewritten their guide for gun dealers in Oregon and removed errors such as a statement that a transfer could not be made without an approval. In fact, in the absence of denial, transfers can take place after three business days have elapsed even if there is a “delay” or “pend.”

The new manual reflects this and should be helpful for dealers who were unsure whether they could, in fact, deliver a firearm before an “approval” was issued. If you are experiencing delays because a dealer won’t release a firearm without an approval, you can take them a copy of this letter from the State Police clearly saying the transfer MAY take place. They are not required to release it, but if they refuse you should find a smarter dealer.

The State Police will be sending a letter out to all Oregon gun dealers with information including new phone numbers that buyers can use to request information about delays and denials. The State Police have informed us that they plan to have an improved response to those inquiries.

OSP will also be providing dealers with handouts to give to customers with contact info in the event of a delay or denial.

For buyers who have questions about delays and denials, the new number to request information is 503-373-1808 EX 327. The State Police have promised to respond to questions about delays and denials promptly.

OSP also plans to post all this information and current documents on their website.

OREGON APPEALS COURT DEALS MAJOR BLOW TO GUN RIGHTS IN OREGON

An Oregon Appeals Court decision has found that your car is now considered a “public place.” That means that possessing a loaded firearm in a vehicle may be considered a crime if the locality in which you are traveling has a ban on open loaded carry.

This ruling is bizarre in light of how Oregon law defines “public place.” ORS 161.015 defines public place this way:

(10) “Public place” means a place to which the general public has access and includes, but is not limited to, hallways, lobbies and other parts of apartment houses and hotels not constituting rooms or apartments designed for actual residence, and highways, streets, schools, places of amusement, parks, playgrounds and premises used in connection with public passenger transportation.

The case, Bryan Ward VS State of Oregon, dealt with an arrest, by a Portland Police officer, of a person who had an unconcealed handgun in his car.

It has always been our position that open carry in a vehicle was clearly protected by Oregon law. ORS 166.250 clearly states that except for CHL holders, it is concealed carry in a vehicle that is prohibited. It further states that the prohibition against concealed, loaded carry in a vehicle does not apply to”a recreational vessel or recreational vehicle while used, for whatever period of time, as residential quarters.”

The Appeals Court decision turns on its head Oregon’s preemption statute which allows only the state legislature to regulate possession of firearms, except for loaded carry in public places. If your car is now considered a “public place” will a law enforcement officer need a warrant to search it?

The Court concludes “When read together, ORS 166.173 and 161.015(1) clearly allow local governments to regulate the possession of loaded firearms on their streets and highways.”

But ORS 166.173 states”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.” and 161.015, as noted above, clearly defines a “public place” as a place to which the general public has access. ” It is not ambiguous in any way.

The Court also reaches conclusions that seem to have no bearing on this case at all. In their decision, they state the following :

“Moreover, ORS 166.173(2)(c)–which exempts persons licensed to carry concealed weapons from local loaded firearms regulations–demonstrates that the legislature anticipated situations in which persons may possess concealed, loaded firearms in a public place. The legislature chose to exempt such persons from local regulations based on their possession of a certain type of permit, despite the fact that a concealed firearm, although otherwise in a “public place,” is not kept in a place to which the “general public has access.”

But this case is not about concealed handguns. CHL holders are exempt from many restrictions that non-license holders are subject to, and the legislature made very specific rules about vehicles and firearms possession which clearly allow open carry without a license while in a car. If a car is a “public place” then why even have laws specifically dealing with possession in a vehicle when the limits on carrying in “public places” would apply  to cars anyway?

Oregon’s preemption law was created specifically to prevent a person from inadvertently breaking the law as he moved around the state. This ruling is a major setback for gun rights in Oregon and puts many people at risk simply by crossing into a town or city that has onerous and unposted rules. OFF is considering what further legal action can be taken, and in the meantime warns gun owners to be very careful when traveling in Oregon.