CHL Questions

[Chromaflage]

During a CHL class, taught by a volunter Sgt, a couple statements were made that have been echoing in my head.

1. He stated that an assistant DA once told him that although you may not be prosecuted criminally for a self-defense shoot, there is a 100% chance that a civil suit would be brought against the shooter. What are your thoughts on this comment?

2. (a bit more complicated) He also stated that Indian reservations do not recognize an Oregon CHL and you must obtain permission from a tribal judge in order to carry concealed on an Indian reservation. So, I'm wondering if anyone has ever attempted to obtain permission from a tribal judge. I've looked at the Warm Springs rules, and they only specifically apply to "Indians" as stated in the rules. But here's a scenario. You have a concealed handgun and launch a driftboat just off Highway 26 at the ramp in Warm Springs. You are now carrying concealed in tribal land. Float away, your under BLM jurisdiction. Float under the bridge, on one side of the river, your in BLM jurisdiction, on the other side, you're on tribal land. While floating - still BLM. Looking for comments and thoughts on the implications here.

Thanks!

[rrust1]

1. He's right. Probably will face a civil suit from recipient or his family. That doesn't mean you lose, just means court costs and attorneys fees (I guess you do lose). But if you win, you get those costs back (at least in Oregon) and a small prevailing party fee.

2. Not sure how it works concealed or open carry on the reservations. But think about this, there is an exception when a licensed fisherman is fishing in Oregon that you do not have to possess a CHL to carry concealed at that time.

See ORS 166.260 (2)(b) Licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing, or while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.

It would be nice to know how possession, concealed or not, and provided for as legal without a permit under Oregon law, is treated in those rare circumstances when you cross reservation or similar lands (eg Some National Parks prohibit firearms.)

[GraphiteZen]

Originally Posted by rrust1

See ORS 166.260 (2)(b) Licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing, or while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.

It would be nice to know how possession, concealed or not, and provided for as legal without a permit under Oregon law, is treated in those rare circumstances when you cross reservation or similar lands (eg Some National Parks prohibit firearms.)

I asked a gun seller about this, and he gave me a very interesting reply.

"Would you consider "returning from" as walking from your boat to retrieve your truck."

His point was obvious. It could be argued that once you arrived at your vehicle, your fishing expedition could be considered over, as "to" and "from" aren't specified. They could argue further and claim that once you reached the safety of your vehicle you were no longer subject to the dangers that existed while in the wilderness, so would therefore have no justifiable reason to be carrying a concealed weapon.

[baltz526]

Originally Posted by GraphiteZen

I asked a gun seller about this, and he gave me a very interesting reply.

"Would you consider "returning from" as walking from your boat to retrieve your truck."

His point was obvious. It could be argued that once you arrived at your vehicle, your fishing expedition could be considered over, as "to" and "from" aren't specified. They could argue further and claim that once you reached the safety of your vehicle you were no longer subject to the dangers that existed while in the wilderness, so would therefore have no justifiable reason to be carrying a concealed weapon.

interesting! i live in my home, if i'm going hunting 1 mile from my house. what difference is there between my getting the 1 mile on a horse, or a auto? if on a horse, and i carry concealed, is this different than if i'm in my auto and carry concealed? while coming or going hunting?

[GraphiteZen]

Originally Posted by baltz526

interesting! i live in my home, if i'm going hunting 1 mile from my house. what difference is there between my getting the 1 mile on a horse, or a auto? if on a horse, and i carry concealed, is this different than if i'm in my auto and carry concealed? while coming or going hunting?

I don't think that it can be defined until either a cop cites you for carrying concealed and you have to defend yourself in court, or the intricacies are examined if you end up using it on a human in defense.

With that said, the danger of you being cited for a concealed weapon apparently exists if you are not actually on the water or sitting in a bush clanging antlers or something.

I might be way off as there could be something else in the document that would serve to further define the actuality of locations or destinations or whatever.

[baltz526]

166.260 Persons not affected by ORS 166.250. (1) ORS 166.250 does not apply to or affect:
(a) Sheriffs, constables, marshals, police officers, whether active or honorably retired, parole and probation officers or other duly appointed peace officers.
(b) Any person summoned by any such officer to assist in making arrests or preserving the peace, while said person so summoned is actually engaged in assisting the officer.
(c) The possession or transportation by any merchant of unloaded firearms as merchandise.
(d) Active or reserve members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard or Marine Corps of the United States, or of the National Guard, when on duty.
(e) Organizations which are by law authorized to purchase or receive weapons described in ORS 166.250 from the United States, or from this state.
(f) Duly authorized military or civil organizations while parading, or the members thereof when going to and from the places of meeting of their organization.
(g) A corrections officer while transporting or accompanying an individual convicted of or arrested for an offense and confined in a place of incarceration or detention while outside the confines of the place of incarceration or detention.
(h) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.
(2) Except for persons who are otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm under ORS 166.250 (1)(c) or 166.270, ORS 166.250 does not apply to or affect:
(a) Members of any club or organization, for the purpose of practicing shooting at targets upon the established target ranges, whether public or private, while such members are using any of the firearms referred to in ORS 166.250 upon such target ranges, or while going to and from such ranges.
(b) Licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing, or while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.
(3) The exceptions listed in subsection (1)(b) to (h) of this section constitute affirmative defenses to a charge of violating ORS 166.250. [Amended by 1977 c.207 §1; 1991 c.67 §36; 1993 c.735 §1; 1995 c.670 §2; 1999 c.1040 §3]

[baltz526]

(a) Members of any club or organization, for the purpose of practicing shooting at targets upon the established target ranges, whether public or private, while such members are using any of the firearms referred to in ORS 166.250 upon such target ranges, or while going to and from such ranges.
(b) Licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing, or while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.

this what it says, exactly. so i believe (while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.) expeditions start and end, at my place of residence or place i store my expedition equipment. expeditions do not start or end where i park my truck. they start and end where i pack my gear to go on the expedition

[evreydayjay]

To make this easy; Oregon is an open carry state. So as long as your firearm is in plain site you can carry just about anywhere anytime.

I took the CHL class and our instructors said that the reservations were considered their own country and that they just don't allow concealed weapons.

[Big Unit]

Talked to a sporting goods guy last night. Don't have handloads in your personal defense gun...looks like specific intent. Jury would frown on that he said.

BU

[runningfox]

[QUOTE=Big Unit;2440779]Talked to a sporting goods guy last night. Don't have handloads in your personal defense gun...looks like specific intent. Jury would frown on that he said.

Why would hand loads make a difference over factory loads regarding specific intent? That doesn't make sense to me, self defense is self defense, what about hydra shok or black talon, factory loads?

[Big Unit]

[quote=runningfox;2440805]

Originally Posted by Big Unit

Talked to a sporting goods guy last night. Don't have handloads in your personal defense gun...looks like specific intent. Jury would frown on that he said.

Why would hand loads make a difference over factory loads regarding specific intent? That doesn't make sense to me, self defense is self defense, what about hydra shok or black talon, factory loads?

Just relaying the info. I quizzed him when I was confused too. He said an attorney would turn it around.

????

BU

[Don Becker]

Originally Posted by rrust1

1. He's right. Probably will face a civil suit from recipient or his family. That doesn't mean you lose, just means court costs and attorneys fees (I guess you do lose). But if you win, you get those costs back (at least in Oregon) and a small prevailing party fee. . . . .

(emphasis added)

If you believe this also pertains to defense costs (attorney fees, etc), you are fooling yourself. (I'm unsure about the comparatively minor court costs and prevailing fee.) It just isn't true. I really, really wish it was true. 'Patently unfair but anyone can sue you for just about anything and you get to defend yourself or otherwise extract yourself at your own (or, if you have coverage, your insurance company's) cost. Suits against persons or entities, in Oregon, for frivolous litigation almost never go anywhere. Don

[jvp]

Originally Posted by GraphiteZen

I asked a gun seller about this, and he gave me a very interesting reply.

"Would you consider "returning from" as walking from your boat to retrieve your truck."

His point was obvious. It could be argued that once you arrived at your vehicle, your fishing expedition could be considered over, as "to" and "from" aren't specified. They could argue further and claim that once you reached the safety of your vehicle you were no longer subject to the dangers that existed while in the wilderness, so would therefore have no justifiable reason to be carrying a concealed weapon.

you are safer in the wilderness than the parking lot. just as if you leave the main parking of a hiking trail you are safer once you have gone beyond the first mile. predators don't want to work that hard at getting a victim.

[shorthair]

While I don't like it I believe he was correct on #2 as reservations are considered sovergin nations by treaty.

[Ifishsum]

Personally I think the whole hand loads issue is overblown - the idea is that a lawyer could argue to the jury that you hand loaded some special killer round because you were intent on murdering someone. I'm not sure if this tactic has ever been used but there's a lot of discussion on gun boards about it. I do carry factory loads for SD, but for different reasons.

In the unlikely event that you ever did have to shoot someone in self defense, I can guarantee that you'll want a lawyer - no matter how clean the shoot was.

[jvp]

Originally Posted by shorthair

While I don't like it I believe he was correct on #2 as reservations are considered sovergin nations by treaty.

rant rant

[ommedia]

True, to a point.

Cities may have their own laws on the books that trump county or state laws. You can not open carry in the city of Portland or Gresham for example.

Originally Posted by evreydayjay

To make this easy; Oregon is an open carry state. So as long as your firearm is in plain site you can carry just about anywhere anytime.

I took the CHL class and our instructors said that the reservations were considered their own country and that they just don't allow concealed weapons.

[ommedia]

Our instructor this last week told our class something I found very confusing.

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and nobody has a CHL, the driver or owner can get charged"

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and someone has a CHL, everyone in the vehicle without a CHL can get charged"

just seems odd that I could be charged for riding with you and you have a valid CHL and a gun under the seat.

[skeet]

Not sure if this counts but I was pulled over on Hwy 26 by a warm springs officer and He stated that I was on reservation property. I gave him my permit and license. He asked if I was carrying and I replied yes. He never gave it another thought. Maybe just a nice guy. Not sure if he could have cited me or not.

[FromTheWoods]

I haven't purchased a store-bought round for my handgun in over 25 years. If it happens that I use that gun in defense, let the courts make a fuss that I'm shooting reloads. I figure a quarter century of habit might trump their assertions that I was stalking with intent to maximize perpetrator-tissue destruction--or whatever they would care to call it.

[nobrownline]

Originally Posted by ommedia

Our instructor this last week told our class something I found very confusing.

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and nobody has a CHL, the driver or owner can get charged"

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and someone has a CHL, everyone in the vehicle without a CHL can get charged"

just seems odd that I could be charged for riding with you and you have a valid CHL and a gun under the seat.

I can tell you for a fact this is true in Wa. When I was pulled over while going fishing with my wife the cop told me if the gun is not on the person with the permit (ie in holster or pocket) then anybody can reach it and therefor can be cited. It ended up costing over $500 dollars because my wife didnt have her permit.

[rrust1]

Originally Posted by Don Becker

(emphasis added)

If you believe this also pertains to defense costs (attorney fees, etc), you are fooling yourself. (I'm unsure about the comparatively minor court costs and prevailing fee.) It just isn't true. I really, really wish it was true. 'Patently unfair but anyone can sue you for just about anything and you get to defend yourself or otherwise extract yourself at your own (or, if you have coverage, your insurance company's) cost. Suits against persons or entities, in Oregon, for frivolous litigation almost never go anywhere. Don

Don,

Not necessarily. The ORS provides in many instances for attorneys fees for the prevailing party, at the discretion of the judge. I believe ORS 20.075 will explain it the best.

ORS 20.075 Factors to be considered by court in awarding attorney fees; limitation on appellate review of attorney fee award. (1) A court shall consider the following factors in determining whether to award attorney fees in any case in which an award of attorney fees is authorized by statute and in which the court has discretion to decide whether to award attorney fees:
(a) The conduct of the parties in the transactions or occurrences that gave rise to the litigation, including any conduct of a party that was reckless, willful, malicious, in bad faith or illegal.
(b) The objective reasonableness of the claims and defenses asserted by the parties.
(c) The extent to which an award of an attorney fee in the case would deter others from asserting good faith claims or defenses in similar cases.
(d) The extent to which an award of an attorney fee in the case would deter others from asserting meritless claims and defenses.
(e) The objective reasonableness of the parties and the diligence of the parties and their attorneys during the proceedings.
(f) The objective reasonableness of the parties and the diligence of the parties in pursuing settlement of the dispute.
(g) The amount that the court has awarded as a prevailing party fee under ORS 20.190.
(h) Such other factors as the court may consider appropriate under the circumstances of the case.
(2) A court shall consider the factors specified in subsection (1) of this section in determining the amount of an award of attorney fees in any case in which an award of attorney fees is authorized or required by statute. In addition, the court shall consider the following factors in determining the amount of an award of attorney fees in those cases:
(a) The time and labor required in the proceeding, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved in the proceeding and the skill needed to properly perform the legal services.
(b) The likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the acceptance of the particular employment by the attorney would preclude the attorney from taking other cases.
(c) The fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services.
(d) The amount involved in the controversy and the results obtained.
(e) The time limitations imposed by the client or the circumstances of the case.
(f) The nature and length of the attorney’s professional relationship with the client.
(g) The experience, reputation and ability of the attorney performing the services.
(h) Whether the fee of the attorney is fixed or contingent.
(3) In any appeal from the award or denial of an attorney fee subject to this section, the court reviewing the award may not modify the decision of the court in making or denying an award, or the decision of the court as to the amount of the award, except upon a finding of an abuse of discretion.
(4) Nothing in this section authorizes the award of an attorney fee in excess of a reasonable attorney fee. [1995 c.618 §6; 2001 c.417 §3]

I understand that this must be statutorily provided for, but what is true is that this applies under many civil suit circumstances in Oregon. That said, it is still discretionary and you must win to have a shot at them, but they are available in our state.

[Chromaflage]

Just because the statute MIGHT allow for the recovery of attorney fees, there is no guarantee that you will be able to collect and you still have to put up the money up front. But, yes, it seems that the provisions are certainly there.

[rrust1]

Chromoflage--

I agree completely. It is not a win-win. It stinks that you may have to be out of pocket on attorneys fees. But, it is better than not having a shot at recovery. (no pun intended)

[huntntrap]

You guys need to make sure that these guys giving the classes know what they are talking about. first the CHL give you the right to carry a concealed handgun. yes you can be charged for concealed weapon because there is no license for them they are spring assisted knives, double edge knives,centrifical assisted knives,and brass knuckles.
everbody get hung up on the differance so when asking Questions make sure you know what your asking.

[Catch 22]

Going to and from hunting/fishing is OK. Not going to the girlfriends house or the sporting goods store 8 miles out of the way. You are legal in route. As in direct route. Same for going to the shooting range. BUT YOU MUST BE A MEMBER OF THE CLUB/RANGE. People seem to miss that.

My understanding is unless you have a license or meet the above criteria:

A handgun in a case needs to be in the trunk. If you drive an SUV or type rig that has no trunk, it needs to be in plain sight and out of the case preferably on the passenger seat.
A rifle can be loaded, chambered and safety off if you want and in the passenger seat or under a blanket. It does not fall under the concealed issue. Yes I know this isn't safe. I'm talking legal not safety.

[GraphiteZen]

Originally Posted by Catch 22

Going to and from hunting/fishing is OK. Not going to the girlfriends house or the sporting goods store 8 miles out of the way. You are legal in route. As in direct route. Same for going to the shooting range.

A handgun in a case needs to be in the trunk. If you drive an SUV or type rig that has no trunk, it needs to be in plain sight and out of the case preferably on the passenger seat.

Don't you also have to unload the magazine? When I transport mine to and from fishing, it's on the seat with the slide open and the unloaded magazine sitting next to it. I started transporting like this long ago based on common sense and have since been told by an ex-officer that it's the "correct" way in Oregon.

[baltz526]

[quote=Catch 22;2441831] Same for going to the shooting range. BUT YOU MUST BE A MEMBER OF THE CLUB/RANGE. People seem to miss that.

quote] this is not what the above ORS states. it states :
(a) Members of any club or organization.....) if you are a card carrying member of an organization like the NRA, going to or from a public or private shooting range is covered

[Don Becker]

Originally Posted by rrust1

Don,

Not necessarily. The ORS provides in many instances for attorneys fees for the prevailing party, at the discretion of the judge. I believe ORS 20.075 will explain it the best. . . .

Thank you very much for pointing-out my misstatement. You are exactly correct and I had just forgotten that. Had I had my head fully screwed-on this morning, the point I would have made instead would have look more like this:

Originally Posted by Chromaflage

Just because the statute MIGHT allow for the recovery of attorney fees, there is no guarantee that you will be able to collect and you still have to put up the money up front. But, yes, it seems that the provisions are certainly there.

and, would have gone on to say that even when attorney fees are allowed they are truly laughable (a cruel joke the court plays on you) when comparing actual attorney costs to what the court allows.

Don

[Uncle ted]

Originally Posted by skeet

Not sure if this counts but I was pulled over on Hwy 26 by a warm springs officer and He stated that I was on reservation property. I gave him my permit and license. He asked if I was carrying and I replied yes. He never gave it another thought. Maybe just a nice guy. Not sure if he could have cited me or not.

my thinking (no law or legal basis) if you are on the border of the reservation you wont get hassled unless a. the guy is a jerk or b. you are being a jerk. now if you are way inside the reservation i think they would hostel you about it but not right on the border that people normally not from the reservation travel like hw 26 just my

[Chromaflage]

Yesterday, I called Warm Springs reservation. I talked to three people who could not answer my question. I left a message for a fourth, but they never returned my call.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Chromaflage

Yesterday, I called Warm Springs reservation. I talked to three people who could not answer my question. I left a message for a fourth, but they never returned my call.

Who did you talk to? You can call the PD directly at 541-553-3272. You could go straight to the top and talk with the Police Chief, Carmen Smith.

[Dragonsden73]

Watch this video and come to your own conclusion on your second question:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by GraphiteZen

I asked a gun seller about this, and he gave me a very interesting reply.

"Would you consider "returning from" as walking from your boat to retrieve your truck."

His point was obvious. It could be argued that once you arrived at your vehicle, your fishing expedition could be considered over, as "to" and "from" aren't specified. They could argue further and claim that once you reached the safety of your vehicle you were no longer subject to the dangers that existed while in the wilderness, so would therefore have no justifiable reason to be carrying a concealed weapon.

Naw I don't think so! (nor do at least some OSP officers)

Here's a case in point where a friend of mine ALMOST got busted for CC without a CHL.

He was driving his P.U. on Hwy 217 over near Tigard. He got pulled over by an OSP officer for a dead tailight.

During the course of discussion (and after running a check on him, which turned out all o.k.) the officer asked him if he had any firearms in his vehicle?

My friend admitted that yes, he did have a loaded .22 Revolver under the seat of his truck. (Now it's Big Problem time! )

The officer, not really wanting to arrest him on a potential felony violation made the statement, "Did you know that under Oregon's ORS, that IF you've hunting or fishing or travelling TO or FROM hunting or fishing events that you ARE permitted to carry a Handgun "Concealed"?

He then went on to ask, "Do you have a valid Hunting or Fishing License on you?"

And he followed it up by asking, "Would you by any chance happen to be travelling TO or FROM Hunting or Fishing at this time?"

To which my friend showed his Combo License to the officer and told him, "Yes, I'm coming back from a fishing trip...just heading home, right now"

They both let out a sigh of relief and the officer reminded my friend of the seriousness of of having a loaded concealed handgun inside his vehicle WITHOUT a CHL.

Having my friend relate the above incident was the first I'd ever heard of the "Hunting or Fishing" clause in the ORS.

[CombinationLicense]

Question #1 is exactly why Oregon needs to adopt the "Castle Doctrine" legislation passed recently in Florida. Here's an excerpt from the NRA article describing it:

Florida's "Castle Doctrine" law does the following:
It provides that persons using force authorized by law shall not be prosecuted for using such force. It also prohibits criminals and their families from suing victims for injuring or killing the criminals who have attacked them. In short, it gives rights back to law-abiding people and forces judges and prosecutors to focus on protecting victims.

Question #2 - It's my understanding that as long as you are traveling on a road or highway owned and maintained by the state of Oregon, your concealed permit and/or open carry right is valid. Drive off the state highway or step onto tribal land and you are subject to that nation's laws. It's also my understanding that state concealed carry jurisdiction applies to navigable waterways. However, just like a highway, if you get out of your boat and step foot on tribal land you are subject to their laws.

"CL"

[Chromaflage]

Here's a tangential question, then. If Highway 26, which runs through Warm Springs, is a federal highway and is maintained by the state, why do the tribal authorities have the right to patrol Highway 26 and issue traffic citations to non-tribal citizens. I know, because I have been cited by them for exceeding the speed limit.

And let's take it another step. Often when I am traveling into or through Warm Springs, I am on my way to or from a fishing expedition. So, according to the state, it's legal for me to have a concealed firearm in the vehicle. Let's say I'm on Highway 26, going through Warm Springs and I get pulled over by the Warm Springs police for a moving violation or even a burned out tail light. Technically, I'm not even sure he has the authority to pull me over in the first place since I'm not on tribal land..... not sure what he'd do if I told him I had a concealed handgun in the car. Maybe just let me go until I happened to turn off the highway onto tribal property.

I really think there needs to be some clarification directly from state and tribal authorities on these issues.

[baltz526]

i'll guess the tribal police are state certified. this gives them the authority to issue tickets on state highways. since the state highway right of way is under state law, i would say tribal law concerning firearms is a non issue, state law is in effect in the right of way.

[Chromaflage]

I've thought about that as well. But if that is in fact the case, why wouldn't their traffic citations be run through the state/county court system, rather than the tribal system? I'm not complaining or being argumentative, just curious about these things.

When I received my citation, I had a couple choices - pay on the spot or send the fine to the tribal court. If I paid the fine by the deadline, it would not be reported to the state and would not go on my driving record. But if I delayed, they would have turned the matter over to the state.

Originally Posted by baltz526

i'll guess the tribal police are state certified. this gives them the authority to issue tickets on state highways. since the state highway right of way is under state law, i would say tribal law concerning firearms is a non issue, state law is in effect in the right of way.

[Sixes]

Originally Posted by ommedia

Our instructor this last week told our class something I found very confusing.

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and nobody has a CHL, the driver or owner can get charged"

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and someone has a CHL, everyone in the vehicle without a CHL can get charged"

just seems odd that I could be charged for riding with you and you have a valid CHL and a gun under the seat.

Its like hiding drugs under a seat in the vehicle. If no one says it their drugs then all people could be charged or if it was in a certain close area of a certain person then it could be that it was his or hers drugs.

If it is just the operator and he says its not his car he still gets the charge he is in control of the vehicle and it is his responsiblity to know what is in the car while he is in control of it.

Same could be with the hand gun if it was hidden under a seat it could be the front passengers or the rear passengers gun. You could cite both and or the operator. Depends on circumstances all cases are different.

And about Reservations, the Coquille Tribe is a Public 280 law. Which means it goes by state and or federal laws. So a concealed handgun permit would be honored. Warm Springs is a federal tribe they have there own laws and can make there own drivers licenses also for the lands as an example.

Sixes

[Old Goat]

You may even be charged with illegal discharge of a weapon. It depends on the case and current public outcry. When I took the class years ago, they said to plan on $25K in defence expendatures. But you could go the other way and be dead for cheap.

I personally believe in the quick justice that justified use of a firearm brings. Plus it is a deterant to the criminal comunity. That said, I have never been in a situation which required the use.

Guns are good for the country on many levels. Keeps the criminals and government in check.

[Sixes]

Originally Posted by baltz526

i'll guess the tribal police are state certified. this gives them the authority to issue tickets on state highways. since the state highway right of way is under state law, i would say tribal law concerning firearms is a non issue, state law is in effect in the right of way.

Tribal Police are State certified by the State of Oregon and also Federally certified officers through the BIA.

In some case they get cross Deputized as a Deputy Sheriff in that said County only. Three ways to approach a case if they wish to.

Sixes

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by ommedia

Our instructor this last week told our class something I found very confusing.

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and nobody has a CHL, the driver or owner can get charged"

"If you get pulled over, with passengers in the vehicle, with a concealed weapon, and someone has a CHL, everyone in the vehicle without a CHL can get charged"

just seems odd that I could be charged for riding with you and you have a valid CHL and a gun under the seat.

I saw this discussed above here and think that this second statement is not exactly true...it really depends upon WHERE the firearm is.

For instance IF a person is in the car and has a CHL (either Driver OR Passenger/s), and they have that Concealed firearm ON their person, then there's no reason for anyone else in the vehicle for being cited as being in violation of any CC issues.

However if there's a concealed weapon IN the car accessable to another party who doesn't have a CHL, then they can be charged with being in violation.

However there's a caveat that says that this other party/s has to KNOW that it's there. (How this is established, I'm not exactly certain, maybe in court?)

An example of this would be for the CW to be in the Glove Compartment and a passenger riding in the #2 seat not knowing it was there.

On the other hand, a car full of gang bangers and a hidden handgun under the back seat, I'm thinking everybody in back's going for a ride in bracelets!

[rrust1]

Originally Posted by Old Salt

But you could go the other way and be dead for cheap.

That might be the best iFish quote of 2009. Very true, very, very true. Thanks for making me laugh.

[BrianMaguire]

Good thread, I got a CWp because I simply had guns all the time, it was a CYA move.

[scottishsetter]

Maybe the state should just come out with a Gold Star CC License. Proof of being a good citizen for TEN years and having reloaded/shot 10,000 rounds in your life.
That would raise revenue from good citizens. It would allow you to carry the gun in your trunk.....if you wanted.

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by scottishsetter

Maybe the state should just come out with a Gold Star CC License. Proof of being a good citizen for TEN years and having reloaded/shot 10,000 rounds in your life.
That would raise revenue from good citizens. It would allow you to carry the gun in your trunk.....if you wanted.

You mean you CAN'T (already) carry it in your trunk?!!

Geez, I'd just be more comfortable with my Fishing License, some old clunker rod in the back and a pair of hipboots thrown in on top of it.

You don't even need a class for that!

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Sixes

Tribal Police are State certified by the State of Oregon and also Federally certified officers through the BIA.

In some case they get cross Deputized as a Deputy Sheriff in that said County only. Three ways to approach a case if they wish to.

Sixes

Warm Springs officers are only State certified. The BIA academy is in New Mexico and the Tribe doesn't want to shell out the $$ to send them there. Most of the officers are not Tribal members. As long as you are on 26...your chances of being "harassed" are slim to none. I know that when I worked there in the jail for 16 months...we had a total of 3 white guys come in for being arrested. 2 of them were from Kah-Ne-Tah and the other was for a white guy who got deuced on 26. They were in the jail for a short time and then taken to Madras or to The Dalles and housed there.

[Hunt'nFish]

Originally Posted by baltz526

this what it says, exactly. so i believe (while going to or returning from a hunting or fishing expedition.) expeditions start and end, at my place of residence or place i store my expedition equipment. expeditions do not start or end where i park my truck. they start and end where i pack my gear to go on the expedition

Exactly. This was tested for me when two young rookie Troopers tried to tell me they "could" cite me for illegal possesion on a firearm in my truck while traveling to E. Oregon (rat hunt and spring steelhead) late one night along central I84. This was all after I told them where I was going, why I was going so fast (80mph) and what I was planning to do (Steelhead & rats) when I got there. They removed my firearms and ran them through the system (without my consent) and handled them like farm tools.
I politely told them it was my understanding that the above mentioned state statue did in fact give me legal right to carry any way I so choose, concealed or openly (which was the case here) and that I didn't appreciate being told they "could" when in fact I know you can't.

I was very polite about it ("With all due respect Officer...BUT"), but it did cost me 5 tickets in 10min time. All were dismissed except the original speeding ticket. yes they were after me after that and yes I did get stopped a second time 10min down the road for going 70.

That's Ok, I went to court to speak my mind about the way I was treated.
Felt it was my duty to remind them that we ALL are not criminals out there and I didn't appreciate being bullied around and treated like one after I disclosed my firearms to them.
It made me feel better, but I doubt it made any differance.
Hunt'nFish

[shorthair]

Originally Posted by GraphiteZen

Don't you also have to unload the magazine? When I transport mine to and from fishing, it's on the seat with the slide open and the unloaded magazine sitting next to it. I started transporting like this long ago based on common sense and have since been told by an ex-officer that it's the "correct" way in Oregon.

Ok that sounds about right & I can see someone who followed that advice telling some felon " please wait while I load my empty magizine " and we all believe the felon will wait patentlly while the law abiding citizen does all this.

[billc_sbio]

Originally Posted by shorthair

Ok that sounds about right & I can see someone who followed that advice telling some felon " please wait while I load my empty magizine " and we all believe the felon will wait patentlly while the law abiding citizen does all this.

I don't remember the exact details of what prompted my phone call, but it had something to do with some dumb a** ammendment or law that the late Bonnie Hays was trying to foist upon her fellow Oregon citizens.

My call ended up connecting me to one of her (male) "assistants".

In the course of our discussion I mentioned that what she was trying to do was already addressed in the then new State CHL statute and we discussed that even further.

At one point I remember mentioning that the concealed carry handgun was already loaded.

At which point I vividly remember him stopping me and saying, "You mean you're all carrying LOADED firearms?"

Sometimes it amazes me what the clowns in Government (who vote on all this) DON'T know!

[shorthair]

Ben Franklin was right " We get the Gov't we deserve ".
If we fail to pay attention they'll stick it to us every time.

[JerryM]

1) You can carry a loaded firearm in a vehicle in Oregon.
2) You can carry on the state highway through Warm Springs but step foot out of your vehicle armed without a tribal permit and you are fair game.
3) We are an open carry state but be careful in cities like Portland, Eugene etc that do not respect your rights. You will probably eventually win in court if you push it but it will be a long haul.
4) I very highly doubt the story about the "Rookie Troopers" since Troopers are specifically and redundantly schooled in this area.
5) Anyone can sue anyone in Oregon until a judge says otherwise. Don't use handloads as defense rounds as juries sometimes are not real bright and can be convinced your hand load was made by you to mame, cripple, kill etc because you are a gun crazed sadist. Remember same jury pool elected Ted.
6) Dead men don't get sued, cited etc.

[Stu]

[quote=runningfox;2440805]

Originally Posted by Big Unit

Talked to a sporting goods guy last night. Don't have handloads in your personal defense gun...looks like specific intent. Jury would frown on that he said.

Why would hand loads make a difference over factory loads regarding specific intent? That doesn't make sense to me, self defense is self defense, what about hydra shok or black talon, factory loads?

The cop that gave the class I took said the same thing. That is why I have my favorite goose load in my shotgun for home defense. I figure an 1&1/4 oz of steel BB's at 20' should do the trick.