Questions about letter from Sheriff that came with CHL
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Questions about letter from Sheriff that came with CHL

  1. #1

    Questions about letter from Sheriff that came with CHL

    My CHL came with a letter from the Sheriff. Two items on his list contradict information I've seen in several places.

    First it says:
    "Do not carry a concealed handgun onto airport terminal facilities designated for scheduled airline services or which maintain baggage screening and checking. Any airport area that has restricted or sterile areas as designated by the Federal Aviation Administration also has a prohibition on concealed handguns. (License holders may secure their handguns in vehicles remaining under their control in airport parking lots.) Upon your request, we will provide you with a copy of the Federal Aviation Administration policy."

    There was a thread here or on another site about the Portland airport. I was under the impression that you could carry in the non-secure areas. Any further info on this?

    Second it says:
    "Remember that utilizing deadly physical force is only justified in the protection of life, never property. If a threat to life exists and that threat can be reduced by fleeing rather than utilizing deadly physical force, you are obligated to flee with the exception of justifiable defense of your home. (Living areas only)"

    I thought court cases had shown there was no duty to retreat. Is that not the case?

  2.   
  3. #2

    why

    It is amazing what happens. I just relocated to the philippines and things are much different than the US. Hope things work out.

  4. The "duty to retreat" depends on what state you are in. Some still have antiquated laws in effect. As for the airport thing, as far as I know, the non-secure areas are subject to state law. I know I can carry into one in Arizona. The only restrictions are in the secure areas.

  5. #4
    to be clear, this is in Clatsop county, Oregon.

  6. For Portland International Airport, I'd avoid carrying even in the non-secure area, just because of Portland's general squeamishness around firearms. Outside Portland, you should be fine. Astoria is the only airport in your county that got scheduled airliner service, and it's both already gone, and was through a 'charter airline' that didn't have you go through FAA security anyway.

    It's one of those "it may be legal, but the police will hassle you anyway - so unless you WANT to be the court test case, avoid it" issues.

    When I took my Utah (with Oregon addendum) CHL course, it was emphasized that Oregon has no "duty to retreat" OR "stand your ground" law, so it comes entirely down to whether the police and prosecutor decide to charge you or not. But that was at the state level. Locales may not be able to legislate gun RIGHTS, but they can legislate BEHAVIOR with guns (see Portland's "gun crime reduction zone" silliness,) so maybe Clatsop has a "duty to retreat" law?

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Ed Hurtley View Post
    For Portland International Airport, I'd avoid carrying even in the non-secure area, just because of Portland's general squeamishness around firearms. Outside Portland, you should be fine. Astoria is the only airport in your county that got scheduled airliner service, and it's both already gone, and was through a 'charter airline' that didn't have you go through FAA security anyway.

    It's one of those "it may be legal, but the police will hassle you anyway - so unless you WANT to be the court test case, avoid it" issues.

    When I took my Utah (with Oregon addendum) CHL course, it was emphasized that Oregon has no "duty to retreat" OR "stand your ground" law, so it comes entirely down to whether the police and prosecutor decide to charge you or not. But that was at the state level. Locales may not be able to legislate gun RIGHTS, but they can legislate BEHAVIOR with guns (see Portland's "gun crime reduction zone" silliness,) so maybe Clatsop has a "duty to retreat" law?
    Lets start by saying that for legal advice, you need to consult a lawyer, and
    after relieving you of several hundred dollars, the advice you get will most
    likely be something along the lines of "maybe".

    On airports - in Oregon, you may carry in the public part of the airport, but
    not into or beyond the security checks.

    The advice on when you can use deadly force is correct.
    I suggest that you go online ans spend some time reading section 161 of the Oregon
    statutes.

    Basically, you can use deadly force to prevent death or serious injury to a
    person - person being you, a family member, or anyone else at all.

    The only time you can use deadly force to protect property is to prevent arson.
    But be very certain that someone is about to commit arson, and that you can
    defend your claim.

    However, you can use deadly force to prevent the commission of a felony - so
    someone robbing you at gun/knife point and threatening you with injury is probably fair game -- but be really certain that you want to get into a gunfight...

    On "on retreat" - it has a history in Oregon.
    About 25 years ago, someone was prosecuted for shooting with his concealed
    handgun. The prosecution argued that there was no need to shoot, he could have
    run away.

    The case went to the Oregon Supreme Court. They found for the prosecution, even
    though there is no law requiring a duty to retreat.

    Now, about three or four years ago, there was a similar case.
    The prosecution used the precedent set by the previous case to get a conviction,
    and the case found its way to the Oregon Supreme Court.

    The court examined the precedent. They were extremely caustic in their comments
    about the quality of the legal work behind that finding. They basically demolished
    it, and found for the defendant.

    So, 30 years ago, no duty to retreat. 25 years ago, you have a duty to retreat,
    even though no law says so. As of a very few years ago, you no longer have to
    retreat.

    That said - if you can walk/run away, I would suggest that as being the best
    course of action. You may win in court, but it may cost you days, weeks or
    months in jail, and more money than you are likely to earn in the next 20 years.

  8. I’m sorry I didn’t find this thread earlier.

    You need to study Oregon Revised Statute 161, and 166 concerning carrying a concealed handgun, and the use of deadly physical force. More specifically you need to study:

    ORS 166 – All of it if you can.
    ORS 166.220 – Unlawful use of a weapon;
    ORS 166.240 - Carrying of concealed weapons;
    ORS 166.250 – Unlawful possession of firearms;
    ORS 166.260 – Persons not affected by ORS 166.250;
    ORS 166.626 – Limitation of peace officer’s authority to arrest for violating ORS 166.250;

    ORS 161.209 - Use of physical force in defense of a person;
    ORS 161.215 - Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person;
    ORS 161.219 - Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person;
    ORS 161.225 - Use of physical force in defense of premises.

    Concerning carrying in an airport – You are exempted from restrictions the city and county can place on public property if have a valid Concealed Handgun License per ORS 166.260 in regards to airports. With that being said, the screening checkpoint that is run by the Transportation Security Administration is federally controlled property by a common use and by leasing the property from the city. I do know under United States Code Title 18, Section 930 is a misdemeanor by itself, and can be a felony depending on how the act was committed. I believe there are additional federal laws concerning being in possession of a firearm in airport security checkpoints, but I don’t know them off the top of my head.

    Concerning your duty to retreat, there is no law specifically mentioning duty to retreat but it is expressed in ORS 161.209 by the word “necessary” and that was good enough for the Oregon Supreme Court to clarify on the spirit of the law. The Oregon State Supreme Court then ruled there is a duty to retreat per State v. Charles.

    There is still a duty to retreat when you can reasonably conceive of retreating per Oregon Supreme Court ruling State v. Sandoval. The ruling stated, “Person is not required to retreat before using deadly physical force to defend against imminent use of deadly physical force by another.” In short, you do not have a duty to retreat if there is imminent use of deadly physical force against you. The key word here is “imminent.” Short of “imminent” you still have a duty to retreat if reasonably possible.

    You are not allowed to shoot someone simply because they are committing a felony in your presence, but only when they are committing a felony in your presence and are threatening or using physical force against a person per ORS 161.219 Section 1. Remember - not all felony crimes in the State of Oregon use physical force to commit the act.

    In addition to the laws I mentioned above, I would become very familiar with the Oregon State Supreme Court Case Rulings:

    State v. Leos (1971);
    State v. Burns (1973);
    State v. Freeman (1991);
    State v. Sandoval (2007);

    You need to be well versed in the laws because it could mean all the difference between a grand jury trial and a criminal trial. Unfortunately, this should have been covered during the class you took. If you have any additional questions, feel free to send me an email.

Posting Permissions

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