Washington Illegal to Concealed Carry in "no minors" section of a bar?

Discussion in 'North West USA' started by scott_see, Nov 19, 2013.

  1. scott_see

    scott_see New Member

    173
    1
    Someone told me that in Washington State, it's illegal to concealed carry in the "no minors" section of a bar. I've searched and found conflicting info on this. Does anyone know what the scoop is on this? Living on the WA / OR border is a pain. Two states to keep track of. :eek:

    Thanks,
     
  2. Devinh2

    Devinh2 Guest

    1,000
    120
    You can't carry wherever you have to be 21 or over.
     

  3. scott_see

    scott_see New Member

    173
    1
    That's what I heard. I'll have to watch out for that. It's okay in Oregon.

    Oregon seems to be more gun friendly. Okay at schools. But not in Washington.
     
  4. glocknorm

    glocknorm Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporting Member

    1,000
    145
    Revised Code of Washington, section 9.41.300(d) prohibits firearms in "that portion of an establishment classified by the state liquor control board as off-limits to persons under twenty-one years of age", among several other areas (e.g.schools, jails).
     
  5. FinancialDan

    FinancialDan New Member

    187
    0
    I wouldn't say OR is more gun friendly than WA... different yes. But I feel like WA is easier to remember because, while there are a few places you can't carry, at least it's consistent. If you know the state law you're good. Cities are not allowed to make gun laws more restrictive than state law. In OR, you have to know the state law and then you have to pay attention to each individual city that you might be going through.
     
  6. scott_see

    scott_see New Member

    173
    1
    That's a good point. And I'm not even sure where I'd find that info. It's not in the app Legal Heat.
     
  7. scott_see

    scott_see New Member

    173
    1
    Let me backpedal a bit there

    A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public buildings as defined in ORS 161.015. (§166.173(1)). However, due to the exemption of permit holders under §166.370(3) the Oregon Attorney General has stated that "the legislature did not intend...to allow local governments to negate the right granted by the statute to concealed handgun licensees." 46 Or. Op. Atty. Gen. 362, 1990 WL 519208 (Or. A.G. 1990) and thus these prohibitions do not apply to permit holders.

    That's from Legal Heat.
     
  8. FinancialDan

    FinancialDan New Member

    187
    0
    Legal Heat also says this about Public Buildings:

    "Public Buildings: Oregon Code Section 166.370(3)(d) allows a person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun to carry in public buildings (hospitals, capitol buidlings, state office buildings, etc). HOWEVER, ORS 166.380 states that, "A peace officer may examine a firearm possessed by anyone on the person while in or on a public building to determine whether the firearm is a loaded firearm. Refusal by a person to allow the examination authorized by subsection (1) of this section constitutes reason to believe that the person has committed a crime and the peace officer may make an arrest pursuant to ORS 133.310." No exemption is given for permit holders to this requirement and its exact applicability to permit holders is unknown. As it appears to our reading, a permit holder, while in a public building, may be required to maintain the firearm "unloaded" or at least submit to an inspection of the firearm when asked by a peace officer therein. (see Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 166.380). We encourage individual due diligence in determining how the firearm must be carried into a public building."

    So, my only concern here is that it says that even permit holders, while allowed to carry, may be required to carry the weapon "unloaded". It is unclear. I'd hate to lose my permit privilege and end up with a criminal conviction for carrying a loaded weapon in a public building because the law it vague. I wonder if there is anyone with ACTUAL experience in this case... or an OR LEO that can address this. Even the lawyers at Legal Heat can't figure it out. Anyway, back to the point, it seems that other than this case, OR supersede city or county ordinances? I don't know... it still seems a little vague to me.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2013
  9. scott_see

    scott_see New Member

    173
    1
    That is pretty vague. Time to ask an LEO. They were very happy to help at PDX.