Oregon Here...

[DemocratGunOwner]

Oregon, Utah and Maine Permits. I can legally carry in Portland and Portland - how many people can say that?

Will soon have NH, NV, FL, and CT (I'm starting a collection).

:-D

I have OR and UT. Don't travel to NV often enough to care, (only got the UT because it is the common/easy-to-get multi-state one,) and the other states I *WOULD* have any interest in carrying in are effectively impossible for an Oregonian to get a CHL for. Although, now that I look, FL would add NM and KS..... (Not that I travel to either anything even vaguely resembling often, but I do have distant extended family in both.)

 

[marcparis]

:-D

I have OR and UT. Don't travel to NV often enough to care, (only got the UT because it is the common/easy-to-get multi-state one,) and the other states I *WOULD* have any interest in carrying in are effectively impossible for an Oregonian to get a CHL for. Although, now that I look, FL would add NM and KS..... (Not that I travel to either anything even vaguely resembling often, but I do have distant extended family in both.)

I got UT because it's cheap and if you're in Portland you kind of need it (or equivalent) since WA doesn't recognize OR. I'll be in Reno and while I'm there I'm taking a course to get my NV permit - you have to take the class in NV to get it. I go to NV enough that it's worth having. It turns out the class covers OR, UT as well (which I already have) but also happens to meet the training requirements for FL, NH and CT. I have family in FL so it's good to have and as you mentioned it gives me NM and KS. I didn't think NH had training requirements but apparently it does and this course meets them. The course itself includes an "option" that completes the NRA Basic pistol training and from what I read that is sufficient for CT training requirements. My wife does have a friend in CT so it's good to have as well. The only New England States that won't be covered then are RI and MA but good luck with getting those (expensive, unlikely to get anyway and you need to renew them every year if you're lucky enough to get it - MA anyway).

With that set of permits I'll be able to carry in all states except
IL, DC, HI, Territories - no (or effectively) no CCW
CA, New York, New Jersey, MD - no recognition of out of state permits and no (or effectively no) ability to get a non resident permit
MA, RI - no recognition of out of state permits. Technically possible to get a non resident permit. Currently not worth the money or hassle.
SC, CO - do recognize one or more of the permits that I have however I must be a resident of the state and they don't recognize OR. They don't allow you to get a Non resident permit - SC does if you own land there.

WI should happen sometime close to the end of the year since they passed a CCW permit law and will recognize some states' permits and don't have a residency requirement. I'm sure at least one of my 7 will work there. :biggrin:

So that's 40 out of 52 (50 states + DC and territories) - not bad. This would have been simpler if Oregon had passed a recognition bill this year which it nearly did. That would certainly open up more recognition of Oregon permits by other states - in particular SC and CO which have residency requirements. Other than SC and CO for the remaining 10 to recognize my permits it will take a National recognition law.

 

[marcparis]

I got UT because it's cheap and if you're in Portland you kind of need it (or equivalent) since WA doesn't recognize OR. I'll be in Reno and while I'm there I'm taking a course to get my NV permit - you have to take the class in NV to get it. I go to NV enough that it's worth having. It turns out the class covers OR, UT as well (which I already have) but also happens to meet the training requirements for FL, NH and CT. I have family in FL so it's good to have and as you mentioned it gives me NM and KS. I didn't think NH had training requirements but apparently it does and this course meets them. The course itself includes an "option" that completes the NRA Basic pistol training and from what I read that is sufficient for CT training requirements. My wife does have a friend in CT so it's good to have as well. The only New England States that won't be covered then are RI and MA but good luck with getting those (expensive, unlikely to get anyway and you need to renew them every year if you're lucky enough to get it - MA anyway).

With that set of permits I'll be able to carry in all states except
IL, DC, HI, Territories - no (or effectively) no CCW
CA, New York, New Jersey, MD - no recognition of out of state permits and no (or effectively no) ability to get a non resident permit
MA, RI - no recognition of out of state permits. Technically possible to get a non resident permit. Currently not worth the money or hassle.
SC, CO - do recognize one or more of the permits that I have however I must be a resident of the state and they don't recognize OR. They don't allow you to get a Non resident permit - SC does if you own land there.

WI should happen sometime close to the end of the year since they passed a CCW permit law and will recognize some states' permits and don't have a residency requirement. I'm sure at least one of my 7 will work there. :biggrin:

So that's 40 out of 52 (50 states + DC and territories) - not bad. This would have been simpler if Oregon had passed a recognition bill this year which it nearly did. That would certainly open up more recognition of Oregon permits by other states - in particular SC and CO which have residency requirements. Other than SC and CO for the remaining 10 to recognize my permits it will take a National recognition law.

On the topic of Oregon CHL permits. It's my understanding that each county issues it's own and they don't have a uniform look to them. I must say the Clackamas county one is embarrassingly cheap looking (especially when compares to UT and ME). It makes my library card look like a Passport. I always wondered that if I carried in a state somewhat remote from Oregon where it's not common that I'd be taken in by the LEO because he thought I did a really crummy job trying to doctor up a fake license. Is it like that all across the state or am I just one of the lucky ones?

 

[Firefighterchen]

I got UT because it's cheap and if you're in Portland you kind of need it (or equivalent) since WA doesn't recognize OR. I'll be in Reno and while I'm there I'm taking a course to get my NV permit - you have to take the class in NV to get it. I go to NV enough that it's worth having. It turns out the class covers OR, UT as well (which I already have) but also happens to meet the training requirements for FL, NH and CT. I have family in FL so it's good to have and as you mentioned it gives me NM and KS. I didn't think NH had training requirements but apparently it does and this course meets them. The course itself includes an "option" that completes the NRA Basic pistol training and from what I read that is sufficient for CT training requirements. My wife does have a friend in CT so it's good to have as well. The only New England States that won't be covered then are RI and MA but good luck with getting those (expensive, unlikely to get anyway and you need to renew them every year if you're lucky enough to get it - MA anyway).

With that set of permits I'll be able to carry in all states except
IL, DC, HI, Territories - no (or effectively) no CCW
CA, New York, New Jersey, MD - no recognition of out of state permits and no (or effectively no) ability to get a non resident permit
MA, RI - no recognition of out of state permits. Technically possible to get a non resident permit. Currently not worth the money or hassle.
SC, CO - do recognize one or more of the permits that I have however I must be a resident of the state and they don't recognize OR. They don't allow you to get a Non resident permit - SC does if you own land there.

WI should happen sometime close to the end of the year since they passed a CCW permit law and will recognize some states' permits and don't have a residency requirement. I'm sure at least one of my 7 will work there. :biggrin:

So that's 40 out of 52 (50 states + DC and territories) - not bad. This would have been simpler if Oregon had passed a recognition bill this year which it nearly did. That would certainly open up more recognition of Oregon permits by other states - in particular SC and CO which have residency requirements. Other than SC and CO for the remaining 10 to recognize my permits it will take a National recognition law.

On the topic of Oregon CHL permits. It's my understanding that each county issues it's own and they don't have a uniform look to them. I must say the Clackamas county one is embarrassingly cheap looking (especially when compares to UT and ME). It makes my library card look like a Passport. I always wondered that if I carried in a state somewhat remote from Oregon where it's not common that I'd be taken in by the LEO because he thought I did a really crummy job trying to doctor up a fake license. Is it like that all across the state or am I just one of the lucky ones?

oregon has no reciprocity with other states...

If you mean another county, city, or remote area within oregon, you should be fine once they look up your information, granted you did something illegal.

Edit: just read some of your other posts. I think I understand what the question is now. If you handed them your mass of permits lol would they look at the oregon one and think its fake?

Lane County permit is very nice. Looks and feels like an older drivers license (thick, plastic, nice seal over the top, picture and signature printed on the front), as the new dl's are thinner and more flexible.

 

[marcparis]

oregon has no reciprocity with other states...

If you mean another county, city, or remote area within oregon, you should be fine once they look up your information, granted you did something illegal.

Edit: just read some of your other posts. I think I understand what the question is now. If you handed them your mass of permits lol would they look at the oregon one and think its fake?

Lane County permit is very nice. Looks and feels like an older drivers license (thick, plastic, nice seal over the top, picture and signature printed on the front), as the new dl's are thinner and more flexible.

Yeah what I meant is some states like Tennessee, Kentucky or Indiana recognize the Oregon CHL even though Oregon doesn't recognize theirs. Their law probably has basically universal recognition of other states' permits (as it should be and I wish Oregon did that as well IMHO). I feel though if I showed a sheriff in Tennessee my Clackamas county issued Oregon CHL he'd treat me like an 18 year with a really cheap fake ID trying to buy booze . Granted if he managed to check it out and confirm the permit it would all check out okay since it's completely legitimate. It just give a first impression of a really poor attempt at a fake id. I guess it does have the advantage that no one faking an ID would do such a crummy job - it's so bad it's gotta be legit :biggrin:

 

[DemocratGunOwner]

Multnomah County's are just simple "printed on a plastic card" type. Nothing fancy, but not 'amateur' looking, either. The fact that it's just printed on a plastic card is the only cheap-ness to it. (No holograms or other security features like on the driver license or the Utah CFP.)

Maybe I'll scan mine, obscure all the "information" and post it. The database only shows Lane county's, so it might be good to make a thread for people to post their county's.