One year ago this month, University graduate student and Concealed Handgun License holder Brian Stubbs challenged an Oregon University System policy forbidding him from carrying his gun on campus.
A federal judge dismissed Stubbs’ suit against the Oregon State Board of Higher Education in June, but key players on both sides of this ongoing controversy — whether to allow students, faculty and visitors with licenses to carry concealed firearms to bring them onto campus — agree the matter has yet to be resolved.
Source of contention
Statewide, 98,537 people had a CHL as of December 2004, according to Law Enforcement Data System information. In Lane County, 9,566 or about 4.1 percent of people over 21 held licenses, compared with 9,921 (about 3.2 percent) in Washington County and 11,673 (about 2.4 percent) in Multnomah County. Some of these holders think the OUS is violating state law by forbidding concealed weapons on university campuses for license holders. Once people obtain licenses in Oregon, the Oregon Revised Statutes allow them to carry their concealed handguns in “public buildings,” including hospitals, public and private schools and universities, with the exception of courtrooms. Some private establishments, such as bars and movies theaters, may post signs banning concealed weapons.
However, the Oregon Administrative Rules for Oregon universities — regulations created by the board of higher education to interpret Oregon statutes — bar CHL holders from carrying concealed guns at OUS facilities, such as in University buildings.
Obtaining a license
Oregonians interested in carrying a concealed handgun must obtain a permit from their local sheriff’s office after meeting eligibility requirements and completing a firearms safety course.
However, laws governing concealed handgun licenses vary on a state-to-state basis. About 35 states, including Oregon, have “shall issue” laws allowing anyone who applies and meets state requirements to carry a concealed handgun, according to Packing.org. Several other states, such as California, have limited laws allowing lawenforcement to determine whether to issue a license to a specific applicant. Concealed weapons are prohibited in five states, including Illinois and Wisconsin.
Special Deputy Paige Payne, who works in the Washington County Sheriff’s Office Concealed Handgun License Unit, said law enforcement agencies around the state share information about concealed carry licenses.
If a CHL holder is accused of committing a crime or has a restraining order placed against him or her, the local sheriff’s office that issued the person’s CHL will be notified, and the license can be revoked.
Payne said her agency revokes
licenses “quite often.”
The Baron’s Den employee and firearm safety instructor Raye Gunter, who said he has put more people through the Lane County Sheriff’s Office for CHLs than any other instructor in the state, said he’s seen the number of people interested in having a concealed handgun rise as more people come of age and make a decision to carry for self-defense.
Gunter — who also teaches a basic handgun safety class at Lane
Community College that qualifies students to apply for a CHL — said there is a two-to-one ratio of men to women interested in concealed carry.
The concealed carry suit
The issue of concealed weapons on OUS property gained attention in March 2004 when conservative talk radio host Lars Larson refused to speak at a First Amendment forum at Southern Oregon University after learning he could not bring his concealed weapon under OUS rules. SOU eventually rescinded Larson’s invitation.
The OUS policy made news again in January 2004 after Stubbs, a graduate teaching fellow who had obtained his CHL, sued the members of the higher education board in federal court. Stubbs alleged that the OUS policy violated state laws allowing CHL holders to carry firearms in public buildings.
The suit named members of the board because they set the policies that are enforced by the OUS. The suit also named then-OUS Chancellor Richard Jarvis and University President Dave Frohnmayer as defendants because they were responsible for implementing the weapons policy.
Before filing the lawsuit, Stubbs asked OUS administration whether it would enforce its policy if he carried his weapon on University property, according to court papers. In response, Stubbs received a letter indicating that administrators would enforce the policy, which includes academic sanctions, if he attempted to carry his firearm on
University grounds.
After receiving the letter, Stubbs complied with the policy by not carrying his concealed weapon, according to the papers.
In the suit, Stubbs argued the OUS policy violated state statutes and he was deprived “due process” rights granted by the 14th Amendment.
Stubbs said his case related to an important issue concerning the rights of citizens, according to a Jan. 23, 2004 article in the Emerald.
“It is important that the board and university system respect the limitation of their powers and cease infringing on the rights of students, faculty and staff,” Stubbs said in the article. “This lawsuit is about restoring rights to citizens and making the board of higher education and the Oregon University System obey the law.”
The members of the board, represented by Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers, moved to dismiss the case, arguing Stubbs’ case lacked standing because the policy had not actually been enforced. The defendants also disputed the court’s jurisdiction over Stubbs’ due process claims.
OUS spokeswoman Di Saunders defended the decision to ban handguns on campuses, citing safety concerns, according to the Jan. 23 article.
“Student safety on OUS campuses is our first and foremost concern,” she said in the article. “That is why the state board went beyond the Oregon statute and voted to not allow handguns on Oregon public campuses.”
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken agreed with the defense and dismissed the case on procedural grounds, saying Stubbs failed to present an adequate “case or controversy” because the policy had not been enforced.
Yet Aiken noted that the outcome of the case didn’t determine the legality of the OUS policy on CHL holders.
“Defendants concede that interpretation of the state’s firearm preemption (sic) statute is ‘inevitable,’” she said in the ruling. “However, because there is no federal case or controversy, this question must be addressed in a different forum.”
LCC revises its policy
Most recently, the LCC Board of Education revised its policy on concealed firearms in November to comply with its interpretation of state law. The new policy allows CHL holders to carry their guns on college-owned property or at LCC-sponsored events.
The revision adds an exception to the college’s ban on firearms and other weapons as provided by Oregon or federal law. Under the exception, CHL holders can carry their weapons “if that is their interpretation of the (Oregon) law,” Director of Health and
Safety Sandy Ing-Weise said.
Although the rule change allows CHL holders to carry, Vice President for College Operations Marie Matsen said LCC officials will “strongly
discourage people from carrying.”
Matsen said LCC administrators are still working on the implementation of the policy, which might require that people who have a CHL and want to carry on campus notify LCC officials.
Matsen said the policy was changed because LCC’s legal counsel advised the board that its policy “really wasn’t consistent with the ORS.”
“What our legal counsel told us was actually anyone who has a valid concealed weapons permit, we can’t prohibit them from carrying on campus,” she said.
Because it’s not part of the OUS, LCC is governed by different rules than the University.
Ing-Weise said the board had to consider two differing views on concealed weapons
and seek a compromise.
“Basically, you come down to two kinds of people with philosophical beliefs,” she said. “One is that protection of the group is worth the infringement on the right (to carry concealed). The other is that the protection of the group is not significant enough to justify infringing on the right.”
Ing-Weise said there haven’t been problems at LCC with concealed handguns since the revision, but said the old policy provided support for administrators to talk to a student suspected of carrying a concealed weapon if another student felt threatened by that weapon. Now they can’t.
Ing-Weise said some administrative rules have been drafted about certain circumstances under which people can’t carry concealed weapons at LCC, although the rules have not returned from review by legal counsel.

[email protected]