Some Oregon lawmakers, and certainly anti-gunners in the Beaver State, were stunned earlier this Fall when a Court of Appeals ruled that what they thought was a “housekeeping” change in the language of the state’s gun law now prohibits county sheriffs from revoking concealed pistol licenses (CPL) from people they consider dangerous.
The problem began surfacing late last month, when The Portland Oregonian newspaper revealed the consternation being felt by lawmen and lawmakers.
In September, a state appeals court ruled that a Washington County man’s CPL had been wrongly seized by the county sheriff after the man, identified as Tom Bates, had allegedly made threats against employees of the telephone company, and some state officials.
The newspaper noted that Oregon sheriffs “cannot point to any serious crimes committed by people who could have their licenses revoked before the ruling.” That hasn’t stopped some lawmen from expressing concerns that some people who have CPLs might be considered “dangerous.” Under the court ruling, which may be overturned by the Oregon Supreme Court, or “fixed” when the legislature convenes in 2007, a CPL in the possession of one of these “dangerous” persons cannot be revoked just because police or sheriffs deputies want to.
Attorneys for Washington County have hopes the state high court will reverse the appeals court ruling.
About 93,000 Oregonians are licensed to carry concealed handguns, the newspaper reported. More than 2,100 CPLs have been revoked on the grounds that the court or sheriff thought someone to be “dangerous,” The Oregonian said.
The newspaper reported that Bates had left threatening or obscene voice mail messages for officials with the Qwest telephone company in 2002. He claimed that he “wanted to be heard” over complaints with the company.
He also had left messages for employees of the state Employment Department in 2004.
Washington County Sheriff Rob Gordon seized Bates’ carry license in February 2004, and Bates went to court. The sheriff maintained that “somebody has to have that kind of authority” to revoke a gun permit.