Oregon Beaverton residents - Help repeal the open carry ban

[Steve M]

This thread is primarily for the citizens of Beaverton, Oregon but any helpful advice by others is welcome. The purpose is to organize my fellow Beaverton residents in order to get city code 5.08.240 repealed. This is the ordinance that prohibits open carry in Beaverton unless you have a CHL.

Please don't make this a discussion of OC versus CC, this is about your 2A rights and pushing back. The best defense is a good offense and we've been napping since at least 1934.

Last night Mayor Doyle proudly declared September 2013 as "Preparedness Month", an effort get the people of Beaverton to be self-reliant and ready to support themselves in the event of an emergency. About 45 minutes later I got to speak to the council and argued that in the event of an emergency we would need the ability to protect ourselves and our valuable stores of supplies. I also argued that in the event that our homes had to be evacuated that most citizens would be unable to arm themselves as very few have a CHL, including adults too young to get a CHL.

Of course they opted not to even take a vote to repeal the law because I'm just one voter, but I hope I got them thinking about how this law has some pretty grave side effects that they may not have considered before. Councilor Betty Bode was the only person to speak to me and she essentially asked that I attend CERT training then come back, presumably because this training would leave me feeling confident about not being armed in the aftermath of a disaster. Tonight I will attend my first CERT training class and when I have graduated in October I will return to the city council and repeat my request to repeal 5.08.240.

In the mean time please help repeal this ordinance by any of the following methods:

1. Attend a city council meeting and step up to the mic to make your request in your own words. To do this walk into the council chambers at about 6:20pm, put your info on the little orange form and give it to the recorder. She sits at the desk closest to the door. Meetings are usually the first three Tuesdays of the month at 6:30pm: Beaverton, OR - Official Website - About Council Meetings
2. Call the council members and tell them that you want 5.08.240 repealed. You can give your own reasoning or simply refer to "that guy" that requested it in the September 3rd meeting. Beaverton, OR - Official Website - City Council
3. Fill out the contact form and send a brief message to all city counselors: Beaverton - City Council: Feedback Form
4. Start or help start a petition to repeal 5.08.240. If you are a member of local gun clubs or other organizations frequented by Beaverton citizens that support the 2A then this would be a great source of signatures. There are about 90k people living in Beaverton so we'd need hundreds of signatures to get the attention of the council.

The more effort required by you (eg. speaking at a council meeting) the more the council will sit up and take notice. However, if all you can do is send them a message via the feedback form and sign a petition then it will be a great help.

If you wish to see the video of my request to the Beaverton City Council then click on this link and skip to about the 51:37 mark: Beaverton Council Meeting - Televised - Sep 3rd, 2013

Read More

 

[Dunerunner]

How can a city pass laws (ordnances) that are more restrictive and go beyond State Law? Best of luck with your efforts to get this reversed!

 

[lowly monk]

Steve, Have you joined "OFF". Kevin and the staff is very sharp. Thank you for this. I will follow and help do research. Oregon's Only No Compromise Gun Lobby - Oregon Firearms Federation

 

[Morpheus]

How can a city pass laws (ordnances) that are more restrictive and go beyond State Law? Best of luck with your efforts to get this reversed!

In short, because the Oregon supreme court ruled that because we have a CHL and people with a CHL are immune to said law, that cities/counties can pass more restrictive laws against non CHL holders.

While I don't agree with it, that has been the ruling for a while and was upheld recently I believe.

 

[orygunmike]

How can a city pass laws (ordnances) that are more restrictive and go beyond State Law? Best of luck with your efforts to get this reversed!

ORS 166.173 - Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places - 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes

 

[Steve M]

Steve, Have you joined "OFF". Kevin and the staff is very sharp. Thank you for this. I will follow and help do research. Oregon's Only No Compromise Gun Lobby - Oregon Firearms Federation

I have his book and have referenced his website before for information, but I had not joined till just a few moments ago. Thanks for that idea. I'll contact Kevin and point him to this thread to see if it is something he's willing to help advertise so that we can get Beaverton supporters mobilized.

 

[cueball1214]

Thanks for this. I have written them asking them politely to reconsider and reveres. I will be attending more City Council meetings as i am a Beaverton resident.

 

[ocarolan]

Just an idea. Generally, no council repeals a statute they made. That would admit an error. Nobody does that.

Better to clarify the ordinance, in order to improve it. That might succeed in relaxing or obviating the worst effects of the ban. For example, add:

"B. Subsection A of this section does not apply to or affect:
[...]
(9) A person carrying a firearm safely in a holster for purposes of legitimate self-defense.
(10) A citizen transporting a firearm in a scabbard or sling with a manual safety engaged."

It's not perfect but might get the results you want. For reference, here's the full statute:

5.08.240 Unlawful Carrying of a Loaded Firearm.

A. No person in a public place shall carry a firearm upon the person unless all ammunition has been removed from the chamber and from the cylinder, clip or magazine.

B. Subsection A of this section does not apply to or affect:

1. A law enforcement officer in the performance of official duty.

2. A member of the military in the performance of official duty.

3. A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.

4. A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building under ORS 166.370.

5. Any person summoned by any law enforcement officer to assist in making arrests or preserving the peace, while said person so summoned is actually engaged in assisting the officer.

6. A corrections officer while transporting or accompanying an individual convicted of or arrested for an offense and confined in a place of incarceration or detention while outside the confines of the place of incarceration or detention.

7. When authorized by the officer’s employer, a parole and probation officer, as defined in ORS 181.610, may carry a firearm while engaged in official duties if the officer has completed: (1) A firearms training program recognized by the Board on Public Safety Standards and Training; and (2) A psychological screening.

8. An armed private security officer, proprietary security manager or security contractor certified and permitted by the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training to possess a firearm while in the performance of their duties.

C. A person who violates this section commits a Class A misdemeanor. [BC 5.08.240, added by Ordinance No. 4084, 2/7/00]

<broken link removed>

 

[Steve M]

Just an idea. Generally, no council repeals a law they made. That would admit an error. "Hey we were stupid. We never should have passed that law". Nobody says that.

So you're very unlikely to repeal any gun law.

The only person in council chambers that voted on that ordinance was the mayor back when he was on the council. The ordinance was proposed by the mayor that he ousted by a large margin. It would only be to admit that previous councilors were hoodwinked by a mayor that city voted out of office.

Better to clarify the law, in order to improve it. That might succeed in relaxing or obviating the effects of the ban. For example, add:

"...except the rule shall not apply to (a) a firearm carried safely in a holster for purposes of legitimate self-defense (b) a firearm carried safely in a scabbard or sling with a manual safety engaged."

No. NO. NOOOOOO! Zero compromises. Are women allowed to only vote on national issues? Are slaves still maintained M-F but free on the weekends?

 

[Dunerunner]

Unbelievable!! I used to hunt in a lot just north of my housing development when we lived in Cedar Hills!! Of course, that was almost 50 years ago.....

 

[ocarolan]

The only person in council chambers that voted on that ordinance was the mayor back when he was on the council. The ordinance was proposed by the mayor that he ousted by a large margin. It would only be to admit that previous councilors were hoodwinked by a mayor that city voted out of office.

No. NO. NOOOOOO! Zero compromises. Are women allowed to only vote on national issues? Are slaves still maintained M-F but free on the weekends?

Steve, I applaud your purpose and best of luck. Historically though, it's best to present the cause in the most palatable way. Look at our legislative successes, like Washington's HB 1016 in 2011. That was titled "Changing restrictions on firearm noise suppressors", not "Removing restrictions". If you want to make headway, I'd avoid the word "repeal" or "remove".

By the way, slavery and suffrage did involve interstitial compromises... eg the Emancipation Proclamation did not free slaves in the five non-rebelling states, because Lincoln needed their support.

 

[MinnesotaORnewbie]

From personal observation and personal experience from my wife and I, Beaverton police profile, harass, harass, harass, profile, have HUGE EGOS, and harass people. I will not even drive through Beaverton if I can help it. Probably not all of them, but definitely a few of them are the biggest hard headed, Egotistical, power tripped Douche Bags to ever carry a badge. Someone should go before one of Beaverton's city counsel meetings and let them know of these things, even if they probably already know. I'm sure they probably get their monthly quotas for motor vehicle tickets/moving violations on a regular basis. The worst part is, if you try to go to court to fight the citation, the working man needs to take off work multiple times because of their so convenient times of traffic court with the outcome almost always being the so called honest, ethical police officers word against your low life, proven guilty while the cop is still tailing your bumper at a distance of 1 foot, and who cannot afford the ticket let alone take off work with having to take the plea agreement for a small reduction in the criminally issued ticket in the first place. WOW, sorry about that, I guess I had some tucked away issues that were still kindling within me. So anyways, Best of luck!

 

[Steve M]

Thanks for this. I have written them asking them politely to reconsider and reveres. I will be attending more City Council meetings as i am a Beaverton resident.

Thank you for taking action! If you or anyone else plans to attend a council meeting please let me know and I'll be happy to be there too to help point out how to get your name on the list for the visitor comment period and lend moral support as it can be intimidating to get up there and speak.

I have no intention of badgering the council and turning them against me by showing up every week and saying the same stuff over and over again, but if one of you plans to speak I'd like them to see me sitting there in support of you. They need to know that this issue isn't going away.

 

[Steve M]

I received a PM from someone living in an unincorporated area near Beaverton that is in support of repealing the ordinance. This has caused me to stop and reflect on how people living outside of Beaverton can help.

If you live near Beaverton or commute to or through Beaverton on a regular basis and feel that you are or could be negatively impacted by this ordinance then the council should still hear from you.

1. Help spread the word. You undoubtedly know at least one person that does live in Beaverton that you can enlighten.
2. Attend a council meeting and tell them how you are being impacted by this ordinance.
3. If attending a council meeting is not practical then write/e-mail/call the city council members and tell them how you are being impacted by this ordinance.
4. If we end up having to start a petition you can help gather signatures.
5. If we ever hold a rally outside of city hall something similar to that then please show up.
6. Write your Oregon representatives and ask them to repeal ORS 166.173
7. Write your US Representatives and ask them to enact legislation that preempts the ability to regulate the possession of firearms.

If you live in the state of Oregon and would like to help even though you are not impacted in any way by this ordinance:

1. Write your Oregon representatives and ask them to repeal ORS 166.173
2. Write your US Representatives and ask them to enact legislation that preempts the ability to regulate the possession of firearms.

If you live in the USA but not in Oregon and want to help out:

1. Write your US Representatives and ask them to enact legislation that preempts state's ability to regulate the possession of firearms.

 

[Steve M]

I just received a press release of an event that will allow anyone living near Beaverton to put your legislators on the spot regarding gun control issues as they pertain to defending yourself and your family following a major disaster.
<broken link removed>

The event is at the Beaverton City Library on Monday September 9th at 7pm. It is hosted by Senator Hass and will also be attended by Representative Read and Representative Barker. The event will start with a 15 minute presentation about the effects of a 9.0 earthquake, the aftermath that would result, and estimates of how long it would take to recover. Following that will be a roundtable discussion then a 30-45 minute period where the public can ask questions.

I will be attending this event and I will be asking my Oregon Senator and Representative why they supported laws that would leave me unarmed or poorly armed in a disaster and what they are going to do to preempt city ordinances against possession of loaded firearms such as those in Portland/Beaverton/Tigard. I encourage everyone in the area to attend and have a well thought out question regarding their desire to leave you defenseless following a disaster.

 

[Misterbill]

Another reason that Oregon sucks... No pre-emption.

Add that to the whole
"Oregon cops look for out-of-staters first" to screw over on any penny ante BS.

Ask my Aunt, (68 years old) the 35-year veteran adoption services agent who was arrested, jailed and tried for "shoplifting" for forgetfully slipping ONE book (out of the 6 she paid for) into her purse as she browsed a Eugene book store. Ya, she was STEALING that $2.95 paperback...COULDN'T have been a mistake...

I've never forgiven Oregon, because everything was fine and it was all a misunderstanding until the SECOND they saw the California driver's license.
Then it was all about handcuffs. I was there and I watched it. Ever since, Screw Oregon and all it's residents.

FU Oregon. You don't care about rights, you care about your own special privileges. And ya, that's how I feel. I've not spent a nickel in Oregon ever since. Fill up at the WA border and drive straight through. Sucks to be you. But don't move to WA. I hope our staties treat you just like yours treat us.
And that echoes, BTW, every WA state trucker I've ever known.

 

[Steve M]

I just received a press release of an event that will allow anyone living near Beaverton to put your legislators on the spot regarding gun control issues as they pertain to defending yourself and your family following a major disaster.
<broken link removed>

A reminder to all - this event is at 7pm this evening at the Beaverton City Library. While it is mainly about politicians trying to get the press to do a positive story about them, I have called and confirmed that ordinary citizens such as you and I are welcome to attend and ask questions.

These politicians have territory outside of Beaverton so clearly this isn't just an event for city residents. Even if you don't live in their districts I don't see why you still couldn't come and ask questions, it's not like they've only invited the press from the city of Beaverton.

It is a Q&A format at the end so if you plan to attend try to figure out in advance how to be concise but still makes them think twice about passing bills that turn you into a helpless victim.

 

[Steve M]

First, a reminder that the Beaverton City Council meeting is at 6:30pm this evening in city hall. I will attend through at least the visitor comment period, though I don't currently plan to make a comment this week. It would be great if at least one other person living in the area would show up this evening and voice their support of repealing the ordinance. I want to keep this in front of them continually and outnumber anyone that might come in to voice support of the ban.

Second, an update on the disaster preparedness roundtable hosted by Senator Hass last evening at the Library. Sorry about the length, but I wanted to be as clear and specific as possible without getting too carried away.

The event started with a presentation of about 25-30 minutes regarding a 9.0M earthquake to our region and how long it would take services to be restored. In short, they expect everything west of the Cascades to be dropped back into the 17th century and to fly supplies into the Redmond airport then pack them over the hills to us. In the valley clean water would take 1 month to a year to restore, electricity 2 months to a year, and 2-4 months for emergency services. Then a representative from the Red Cross spoke and told us that it would be like camping, urban camping, and since a lot of people in Oregon camp we should have no trouble getting by. Then Michael Mumaw, Emergency Manager for Beaverton, spoke a bit about programs that the city is working on. He was followed by Senator Hass and Representative Read saying a little blurb about how they thought it was an important topic. Interestingly, Senator Hass admitted that he recently realized that no one in his house was able to locate a flashlight.

Following this they opened up to questions from the room. I'll spare you the details of all of the other questions, but basically it was a room of about 40 people where 75% of them were over the age of 70 and many wanted to know how we could turn everything over to the government so we'd not have to do any work or spend money to prepare for a disaster. When I was called on I stood up and said that I liked the urban camping analogy, but that it would be like camping on Memorial Day weekend where there is no camp host and no Forest Service around and you are the only person in the campground with food, water, a tent, sleeping bags, and so on. And all of those other campers are going to show up to your marshmallow roast and take what is yours. I asked them when I am confronted by 10, 12, or 20 men armed with clubs and knives, what tool could I put in my hand that would allow me to defend my family. And considering that a 9.0 could hit at any moment without warning, I asked my Senator and Representative specifically to tell me what they were going to do to ensure that I would be able to carry that tool on my person at all times.

The politicians chose to sink into their seats and not answer so the emergency manager for Beaverton (Mr. Mumaw) replied first. He said that if I had a gun there would be someone else out there with a bigger gun and someone else with a bigger gun than them and so forth, so the idea of arming yourself just doesn't work. Also, in recent disasters in places such as Chile the people worked together rather than stealing, so it was fear mongering on my part to suggest that lawlessness could ensue. Then the PhD on seismology chose to answer too and he said that thanks to legislation such as <broken link removed> that everyone would be prepared so there would be no need for anyone to steal supplies from others. Note that at no time did I say "gun" or "firearm", they rightly made that conclusion on their own. Sadly, the room erupted into applause and I assure you that they were not applauding for me.

I'll let you draw your own conclusions. Mine are that I have an Oregon Senator that can't find a flashlight in his own home yet thinks he can legislate how to I choose to prepare for a disaster. We have a city emergency manager that thinks the aftermath of a disaster larger than anything in recorded history with be an idyllic picnic where everyone shares what they have and it is useless to arm yourself because you'll just get robbed anyway by someone with a bigger gun. And one expert that our local government gets their advice from likens a disaster to a camping trip and another is a seismologist that admits if a 9.0 were to hit that his children would be stranded at school on the other side of the Willamette River.

If you disagree with Mr. Mumaw's reply or want to ask him questions for yourself please talk to him: [email protected] or (503) 259-1183

 

[chariot13]

Are slaves still maintained M-F but free on the weekends?

This is the slave of today and the majority of people on this planet has someone trying to be their master. Want freedom? Get rid of freedoms antonym, IE; control (government).

 

[Steve M]

A quick update. Last Tuesday I attended the Beaverton City Council meeting but elected not to say anything during the visitor comment period. I hung around for about an hour before heading home. This evening at 6:30pm is the next meeting and I plan to do the same, though next week I do plan to speak to the council regarding the perception by some that after a major disaster we'll be living in some kind of civilized utopia.

I encourage anyone that can to attend the meetings and if not please contact the council members and voice your support of repealing this ordinance. If you live in Beaverton and don't at least do that then you've got no right to complain about gun control bills at any level of the government.