JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
3,994
Reactions
1,018
Less than a month after Adams said he would postpone his gun control ordinances, the city council will vote on them. Who expected Sam to tell the truth?:angry:

Portland mayor's proposed gun-control ordinances to go before City Council on Nov. 18 | OregonLive.com

The City Council on Nov. 18 will consider three new gun-control proposals and two changes to existing city code that Mayor Sam Adams is proposing in an effort to reduce shootings within the city limits.

Adams sought input on the proposals from community groups, local and state officials, attorneys and criminal justice experts. On Monday, Adams was putting the finishing touches on his proposals after meeting with Chief Mike Reese and deputy city attorney Dave Woboril. He joins mayors across the country who are trying to pass gun-control laws that state lawmakers would not, or could not.

"The state of Oregon has not sufficiently addressed the problems resulting from the increased availability and use of firearms in urban areas of the state, forcing cities such as Portland to enact, within the limits of Oregon state law, city code ordinances to address the threat to the public's health and safety posed by gang violence and illegal gun use," the mayor's proposed ordinance says.

The three new laws that he's proposing: A child safety law that would hold adults responsible if their gun gets into a child's hands, a theft reporting law that would penalize gun owners who don't report the theft or loss of a firearm; and an exclusion zone measure that would designate shooting hot spots in the city, and allow the city to exclude gun offenders who are on probation or under juvenile authority from entering a public area or park within the hot spot locations, unless they live in the area, go to school, obtain social services or travel through it.

The two other measures would amend city code: a special 7 p.m. curfew for juveniles who have been convicted of a gun offense, found to have possessed, purchased, used, transferred or transported a firearm unlawfully; and placing a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 days in jail for previous gun offenders found carrying a loaded gun in a public place, which includes a vehicle or on transit. This would not affect concealed-handgun license holders. Right now, the court has discretion to sentence a violator for up to six months in prison, and a fine up to $500, but it's rarely done.

A new crime of endangering a child by allowing access to a firearm would set a sliding scale of penalties from up to 10 days of jail to 30 days of jail and fines up to $500 to $1,250, dependent upon danger to community.

An adult would be guilty if he or she failed to prevent access to a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, to a child without permission, or the permission of a parent or guardian. The penalty increases if the child carries the firearm off the gun owner's premises, and reaches the most severe penalty if the child carries the firearm to any school, school-sponsored or school-related event.

Under the proposed failure to report theft or loss of a firearm crime, a gun owner would have to report a theft or loss of a firearm within 48 hours of learning of a theft, or misplacement of a gun, and provide its description of the firearm, including serial number, to law enforcement, If not, the owner would be subject to a $500 fine. If an owner reported a gun stolen, but didn't provide the serial number, he or she would face a $200 administrative fee.

According to the mayor's proposal, the number of stolen firearms reported in the city of Portland each year since 2006, ranges from 248 to 327. And, 21.1 percent of traced guns recovered in Oregon in 2009 ended up in crimes less than two years since they were stolen.

"The short time to crime (under 2 years) for 21 percent of guns recovered in Oregon must be addressed," the mayor's proposed ordinance says.

The council would designate Illegal Firearms Use Hotspots, valid for a three-year period. They would be areas of the city where firearms-related crimes or illegal discharges for a 12-month period, within the 18 months preceding its designation is significantly higher than that for other similarly –sized geographic areas of the city. A person could be excluded from the designated hotspots only as a condition of their probation, parole or duration of their juvenile court supervision following conviction of a state firearm use or possession charge, or city firearm crime.

They'd be excluded from entering a public area or park within the designated hot-spot locations, unless they live in the areas, attend school, obtain social services or need to travel through it. They'll also have a right of appeal to the code hearings officer.

Firearms advocates have been quick to challenge Adams' proposals, calling them "laughable" and a publicity stunt. When Adams first unveiled his draft proposals at the end of August, gun-rights advocates cited an Oregon law adopted in 1995 that they argue makes Adams' proposals illegal. The law says no city or other municipal district can enact civil or criminal ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition , transfer, ownership, possession , storage , transportation or use of firearms, or any component of firearms, such as ammunition.

But city attorneys argue that the special curfew, increased penalty for previous offenders and the exclusions would affect only people already convicted of a gun offense. They also point to another state statute that authorizes cities to regulate discharge of firearms, and to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places.

David Kennedy, director of the Center for Crime Prevention and Control at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said the exclusion zones for gun violence is unique. "There's lots of research and common sense that would say that would be worth trying," Kennedy said. "Ordinary folks do not shoot people with guns. Those who do, usually have prior convictions. So it's a very intriguing idea."

Other mayors in major metropolitan cities have taken the lead in this arena. Adams earlier this year joined the coalition Mayors Against Illegal Guns, started by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino. Several major metropolitan cities have adopted some of the very same proposals Adams offers.

The child access prevention law, which holds an adult responsible if a gun gets into the hands of a child, and a lost and stolen gun law, which penalizes a gun owner who fails to report the theft or loss of a firearm , are the most widespread.

The gun ordinances are scheduled to go before council at 3 p.m. on Nov. 18.
 
Consider his enlightened observation, just as 75% of Multnomah County voted for a repeat failure of a Governor to get another chance for the sake of fun & diversity.:s0114:. Its becoming the only choice is by physical, not being a fool and believing in "democracy":s0114: Forget about it....have another drink, you dope:s0114:
 
I never claimed most people around here were smart or particularly enlightened. Unfortunately, Portland is a magnet for morons. I guess that makes me a dope for putting up with them. This dope is pouring a stiff drink to take the edge off the arrogance and stupidity exhibited by elected officials.
 
do they not realize that Oregon law prohibits cities from making their own gun laws?

first prosecution will result in a trip to the oregon supreme court, where the laws will be pooped on and overturned.
 
Right now, the court has discretion to sentence a violator for up to six months in prison, and a fine up to $500, but it's rarely done.

so once again we see the law i sin place but they need another one to inforce the law that is in place already, WTF come on what a crock
 
So this cant possibly overide conceal carry right? No City can trump State law.

Reco

they can put restrictions on anything they want. but prosecution will be a little difficult. more likely, if they're taking this approach, they'll just do like other cities in these United States like to do: have the "law," so they can arrest and confiscate, but then not prosecute. that way the law doesn't get challenged, short of a suit, but they still get to arrest and confiscate until shut down.

so you get arrested, maybe spend the weekend in jail, get your piece confiscated... get released from jail, charges downgraded to a violation. but now you gotta fight to get your gun back. that'll teach ya to carry a gun in my town!
 
I moved to Portland from Oklahoma four years ago, and most of the time, I really love it. The Northwest is fantastic, and I wouldn't mind staying here long term.

But I tell you what, there are occasions around this damn hippie town that make me really scratch my head in befuddlement. Annoying bicyclists, Adams getting elected, Kitzhaber getting re-elected (didn't the guy basically make a mess of everything when he was last in office), and now stupid gun circus shows by the council.

Is Seattle any better?
 
I moved to Portland from Oklahoma four years ago, and most of the time, I really love it. The Northwest is fantastic, and I wouldn't mind staying here long term.

But I tell you what, there are occasions around this damn hippie town that make me really scratch my head in befuddlement. Annoying bicyclists, Adams getting elected, Kitzhaber getting re-elected (didn't the guy basically make a mess of everything when he was last in office), and now stupid gun circus shows by the council.

Is Seattle any better?

I moved to Portland 10 years ago from California (SF bay area); coming from the Bay Area, Portland seemed fairly sane. Lots of things about Portland's politics bother me and yes some of the annoying cyclists too. However, I'll give Portland credit for a few things:

"local" goods/foods are more than just buzz words here -- people really go out of their way to be more sustainable, but local and support local businesses. I think that's worth something.

Portland has a usable public transportation system. I do not use Max often, but I know many people who do. It was a forward thinking move.

Some of those "hippies" that seem annoying, and you (and I) might assume are "liberals" might surprise you. Many are quite disgusted with both dems and repubs and are far more libertarian leaning, and *many* are gun owners and pro-gun.

I'll take Portland any day over SF bay or Seattle: both cities are even more nutty than Portland (by far), they are more crowded, far more expensive, traffic is much worse, etc.

Seattle any better? No way: SF bay area with more rain.

Just my 0.02

DJM
 
Negative, this has not been my experience at all, especially with the elitists in my area.

I can see that -- you live in the West Hills. Wife and I almost moved to SW Hills as it is beautiful, but really did not like the people -- as you say, "Elitist".

I live in N. Portland, not far from Adidas campus, which is a "middle class" neighborhood, formerly working class. Two people on my block have lived in their homes 30+ years; one lady, who must be mid 60's, lives in the house she was born in. Many of my neighbors are pro gun (at least one hunts) and I've done gun sales with two people from NWFA who wound up living withing walking distance.

Come down to my area of town and maybe you feel a different vibe -- we can drop by one of the local taverns where the "old timers" hang out. Beers are on me!

Cheers,
DJM
 
Portland mayor sends signal that WA gun owners better heed


"...State preemption has Seattle stuck in court right now, challenging the trial court victory of the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association in their joint lawsuit to stop the Queen City’s (this column never seriously entertained Seattle’s “Emerald City” moniker because it is simply stupid) attempt to ban guns from city park facilities. It’s illegal, and in the wake of SAF’s victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago, probably unconstitutional...."


<broken link removed>

Or try this:

<broken link removed>
 
"allow the city to exclude gun offenders who are on probation or under juvenile authority from entering a public area or park within the hot spot locations, unless they live in the area, go to school, obtain social services or travel through it. "

So, with this bad bad bad feel good law!!

what are they going to do about the ever growing houseless people that live in parks, under an overpass, on a bus bench, or motor home in the hot spot area?

What if they are shopping/working in the area?
What if they are visiting a Friend?

How are the areas going to be posted?

Is their going to be a sign on every corner, light/power pole, or stop sign?

How will that affect real-estate prices in the hot spot area?

Is their a time limit on this hot spot or is it permanent once placed?

How are the area's determined "hot spots", will the neighbors be able to appeal the city's decision to make an area a Hot Spot? or will the city be able to elect a hot spot at will at any time?

"They'll also have a right of appeal to the code hearings officer."

Is that after they get arrested for being in a public place?

How will a supposed offender that was convinced unlawful carry 15/20 years ago be notified and under probation for a non related crime?

Will the law apply to all convicted of unlawful carry etc. no matter where convicted Washington/Oregon/Idaho/California?

Will there be a charge to file the paperwork to appeal to the code hearings officer?

If one does appeal do they have to carry a piece of paper "permit" allowing them to go to that public area know as a hot spot?

"a special 7 p.m. curfew for juveniles who have been convicted of a gun offense, found to have possessed, purchased, used, transferred or transported a firearm unlawfully;"

Please define "juvenile" is it under 18 or under 21?

What about the 17 year old that has to go to work at 8pm and home at 11pm in a hot spot area?

What about us home builder that do not have serial number's on our firearms and it gets stolen? will it be a $200 administrative fee?
 
Very valid points Contract_Pilot!

I know what I'm about to say has been re-hashed many times, but why make more laws when the violators don't give two $!^#s about them??!!

And where is the money going to come from to pay for the administration, signage, special 'passes', monitoring, etc. that this will bring?

This whole country is going crazy...:huh::s0131::huh:
 
I can see that -- you live in the West Hills. Wife and I almost moved to SW Hills as it is beautiful, but really did not like the people -- as you say, "Elitist".

I live in N. Portland, not far from Adidas campus, which is a "middle class" neighborhood, formerly working class. Two people on my block have lived in their homes 30+ years; one lady, who must be mid 60's, lives in the house she was born in. Many of my neighbors are pro gun (at least one hunts) and I've done gun sales with two people from NWFA who wound up living withing walking distance.

Come down to my area of town and maybe you feel a different vibe -- we can drop by one of the local taverns where the "old timers" hang out. Beers are on me!

Cheers,
DJM

Perhaps I've been scarred by my experiences on the west side, in the pearl, and down on the PSU campus. The majority of people that I know down in those regions are quite anti-gun. It's good to know that people here don't feel the same about the rest of the city.

I'l keep that in mind, and I definitely appreciate the hospitality. Do you have any recommendations? It is indeed quite "phony" up here sometimes. It must be the altitude, both mentally and physically, of course.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top