Portland Mayor Sam Adams - Introducing City Anti-Gun Initiatives

[Joe Link]

Thanks to OFF and their media alert many of us found out about this almost immediately. Please join us in fighting these initiatives and leave your (clean and respectful) comments on the <broken link removed> .

OFF Alert
Original Here

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Portland's Mayor ...Pathetic Media Whore[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Portland's disgraced Mayor, and <broken link removed> , Sam Adams, having apparently run out of teen boys to "mentor" has turned his sights (such as they are) on firearms.

In a <broken link removed> issued today, timed so most local pro-gun talk show hosts had wrapped up for the week, Adams proposed sweeping new anti-gun regulations for the City of Portland.

Adams, whose predilection for underage lovers follows in the footsteps of <broken link removed> (a mentor of anti-gun extremist <broken link removed> ) is asking for comments on his proposals, which would violate Oregon law. The law follows:

166.170 State preemption. (1) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, the authority to regulate in any matter whatsoever the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition, is vested solely in the Legislative Assembly. (2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city or other municipal corporation or district may enact civil or criminal ordinances, including but not limited to zoning ordinances, to regulate, restrict or prohibit the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, storage, transportation or use of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition. Ordinances that are contrary to this subsection are void. [1995 s.s. c.1 §1]


In his press release, Adams actually brags about being a "founding member" of New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg's "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" an organization that is comical in its mindless pursuit of new gun restrictions each time their heavily restricted cities has a shooting...in spite of their gun restrictions.

We think it's safe to say that this latest PR stunt will backfire, just like everything else this sorry, freedom-hating loser has done. But anything can happen in Portland. So keep your powder dry.[/FONT]

Mayor Sam Adam's PortlandOnline Website
<broken link removed>

Request for your comments: Illegal gun initiatives

By Sam Adams

The illegal use of firearms is a long-standing community problem in the City of Portland. Changes to federal and state gun laws are needed. That is why I am a founding member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns. At the state level, Ceasefire Oregon is advocating for common-sense gun safety laws. The Brady Campaign is working on gun education and lobbying on the national level.
But the enactment of state and federal gun safety laws is a slow and uncertain process. In the meantime, due to lax gun safety laws, cities like Portland get caught in the crossfire: literally and tragically.
During my first week as Commissioner of the Portland Police Bureau, I requested that the City Attorney research potential changes to the Portland City Code to effectively reduce gun-related crimes. Federal and state laws govern most, but not all, gun-related issues.
Over the past four days, eight shootings have occurred in Portland.

• OregonLive: Police respond to 7 shootings across N, NE, SE Portland...
• OregonLive: Portland police will step up presence after outbreak of shootings
• OregonLive: Portland Police investigate gang-related gunfire

Portland Police Bureau and the Office of Youth Violence Prevention, working in cooperation with other jurisdictions, have deployed additional resources to stop these activities. However, intervention is only part of the solution. A proactive, preventative strategy to limit guns from getting into the wrong hands and providing tougher penalties for gun-related crimes will play a critical role.
In summary, I am asking for public discussion on the following five gun safety initiatives:

• Impose a special curfew for juveniles who have been found by a court of law to have violated gun laws.
• Create new city crime of failure to control access to a firearm by a child
• Create new city crime of failure to report theft or loss of a firearm
• Increase penalties for possession of a loaded firearm in a public place
• Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated firearms use or possession laws from areas of the City in which illegal use of firearms is markedly greater than other areas. Exclusions to be enforced through arrest for trespass, but with many variances available for necessary and non-harmful activities.

The attached draft Portland City Code provisions contain new or amended language that will assist law enforcement with the difficult job of limiting gun related crime.
Please view the draft by clicking here.

By Friday, September 3, 2010, please email me at [email protected] with any comments you have about the attached proposed local ordinance changes.

Read More

 

[Decker]

Ahhh... good ole' Sammy Adams... such a classy guy and all around great mayor isn't he?

 

[spengo]

Phew, not as bad as I thought when I read the topic.

Impose a special curfew for juveniles who have been found by a court of law to have violated gun laws.

And not a single f*** was given that day

Create new city crime of failure to control access to a firearm by a child

Lol, this one is funny. "I did not fail to control my child's access to firearms your honor, I gave them to him willingly!"

Create new city crime of failure to report theft or loss of a firearm

What is the point? Who wouldn't report a theft of a firearm? I want my goddamn gun back!

Increase penalties for possession of a loaded firearm in a public place

Gay. But the really gay part (having a penalty in the first place) already existed. Good thing OR is shall-issue for CHLs at least.

Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated firearms use or possession laws from areas of the City in which illegal use of firearms is markedly greater than other areas. Exclusions to be enforced through arrest for trespass, but with many variances available for necessary and non-harmful activities.

No effs given here either.

 

[Trlsmn]

This is all just feel good politics, I guess this makes the start of his reelection campaign official. Do we really want Sam Adams making policy that involves children? How about if he works on political ethics first?

 

[drew]

I hope the juvenile name calling comments on the city's site didn't come from members here.

Please read the the draft at the bottom of the page. Please don't start a post with "Mr. Liar Mayor". This is a disservice to your position.

When I see posts like that I will only read for amusement because I've already decided there's not a good argument behind it.

That being said if he didn't throw in the phrase "common-sense gun laws" and mentioned the Brady Campaign and Ceasefire Oregon, I'd be more supportive of some of these measures. I also seem to recall the use of exclusion areas in the past didn't work well.

 

[terrylf72]

I have issue with this idiot.. Everytime I vote, the persone I voted against is the one that wins, I didnt vote for him and now cause of this have even more reason to vote on anything that will get him out of here.. and his politics.

 

[Stomper]

Maybe a more prolific/aggressive needle exchange program will help stem the rising tide of shooting incidents!

 

[jgeist]

Good Ole Sam is the bend over for me type of guy.. As long as we continue to stand, he can't screw us..

 

[pokerace]

[/QUOCreate new city crime of failure to control access to a firearm by a child
TE]

He doesn't want the young men to be able to protect themselves from him.

 

[sprice37]

......and as we all know if we outlaw them then there cannot be a problem due to firearms because the are illegal and criminals only use legally obtained firearms!!!!!

 

[THC101]

the language in these initiatives is so convoluted

 

[ob1]

Quote: Spengo
Create new city crime of failure to report theft or loss of a firearm

What is the point? Who wouldn't report a theft of a firearm? I want my goddamn gun back!

Here's a hypothetical point (and I hope I am wrong): It's the old shell game or reverse incrementalism. This would be a necessary component to any future local gun registration program.
One thing that galls these suckers (un-intended pun) is that they lose owner tracking on any firearm that is sold in a private transaction, after it is registered in the FFL transaction. At this point, we have no mandatory local registration with a FTF transaction, the weapon becomes theoretically untraceable (no papers) if the seller chooses not to maintain or divulge the buyers information. This is one of the reasons they enacted the "Gun Show Loop Hole" ordinance, making record checks at gun shows in Portland mandatory. This of course destroyed one of best things about a FTF private parties transaction at a show, by creating a "record" of it. (If you believe the story that the record of those nics checks are kept only temporarily, I have some swamp land for you)

Now lets say that in the future, (in their twisted pipedreams) a local mandatory registration program becomes reality. Two things that would be required would be that private sellers be required to maintain records of the transfer of their firearms, or even worse, report it to law enforcement for re-registration in a local data base. The second requirement we have right here, registered owners would be required to report the loss of any firearm in their possession. This would remove the ability of the registered owner to protect the identity of the new owner by saying, "I lost it, I dont know when". That would be an admission of guilt in "Sammy's" proposal.

Granted, none of these requirements are in place now. The thing is that we need to be alert, since these people have learned to accomplish their goals with one step at a time, and not necessarily in the order we might expect. It's the old frog in a slowly boiling pot analogy. Call me a tin foil hatter, but Spengo you are right, what other point would this requirement have with an otherwise law abiding gun owner ?

 

[spengo]

Quote: Spengo
Create new city crime of failure to report theft or loss of a firearm

What is the point? Who wouldn't report a theft of a firearm? I want my goddamn gun back!

Here's a hypothetical point (and I hope I am wrong): It's the old shell game or reverse incrementalism. This would be a necessary component to any future local gun registration program.
One thing that galls these suckers (un-intended pun) is that they lose owner tracking on any firearm that is sold in a private transaction, after it is registered in the FFL transaction. At this point, we have no mandatory local registration with a FTF transaction, the weapon becomes theoretically untraceable (no papers) if the seller chooses not to maintain or divulge the buyers information. This is one of the reasons they enacted the "Gun Show Loop Hole" ordinance, making record checks at gun shows in Portland mandatory. This of course destroyed one of best things about a FTF private parties transaction at a show, by creating a "record" of it. (If you believe the story that the record of those nics checks are kept only temporarily, I have some swamp land for you)

Now lets say that in the future, (in their twisted pipedreams) a local mandatory registration program becomes reality. Two things that would be required would be that private sellers be required to maintain records of the transfer of their firearms, or even worse, report it to law enforcement for re-registration in a local data base. The second requirement we have right here, registered owners would be required to report the loss of any firearm in their possession. This would remove the ability of the registered owner to protect the identity of the new owner by saying, "I lost it, I dont know when". That would be an admission of guilt in "Sammy's" proposal.

Granted, none of these requirements are in place now. The thing is that we need to be alert, since these people have learned to accomplish their goals with one step at a time, and not necessarily in the order we might expect. It's the old frog in a slowly boiling pot analogy. Call me a tin foil hatter, but Spengo you are right, what other point would this requirement have with an otherwise law abiding gun owner ?

Huh I didn't think about that. Well if the tin-foil-hat idea is the truth it's a good thing that guy is only mayor of Portland. He can't do too much damage there at least.

 

[chemist]

Let's calm down and actually read these proposals:

"Impose a special curfew for juveniles who have been found by a court of law to have violated gun laws."
The NRA could've been the author of this one - it blames the criminals, not the guns, and aims to keep the criminals off the streets, not the guns.

"Create new city crime of failure to control access to a firearm by a child."
I like! The baby-momma whose precious little gangsta shoots up the 'hood goes to jail too.

"Create new city crime of failure to report theft or loss of a firearm."
This one gives me the willies. There's no way that I'll EVER accept any government entity imposing reporting requirements on my legal gun possession.

"Increase penalties for possession of a loaded firearm in a public place."
Obviously this sentence needs the word illegal inserted in there somewhere, since the city can't pre-empt state law. But IMO the issue isn't the statutory penalty, it's whether the DA's office keeps pleading down serious crimes to jaywalking just to lower their caseload.

"Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated firearms use or possession laws from areas of the City in which illegal use of firearms is markedly greater than other areas. Exclusions [are] to be enforced through arrest for trespass, but with many variances available for necessary and non-harmful activities."
It's scary as heck to think that some public official will decide what sidewalk you can and cannot walk down based on squishy metrics like "markedly greater" or "necessary activities." The gun part is almost irrelevant here - the next version could very well say: "Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated [dog-walking or any other] laws from areas of the City in which illegal [dog-walking or anything else] is markedly greater than other areas." This proposed law would give the government total control over your 1st Amendment rights to free association.

All I'm saying is, let's not mix up our distaste for city politics in general and Mr. Adams in particular with the specifics of these proposed laws.

 

[Trlsmn]

Let's calm down and actually read these proposals:

"Impose a special curfew for juveniles who have been found by a court of law to have violated gun laws."
The NRA could've been the author of this one - it blames the criminals, not the guns, and aims to keep the criminals off the streets, not the guns.

"Create new city crime of failure to control access to a firearm by a child."
I like! The baby-momma whose precious little gangsta shoots up the 'hood goes to jail too.

"Create new city crime of failure to report theft or loss of a firearm."
This one gives me the willies. There's no way that I'll EVER accept any government entity imposing reporting requirements on my legal gun possession.

"Increase penalties for possession of a loaded firearm in a public place."
Obviously this sentence needs the word illegal inserted in there somewhere, since the city can't pre-empt state law. But IMO the issue isn't the statutory penalty, it's whether the DA's office keeps pleading down serious crimes to jaywalking just to lower their caseload.

"Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated firearms use or possession laws from areas of the City in which illegal use of firearms is markedly greater than other areas. Exclusions [are] to be enforced through arrest for trespass, but with many variances available for necessary and non-harmful activities."
It's scary as heck to think that some public official will decide what sidewalk you can and cannot walk down based on squishy metrics like "markedly greater" or "necessary activities." The gun part is almost irrelevant here - the next version could very well say: "Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated [dog-walking or any other] laws from areas of the City in which illegal [dog-walking or anything else] is markedly greater than other areas." This proposed law would give the government total control over your 1st Amendment rights to free association.

All I'm saying is, let's not mix up our distaste for city politics in general and Mr. Adams in particular with the specifics of these proposed laws.

This is exactly what I got out of the whole proposal. Excluding people from an area has serious ramifications and way oversteps the power of government and yes it is much more troubling than the basically pointless child gun safety laws. For one these laws seem directly aimed at the Portland minority youth so there is a racial element to consider as they will in the end be the ones excluded in practice.

The loosely worded "Increase penalties for possession of a loaded firearm in a public place" could be severe consequences and essentially amount to a ban on concealed carry if it is written poorly either on purpose or through willful ignorance.

As for Sam Adams he is a blight on Portland and he's grandstanding, the funny thing is he thinks he actually has a chance at re-election. Prediction, Sam Adams will lose by a landslide next election. In the time since the Beau scandal Sam Adams has proven he has not yet hit "Rock Bottom" so to speak.

 

[capdek]

Let's calm down and actually read these proposals:

"Impose a special curfew for juveniles who have been found by a court of law to have violated gun laws."
The NRA could've been the author of this one - it blames the criminals, not the guns, and aims to keep the criminals off the streets, not the guns.

"Create new city crime of failure to control access to a firearm by a child."
I like! The baby-momma whose precious little gangsta shoots up the 'hood goes to jail too.

"Create new city crime of failure to report theft or loss of a firearm."
This one gives me the willies. There's no way that I'll EVER accept any government entity imposing reporting requirements on my legal gun possession.

"Increase penalties for possession of a loaded firearm in a public place."
Obviously this sentence needs the word illegal inserted in there somewhere, since the city can't pre-empt state law. But IMO the issue isn't the statutory penalty, it's whether the DA's office keeps pleading down serious crimes to jaywalking just to lower their caseload.

"Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated firearms use or possession laws from areas of the City in which illegal use of firearms is markedly greater than other areas. Exclusions [are] to be enforced through arrest for trespass, but with many variances available for necessary and non-harmful activities."
It's scary as heck to think that some public official will decide what sidewalk you can and cannot walk down based on squishy metrics like "markedly greater" or "necessary activities." The gun part is almost irrelevant here - the next version could very well say: "Exclude people who have been found by a court of law to have violated [dog-walking or any other] laws from areas of the City in which illegal [dog-walking or anything else] is markedly greater than other areas." This proposed law would give the government total control over your 1st Amendment rights to free association.

All I'm saying is, let's not mix up our distaste for city politics in general and Mr. Adams in particular with the specifics of these proposed laws.

I agree - for the most part - with chemist on 1. As long as they're targeting gang-bangers and violent juveniles and not some stupid kid who got dinged for shooting Daddy's shotgun across a roadway. The 'assumed' goal with 1 is to target gang-bangers and violent juveniles, so tighten-up the ordinance to clearly do this. Or better yet, why not just throw it out completely and use current laws to get these thugs off the streets? After all, the only kids that will actually abide by this curfew are the generally decent ones who got into some minor trouble for a stupid mistake and want to stay on the right side of the law. The gang-bangers and violent juveniles the law is supposed to target are going to ignore it just like they do all the other laws they are violating as part of their criminal lifestyle.

As for 2, well sure, when you see stories like the one in Boston about Lakeisha Gadson (<broken link removed>), you think "Ya, go after those irresponsible low-life, scum-bag parents!". But I am more afraid that - just like what happened in the above story - the low-life, scum-bag parents of low-life, scum-bag, gang-bangin' juveniles will just walk because they live entirely off government services and keep a ton of government minions employed, and the type of parents that will be targeted will be the main-street type couple whose son Bobby got charged after parking within 1000 feet of his school with his shotgun in the back of his truck (for example see this story <broken link removed> , or this slightly more 'infamous' one <broken link removed> ).

As for 3, well, just like everyone sees, that is nothing more than a backhanded way to identify and register all gun owners. 'Nuff said on that one!

As for 4, where is the word "illegal" in that ridiculous ordinance as chemist correctly points out? That ordinance will never survive constitutional muster as currently written - let alone state preemption laws! And again, even if you did add the word 'illegal' in there somewhere, at the end-of-the-day, it would likely prove to be nothing more than a political tool to harass law-abiding gun owners.

And finally, I think chemist has nailed 5 exactly!

Let's be honest here, this BS from Sam is nothing more than grandstanding to try and get back some street-cred with the liberal base in Portland. At worst, it will win him support with the hard-core anti-gunners while costing the good citizens of Portland a ton in legal fees. At best, it will be seen for what it truly is, will go nowhere, and will prove to be just one more nail in his political coffin.

 

[Trlsmn]

Sam Adams is trying to "rectify" the juvenile "penal" system by touching on a few at risk youth points.

 

[capdek]

Sam Adams is trying to "rectify" the juvenile "penal" system by touching on a few at risk youth points.

 

[chemist]

Sam Adams is trying to "rectify" the juvenile "penal" system by touching on a few at risk youth points.

Ooooh... you bad.

You will have to be analyzed - and possibly penalized.

 

[Trlsmn]

My best Sam Adams one-liner was after the Beau scandal, then the house foreclosure scandal, followed by the truck wreck scandal:


"No House, no Truck, no Beau Breedlove, not a single luxury................"