Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Portland Mayor Sam Adams - Introducing City Anti-Gun Initiatives

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Joe Link, Aug 20, 2010.

  1. Joe Link

    Joe Link Portland, OR Well-Known Member Staff Member Lifetime Supporter 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    6,266
    Likes Received:
    4,537
    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 Portland site.

    OFF Alert
    Original Here

    Mayor Sam Adam's PortlandOnline Website
    Original Here

     
  2. Decker

    Decker My house Active Member

    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    110
    Ahhh... good ole' Sammy Adams... such a classy guy and all around great mayor isn't he?
     
  3. spengo

    spengo GLORIOUS CASCADIA Active Member

    Messages:
    1,267
    Likes Received:
    25
    Phew, not as bad as I thought when I read the topic.

    And not a single f*** was given that day
    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!"
    What is the point? Who wouldn't report a theft of a firearm? I want my goddamn gun back!
    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.
    No effs given here either.
     
  4. Trlsmn

    Trlsmn In Utero (Portland) Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    1,186
    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?
     
  5. drew

    drew OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    970
    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.
     
  6. terrylf72

    terrylf72 Portland, Oregon, United States Member

    Messages:
    641
    Likes Received:
    3
    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.
     
  7. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,912
    Likes Received:
    19,561
    Maybe a more prolific/aggressive needle exchange program will help stem the rising tide of shooting incidents! :D
     
  8. jgeist

    jgeist Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    295
    Likes Received:
    50
    Good Ole Sam is the bend over for me type of guy.. As long as we continue to stand, he can't screw us..:flag:
     
  9. pokerace

    pokerace Newberg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    754
     
  10. sprice37

    sprice37 Albany Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    440
    Likes Received:
    34
    ......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!!!!!:laugh::laugh:
     
  11. THC101

    THC101 Pierce County Member

    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    7
    the language in these initiatives is so convoluted
     
  12. ob1

    ob1 49th parallel Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    543
    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 ?
     
  13. spengo

    spengo GLORIOUS CASCADIA Active Member

    Messages:
    1,267
    Likes Received:
    25
    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.
     
  14. chemist

    chemist Beaverton OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    644
    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.
     
  15. Trlsmn

    Trlsmn In Utero (Portland) Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    1,186
    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. :laugh::bluelaugh::laugh:
     
  16. capdek

    capdek Oregon Gold Supporter Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    63
    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 (Gun laws can’t disarm negligent parenting - BostonHerald.com), 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 Student Charged After Rifle Found On High School Campus, or this slightly more 'infamous' one NRA-ILA :: California: NRA and CRPA Foundation Assisting High School Student with Appeal of Expulsion for Having Unloaded Shotguns in Off-Campus Truck).

    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.
     
  17. Trlsmn

    Trlsmn In Utero (Portland) Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    1,186
    Sam Adams is trying to "rectify" the juvenile "penal" system by touching on a few at risk youth points.
     
  18. capdek

    capdek Oregon Gold Supporter Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    240
    Likes Received:
    63
    :funnypoint:
     
  19. chemist

    chemist Beaverton OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    644
    Ooooh... you bad.

    You will have to be analyzed - and possibly penalized.
     
  20. Trlsmn

    Trlsmn In Utero (Portland) Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    1,186
    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................" :p