JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
34
Reactions
0
Just curious if anyone knows:

I haven't had the occasion to go to the waterfront village in a few years. Last time I went there was an issue with CHL holders carrying their CCW - haven't been back since.

Are they still banning CCWs? I could not find anything on the Festival website or the city website archives - that wasn't 5 or 6 years old.

Anyone know whats up this year?
 
Illegal to Ban CCW on public property or public buildings for licensed legal CHL holders (Except Federal Buildings).

T_H

Thanks for the input - I know that it is not legal but the City of Portland did it anyway, it has been a few years ago that it happened, or at least the first time it affected me- and was all over the news at that time.

Just curious if anyone with first-hand experience knows whether or not they are going to be doing it again this year? what happened last year?
 
I had talked to OFF a few years ago about this and what they said was that the Portland City Council tried to get around it by saying they leased the venue to the company that was running the Rose Festival Water Front Village and it was the company that leased the property that was enforcing the ban on CCW. Interestingly enough a guy I talked to at OFF (can't remember his name, but I think he is the attorney that founded OFF) said he was going down there to try and get arrested. :s0114: Not sure whatever came of that, but he said if you choose to go, concealed is concealed.

Personally I would love to see someone with the time and bank account to challenge this, but sadly, that isn't me.
 
Well if the city does try an end around like this then you cannot be arrested for CCW only told that you are tresspassing and you must leave. I guess you'd have to leave the city then?

HAHA!

I'm not sure if the city of Portland took lessons from the whitehouse or vise-versa. They're all a bunch of slippery snakes!

T_H

:s0081:
 
I had talked to OFF a few years ago about this and what they said was that the Portland City Council tried to get around it by saying they leased the venue to the company that was running the Rose Festival Water Front Village and it was the company that leased the property that was enforcing the ban on CCW. Interestingly enough a guy I talked to at OFF (can't remember his name, but I think he is the attorney that founded OFF) said he was going down there to try and get arrested. :s0114: Not sure whatever came of that, but he said if you choose to go, concealed is concealed.

Personally I would love to see someone with the time and bank account to challenge this, but sadly, that isn't me.

Yes . . .that does ring a bell . . . I do remember them making a private domain claim but there was a lot of debate about whether or not it was a legal ban. I believe that Mr. Starrett from OFF was the gentleman you speak of. Don't know if anything became of it. Figured I'd try it out this year. But if they won't support my 2A rights and recognize my CHL, then I sure as **** ain't going to support the Rose Festival with my "spending" money.
 
Well if the city does try an end around like this then you cannot be arrested for CCW only told that you are tresspassing and you must leave. I guess you'd have to leave the city then?

HAHA!

I'm not sure if the city of Portland took lessons from the whitehouse or vise-versa. They're all a bunch of slippery snakes!

:s0081:

AMEN to that brother! The problem is . . . . and come to the Rose Festival and find out . . . traffic and parking can be a 1 hour cluster #@!*, just to find out that they will turn you away . . . isn't worth the trip :eek:
 
Just got an email back from Kevin Starrett at OFF. He isn't aware if there is a ban this year.

Just might be worth it to test it this year. I don't want to get arrested, but maybe go down and when they ask if you have any weapons say "I have no illegal weapons" and see what happens. I did that about 3-4 years ago and the guy at the gate asked if I had any weapons of any kind. I said I had a pistol in my fanny pack and had a CHL. He told me I could not enter the Waterfront park. I just said OK as I am sure this guy was just parroting what his bosses told him to say, but I may try it this year and short of being arrested ask them to call the police and see if the police agree if they can exclude me.

Might be fun to see what reaction I get. If they tell me to leave I will, but I might ask for a written demand. Not sure if I want to do this yet, but I am thinking seriously about it.
 
Sounds like a good idea Cougfan. I wonder if I may take a trip up to PDX just to see the sights.
 
I haven't been to the annual mud and rain festival for years. The worse they can do is kick you out, if you don't leave or come back it will be trespassing and you will have no defense against that charge.
 
I haven't been to the annual mud and rain festival for years. The worse they can do is kick you out, if you don't leave or come back it will be trespassing and you will have no defense against that charge.

You are correct if indeed leasing the Waterfront Park to a 3rd party makes it temporarily private (like Washington Square Mall or such) for the duration of their lease/rental of the park. The big question I have is whether or not they can lease public land, i.e. the Waterfront Park, to a private enterprise and circumvent Oregon preemption.

Anyone have any input on this? :huh:
 
You are correct if indeed leasing the Waterfront Park to a 3rd party makes it temporarily private (like Washington Square Mall or such) for the duration of their lease/rental of the park. The big question I have is whether or not they can lease public land, i.e. the Waterfront Park, to a private enterprise and circumvent Oregon preemption.

Anyone have any input on this? :huh:

The City of Portland seems to have a general policy of allowing private companies and organizations to temporarily rent parks and exclude (for example) guests who don't buy tickets. If such a company can exclude visitors from what would otherwise be a public space, they'd have the common law right to prohibit firearms. I'm pretty sure, but not completely sure, that the preemption statute would not trump the property rights of a renter who wanted to ban guns from its event. It would be another story if the city required renters to ban guns as a condition of a lease.

Regardless, I doubt we'll get a chance to find out anytime soon.
 
The City of Portland seems to have a general policy of allowing private companies and organizations to temporarily rent parks and exclude (for example) guests who don't buy tickets. If such a company can exclude visitors from what would otherwise be a public space, they'd have the common law right to prohibit firearms. I'm pretty sure, but not completely sure, that the preemption statute would not trump the property rights of a renter who wanted to ban guns from its event. It would be another story if the city required renters to ban guns as a condition of a lease.

Regardless, I doubt we'll get a chance to find out anytime soon.

Would it be possible under the public information act to demand to see the lease/rental conditions from the City of Portland or Metro to see if there are any requirements in the lease/rental agreement that the lessee (sp?) or renter would have to agree to exclude legal CHL holders?

I know this is a long shot as they could be in a closed door meeting and agree to such stipulation with a wink and a nod without putting anything in writing. Just curious as to opinions. ZachS, you seem to have some background in this. What say you?
 
Would it be possible under the public information act to demand to see the lease/rental conditions from the City of Portland or Metro to see if there are any requirements in the lease/rental agreement that the lessee (sp?) or renter would have to agree to exclude legal CHL holders?

I know this is a long shot as they could be in a closed door meeting and agree to such stipulation with a wink and a nod without putting anything in writing. Just curious as to opinions. ZachS, you seem to have some background in this. What say you?

I don't know anything about public information laws here, but that seems like the kind of thing that would be covered. I suspect that the "wink and a nod" scenario would be most likely... assuming legally carried guns are actually banned this year. The request would probably originate with the police department.

Anyway, except for the the principle of the whole thing (and being able to protect yourself going to and from the parking lot), I think carrying there is a moot point. You'll see more gangsters and cops at the "Waterfront Village" than you ever will anywhere else in Portland. When seconds count, the police are truly seconds away - and their presence makes it extraordinarily unlikely that anybody who's not a gang member would deal with anything more violent than pickpocketing. For those reasons, it would be stupider than stupid for a civilian to draw a gun down there.

I don't have any background in this except for a year of law school.... which pretty much just qualifies me to make wild guess about what the law actually is.
 
Why step foot in Portland and give anyone there money to begin with? Nothing but miscreants, thugs, ghettofied morons, and general human garbage hang out there. And even worse people live in Portland. F___ them. Hopefully the whole steaming pile of crap is rained on and it ends up a muddy, stinking, bum-urine smelling mess.
 

Upcoming Events

Teen Rifle 1 Class
  • Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
  • Springfield, OR

New Classified Ads

Back Top