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

Three strikes and no balls...

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Dave Workman, Dec 2, 2010.

  1. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,225
    Likes Received:
    2,390
    "...This column warned about the Portland mayor’s intentions here, and suggested that the same mentality at work in Portland also infests City Hall in Seattle. The “Emerald City” is busy appealing its court loss earlier this year to Bellevue’s Second Amendment Foundation and the National Rifle Association over the wholly illegal city parks gun ban...."


    ?Three Strikes? in CA, no balls in Portland, no brains in Jersey - Seattle gun rights | Examiner.com

    Or try this:

    ?Three Strikes? in CA, no balls in Portland, no brains in Jersey - Seattle gun rights | Examiner.com
     
  2. chemist

    chemist Beaverton OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    644
    California's law is a bad example because it has nothing to do with crimes of violence. Any felonies can contribute to your three strikes, from felony DUI to stealing a bicycle. The state finds itself now in the unenviable position of releasing murderers and rapists to keep nonviolent three-strikes inmates locked up, because there's no legal way around the 3-strikes minimum sentence requirements.

    As far as Portland's new law, I note that the article doesn't say what the five points are! Here, for your edification, they're listed:

    Holds adults responsible if kids get ahold of a gun.

    Penalizes owners who don't report a gun that is lost or stolen.

    Sets a 7PM curfew for juvenile gun offenders.

    Sets mandatory minimum sentences for gun offenders caught with a gun.

    Bars gun offenders from so-called shooting "hot spots" identified around the city.


    Could you please explain to me how any of these violate the spirit or the letter of the state preemption statute? Personally, I don't see the problem with this new law. The only aspect that I might bump up against is the mandatory reporting of loss. Other than that, all I see in the new law is the shooters being held responsible for their crimes, rather than blaming the guns.
     
  3. Trlsmn

    Trlsmn In Utero (Portland) Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    1,186
    "Three balls and no strikes" would have been and awesome title to BTW!

    Or Four balls and ........:bluelaugh::laugh::bluelaugh:
     
  4. VW_Factor

    VW_Factor Woodburn Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    101
    They already were crimes..

    All these ordnances are is political posturing really. With language in such a manner to skirt Oregon state law.

    In the end, Mr. Adams already does blame the guns. He chalks it up to he has a gun problem in PDX. When he actually has a crime and gang problem.
     
  5. Dave Workman

    Dave Workman Western Washington Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,225
    Likes Received:
    2,390
    State preemption does not allow cities, towns or counties to establish their own gun laws in excess of what the state legislature has mandated. Period. It wouldn't matter if the city suddenly required everyone to have a gun. That wouldn't work either.

    If you do not draw a proverbial line in the sand and whack somebody real hard if they cross it, the line is no good. If you give Portland a wink and a nod and say that's okay, then the law has no teeth and it will soon be irrelevant and ignored on a greater scale as cities and counties figure out more ways to dance around the spirit and intent of the statute.