|
|
 |
11.19.10 Portland Hears New Gun Ordinances. |
Last night, Portland held a hearing on Mayor Sam Adams's proposed
ordinances to fight "gun violence." No vote was
held but one is scheduled for December 1st. Video available
here.
The proposal includes new curfews for juveniles who have been
convicted of "gun related" offenses and are
still on parole, and the designating of "hotspots"
where persons convicted of "gun-related" crimes may
not go while they are on parole or probation. Adams said the
"hotspots" had been the center of gun violence for
2 decades but failed to explain why the city just didn't send
more cops there.
The usual cast of characters were on hand including Ginny Burdick,
who told the panel that most gun owners "agreed with her"
and that in spite of all that love,through her long battle she
had received many death threats. Sam Adams thanked her for her
years of service and noted that by introducing these ordinances,
he was "standing on her shoulders." If that's not
a weird enough mental image for you, he also thanked Multnomah
County Commissioner Judy Shiprack for "mentoring"
him. Given Sam's definition of "mentoring" we really
don't want to go there. Shiprack testified that the County would
be looking at similar proposals in January.
Former House member and anti-gun extremist Joanne Bowman testified
that she was fine with the gun restrictions but opposed exclusionary
zones because they would mostly affect young black men. She
testified that since the new ordinance was targeted at only
20 to 30 people the city should just get them all together for
a "community meeting." As relieved as we are
that she no longer has a vote in Salem, we do kind of miss the
comic relief.
The new ordinances also impose a more stringent curfew on minors
convicted of "gun crimes" but make exceptions for
"church activities." Council member Amanda Fritz
was quick to clarify that this definition would include "mosques."
That actually made sense except that she also wanted to make
sure it included synagogues, apparently so that the many Jewish
gang bangers in Portland would not be inconvenienced. (Some
of those bar mitzvahs have gotten out of hand.) Fitz also wanted
to know if guns had serial numbers.
An exchange near the end of the hearing demonstrated that no
one there had a clue what the laws are concerning open carry.
The city presented some interesting statistics. They said that
while "persons of color" made up 25% of the city's
population, they were over 50% of the victims of homicide. At
no time was any mention made of the race of the perpetrators
of these homicides. The
Portland Mercury quotes Adams as saying "People being
murdered by guns are Portlanders of color." People
are being murdered by guns? Not other people, guns? They're
self-animated now? The Mayor did not mention what color
the guns who were murdering people were.
The city also stated of the homicides from 2007 to 2010, firearms
were used in 42%. That leaves 58% of killings totally unaffected
by Adam's proposals.
There are two provisions of special interest to gun owners.
The first is a new offense if a gun owner does not keep his
firearms locked up. If a child gains access to a firearm,
the gun owner faces 10 days in jail and a $500.00 fine. If a
child gains access to a firearm and leaves the premises, the
punishment is 20 days in jail and a fine of $750.00. If the
child gains access and takes the gun to a school or school related
event, the gun owner faces 30 days and a $2500.00 fine.
The exceptions are if the "child" broke into your
home or your guns were locked up or you had a trigger lock on
your gun. The ordinance also states that it does not apply if
you gave your child "permission" to have the gun.
This is an interesting exception. Both sections 1 and 2 of the
lock up ordinance state that the "child" had to gain
access without your permission. Section 1 describes a "child"
gaining access to a firearm, and section 2 describes a "child"
getting access and leaving the premises. So, if you are a gun
owner with a young gang banger residing with you, and you decide
to leave your guns lying around and your micro-thug takes one
down to the local gang recreational area, you have not committed
an offense if you gave him permission.(Makes sense to us.)
Oregon's state preemption law addresses this pretty clearly:
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]
Emphasis added.
So how can Portland regulate the storage of firearms?
Well according to their lawyer, David Woboril, they were not
regulating "storage", they were regulating "access
management."
The second new ordinance of interest to gun owners is a proposal
to make it a crime if you fail to report a lost or stolen gun.
If you fail to provide a serial number for the stolen gun, the
city will charge you $200.00 as an "administration fee."
You're robbed once by a burglar and once by the city. No word
on what they are administering.
We're still trying to determine what legitimate gun owner would
NOT report a stolen gun. But oddly, there is a built in defense
if you simply say you didn't know it was missing. (OK, we get
it.)
The ordinance states that this provision "enables police
to respond more rapidly to a report that a gun was stolen and
possibly return it to its owners or track down the thieves."
(Which means the police can respond more quickly to a report
of a stolen gun, if there is a report of a stolen gun.)
That's on page 3. On page 2, the ordinance states the following:
"Over 150,000 firearms were reported lost or stolen in
2008. 85% of these guns were never recovered and tens of thousands
more were likely never even reported." So we can
certainly see the value of this idea. Of course we're not sure
how they conclude that "tens of thousands" were likely
never even reported, because, well...they weren't reported.
Adams's proposals are pathetic. We'll keep an eye on this and
keep you informed.
|
 Send this Page to a Friend
|
 |
Copyright
© 2000 - 2011, Oregon Firearms Federation. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
|
