Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Man brought gun to Reynolds HS after shooting to protect sister is arrested

  1. #1
    Activist Member bwboley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Portland/Vancouver, ,
    Posts
    252

    Man brought gun to Reynolds HS after shooting to protect sister is arrested

    He wasn't oc but if he was would he have been arrested anyway?
    http://www.kptv.com/story/25755580/p...protect-sister

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Not guilty ! The police have no duty to protect anyone except their pensions !

  3. #3
    Regular Member Lord Sega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Warrenton, Oregon
    Posts
    317

    I'm not a lawyer, so correct me if I'm wrong...

    Ryenolds High School, Troutdale, Oregon is in Multnomah county.

    Multnomah county recently passed new gun laws, one is similar to the Unloaded Carry laws that Portland and some other cities have passed. This is allowed under State preemption ORS 166.170 and ORS 166.173

    Multnomah county code §15.064 POSSESSION OF A LOADED FIREARM IN A PUBLIC PLACE.(see page 7)

    This is poorly written (IMHO) and like Portland and others requires the firearm have all ammunition has been removed from the chamber and from the cylinder, clip, or magazine. It doesn't say "unloaded" in the body of the ordinance.
    If it said unloaded firearm and did not require an unloaded magazine, etc... then it would meet ORS 166.170 & 173.

    Anyway, if the article facts are correct then, I see these offenses:
    1) carrying concealed without a CHL (ORS 166.250)
    2) carrying a loaded firearm in a public place (Multnomah county code §15.064)
    3) carrying a firearm in or on school building, grounds, or within 1000' of school grounds (Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA) 18 U.S.C. § 922(q))
    --- not exempt since he does not have a concealed permit / license of the state the school is in.

    IF he was Open Carry (Unloaded) w/o CHL there would only be the Fed Gun Free Zone to charge with.
    He's 21, so he was able to get a CHL.
    WITH a CHL none of the 3 listed above could be charged.

    From the article, I don't know if the stop & frisk was Terry Stop legal (maybe), and the article says police obtained consent to search his car (even without consent, he was already arrested on a weapons charge, so a warrant would have been easy).

    The article says he is charged with only the Unlawful Possession of a Firearm (Class A misdemeanor = $6,250 and/or 1 year in jail.) It shouldn't loose him his 2A rights permanently (after time and probation is done), but ORS 166.291 Sec 1(h) forces a wait of 4 years after ANY misdemeanor before he could apply for a CHL (not sure when the clock starts on that, at conviction or when time / probation is complete).

    *** Until I researched this response I did not know about the 4 year wait for a CHL for ANY TYPE misdemeanor, learn something new everyday.
    Last edited by Lord Sega; 06-12-2014 at 01:48 AM. Reason: minor format / spelling corrections
    "Guns are not the problem … crazy is the problem” ... “We cannot legislate our society to the craziest amongst us.” - Jon Stewart
    “I do not love the bright sword for it's sharpness, nor the arrow for it's swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend." - Tolkien

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Thanks for the analysis Lord Sega .... hopefully the people of OR have the common sense to understand that these situations are the exact reason (one of them anyway) that we have the RKBA and nullify the law if he goes to trial.

    If cops don't want LACs around them, then they should quit and get new jobs.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Sega View Post
    From the article, I don't know if the stop & frisk was Terry Stop legal (maybe), and the article says police obtained consent to search his car (even without consent, he was already arrested on a weapons charge, so a warrant would have been easy).
    From the article it is hard to tell if he was seized or if it was a consensual encounter. A Terry frisk is permitted if there is an objectively reasonable belief the suspect is armed and presently dangerous. It's probably gonna boil down to whether the guy consented to the encounter and frisk, or if the sergeant seized and conducted the frisk without consent or reasonable suspicion. But the "unusually nervous" excuse seems pretty weak since everyone was probably nervous and what makes you "unusually" nervous?

    From article:

    "A police sergeant motioned for Powell to come toward him and said he appeared "unusually nervous," court documents state.

    The officer conducted a pat down and lifted up Powell's shirt to discover a handgun sticking out of his waistband."
    Last edited by madicarus; 06-14-2014 at 02:22 PM.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by madicarus View Post
    From the article it is hard to tell if he was seized or if it was a consensual encounter. A Terry frisk is permitted if there is an objectively reasonable belief the suspect is armed and presently dangerous. It's probably gonna boil down to whether the guy consented to the encounter and frisk, or if the sergeant seized and conducted the frisk without consent or reasonable suspicion. But the "unusually nervous" excuse seems pretty weak since everyone was probably nervous and what makes you "unusually" nervous?

    From article:

    "A police sergeant motioned for Powell to come toward him and said he appeared "unusually nervous," court documents state.

    The officer conducted a pat down and lifted up Powell's shirt to discover a handgun sticking out of his waistband."
    So what? That means he can steal the gun? We need to change the laws to support OUR safety rights .. to hell with cop's. Get a NEW JOB.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    So what? That means he can steal the gun? We need to change the laws to support OUR safety rights .. to hell with cop's. Get a NEW JOB.
    If the guy consented to the encounter and frisk, then his fault for allowing it to happen and getting his gun seized. Take it at as a lesson of what not to do when armed. If there was no consent, then there could be a good argument to have charges dropped if the only RAS is "unusually nervous".

  8. #8
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Minor technicality here

    He was neither ON the school grounds NOR going to the school grounds. He was going to the church where the school students had been taken.

    Initial reports stated he was arrested outside the school. Technically correct but also misleading.

    Doesn't affect the unlawful possession charge


    The latest report I've heard says:

    "I said 'why didn't you leave it in the car?'" she [his mother] said. "He told me he didn't realize he had a weapon on him."

    HUH? Didn't realize he had a weapon on him? So is he in the habit of unlawful concealed carry?
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •