• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

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

Lord Sega

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
311
Location
Warrenton, Oregon
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:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
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.
 

madicarus

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
22
Location
WA
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:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
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.
 

madicarus

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
22
Location
WA
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".
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,221
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
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?
 
Top