Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Portland 14A.60.010

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    115

    Post imported post

    So I know Portland has the (debatable) right to restrict possession of firearms thanks to ORS 166.173. Their ordinance that declares that restriction is 14A.60.010, which reads, in part:

    A. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm, in or upon a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, recklessly having failed to remove all the ammunition from the firearm.

    B. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm and that firearm’s clip or magazine, in or upon a public place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, recklessly having failed to remove all the ammunition from the clip or magazine.
    Full text available here: http://www.portlandonline.com/Audito...14&a=15437

    It's interesting to observe, and an interesting insight to the local Portlander mindset, that somehow failing to unload a gun is 'reckless'. I'm sure the law author intended on adding that word to show contempt for those who would carry a loaded firearm in public. But, by doing so, in my mind, they've introduced an interesting side-effect.

    The point I'd like to contend, is that by adding this adverb, they've inherently implied that there is a non-reckless way to carry a loaded firearm - separately from being exempt by CHL.

    I'd have to say this should be reviewed by a lawyer before I'd try this defense, and to be prepared for a court fight, but... something to consider.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    70

    Post imported post

    Hmmm...that is interesting.

    Still glad my CHL let's me tell them to pound sand on that one...

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    115

    Post imported post

    I sent this to OFF as well, and Kevin got back to me.

    He was very helpful, but was doubtful that the linguistic gymnastics that I'm trying to perform would actually hold up in court.

    Like yourself, I'll just wait for my CHL, and then politely tell them so.

    One of the nice things about 14A.60.010 is that is specifically states if you area CHL holder, they cannot check to see if your gun is loaded or not:

    D. It is unlawful for any person who possesses a firearm, clip or magazine in or upon a public place, or while in a vehicle in a public place, to refuse to permit a police officer to inspect that firearm after the police officer has identified him or herself as a police officer. This Section does not apply to law enforcement officers or members of the military in the performance of official duties, nor persons licensed to carry a concealed handgun or persons authorized to possess a loaded firearm, clip or magazine while in or on a public building or court facility.
    So, as long as I inform them I have a CHL, by law, they must be hands off.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , Oregon, USA
    Posts
    70

    Post imported post

    Granted, I've only been pulled over once since I got my CHL (for a bad taillight bulb that actually worked fine), my procedure is to hand them my CHL with my other dokumenten and shut my trap as much as possible

  5. #5
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    Xader wrote:
    Granted, I've only been pulled over once since I got my CHL (for a bad taillight bulb that actually worked fine), my procedure is to hand them my CHL with my other dokumenten and shut my trap as much as possible
    Nothing wrong with your way but there are two (okay unlimited) ways to approach an LEO encounter (or an encounter with a citizen for that matter).

    You can take the "in your face" (calmly and civilly of course)or "I know my rights" approach. So long as all your ducks are in a row and you're within your rights, you should come away fine. After all, you're doing nothing illegal right?

    Or you can take the "educate them" approach. With LEO's if you quote section and subsection, perhaps even have it printed out, you may just turn an unknowing LEO into a carry supporter. I mean come on, if the citizen shows the cop that he knows the law better than the cop while being civil and maintaining a good raport, that cop is going to come away with a good impression of citizens who carry.

    That good impression WILL be transferred to other officers.

    And then there are times that you should interact with the minimum. Such as when an officer comes at you like a bull in china shop or when they've done a felony take down because they got a call "man with a gun". Consider yourself a political prisoner and don't give them anything not required (CHL if carrying concealed or in a prohibited area, name, DOB,and address). Then exercise your 5th amendment right to remain silet and your 4th to refuse any searches they (sneakily) will ask to do. Some are legal without your permission but constantly state "I do not consent to any searches". Doesn't mean they won't, they don't need your consent for some.
    "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.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Cremator75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    393

    Post imported post

    I take the don't ask, don't tell approach. If they do ask if I have any weapons, I politely say "Yes". I don't offer up any more id then asked for. They usually just take the DL and come back saying everything is OK. Their system tells them who I am and what permits I have.

Posting Permissions

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