| Author | Post |
|---|
Orygunner
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Dec 17th, 2009 12:35 pm |
|
michael1131988 wrote: The law states that no person may carry around a handgun with a chambered round not even an officer of the law carries a chambered round and the law also states that no indevidual ma carriy a weapon into a federal building and a law library is a federal building and i know for a fact that that library has a sign at both entrances stating that weapons are not allowed on their property. the other thing is that it is considered endangerment of a child to carry in a public library none the less
Michael, please do some reading of the law before stating things you think you know. Absolutely nothing you just said is true except the part about it's illegal to carry weapons into Federal Buildings (and only some of them), and that the library may have signs at the doors.
You may find this link helpful for Oregon law concerning firearms: http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/166.html
...Orygunner...
|
Grapeshot
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Thu Dec 17th, 2009 03:11 pm |
|
We-the-People wrote: snip....
UPDATE: Got the "report card" through the online system and the grade came out a B overall which drags my GPA from 4.0 to 3.5. Now I just need my paper back so that I can use the comments on it in my complaint to the department head. She made some comments that are very easy to show were false and prejudicial.
Gawd forgive that you should think for yourself. Independent thought outside the box is seldom rewarded within the liberal arts. Hope you are able to obtain a fair and honest review.
Yata hey
|
We-the-People
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Dec 17th, 2009 11:25 pm |
|
Grapeshot wrote: We-the-People wrote: snip....
UPDATE: Got the "report card" through the online system and the grade came out a B overall which drags my GPA from 4.0 to 3.5. Now I just need my paper back so that I can use the comments on it in my complaint to the department head. She made some comments that are very easy to show were false and prejudicial.
Gawd forgive that you should think for yourself. Independent thought outside the box is seldom rewarded within the liberal arts. Hope you are able to obtain a fair and honest review.
Yata hey
Actually, I was nicely surprised that my other liberal instructors recognized that I had the right to a differing opinion. My "public speaking" instructor is left wing, even on the "PC committee" of the school. That's not it's official name but that's basically what they deal with. She was relating one of the "incidents" they "fixed" where a student said she felt threatened because the instructor moved throughout the classroom during class and it made her "nervous". No other students (think reasonable people) felt threatend but they directed the instructor to stop moving through the classroom because this one irrational person felt threatened. How do you think they'd react to a lawfully carrying student? LOL
Anyway, I received perfect marks on every one of my speeches even though the majority of them were directly advocating armed students, armed citizens, and the absolute right of citizens to keep and bear arms. In my final speech "be prepared", which covered the necessities of being prepared for catastrophe including civil unrest by aquiring firearms, ammunition, food stuffs, shelter, and defensive planning, she stated that "it was good information and we all need to think about such things before it happens".
So not all liberal academics discriminate against conservative students or try to indoctrinate students to one particular view. Just some, such as my English prof who was more interested in such topics as declaring that global warming is FACT and only unreasonable people would argue that it's not.....while simultaneously saying WE must recognize that the opposition (apparently only the left opposition) has a valid argument. She REALLY didn't like it when I said that while the opposition certainly has the right to their opinion and the right to express it, that they most certainly do NOT always have a valid argument.
Apparently it's only a valid opposition argument if it's a left wing argument and right wing views aren't actually valid.....as evidenced by her multiple instances of saying that I couldn't write about a particular topic because my view was "unreasonable". Hmmmmmmm
I guess she's just used to manipulating a bunch of 18-20 year olds who remain quiet rather than challenge the opposing views of the instructor.
|
Grapeshot
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18th, 2009 12:11 am |
|
Still conservative values, thinking and action are more often than not suppressed within academia - even more so at the primary and secondary level.
Our future leaders are too often not permitted to listen to nor consider thoughts in but one dimension.
Yata hey
|
USP222
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18th, 2009 11:20 pm |
|
| Thats pretty funny when i took my concealed carry permit test my instructor told me if i wasnt going to carry with one in the head then i should just get up and walk out now and he walked by me with his hk usp cocked,locked and ready to go! He said why have a gun that you cant use when its needed, you might as well just carry around a heavy stick because if someone sneeks up on you all you will be able to do is beat them with it. That is also why we take safety class.. Where does it say that carrying with one in the head is illegal "take a picture" and show it to us..
|
Grapeshot
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18th, 2009 11:37 pm |
|
USP222 wrote: Thats pretty funny when i took my concealed carry permit test my instructor told me if i wasnt going to carry with one in the head then i should just get up and walk out now and he walked by me with his hk usp cocked,locked and ready to go! He said why have a gun that you cant use when its needed, you might as well just carry around a heavy stick because if someone sneeks up on you all you will be able to do is beat them with it. That is also why we take safety class.. Where does it say that carrying with one in the head is illegal "take a picture" and show it to us..
LOL - never heard the expression "in the head" used that way.
If you don't mind, I'd prefer not having one in my head. 
I will however have one in the pipe, in the tube, chambered, locked and loaded, or my personal favorite condition 1.
Not pickin' on ya, but I go to the head, use my head, head home, want head room and one or two that I can't use here.
A belated welcome to the forum. Hope you stay, enjoy and benefit.
Yata hey
|
USP222
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18th, 2009 11:44 pm |
|
| LOL!!! Thanks for the warm welcome, I guess that"s just how us yanks talk up here in CT.. But that was a good one Grape.. I like to meet people that have a good sence of humor..
|
Grapeshot
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18th, 2009 11:56 pm |
|
USP222 wrote: LOL!!! Thanks for the warm welcome, I guess that"s just how us yanks talk up here in CT.. But that was a good one Grape.. I like to meet people that have a good sence of humor..
A smile or two never hurts, life was meant to be enjoyed.
BTW - small suggestion, you might add at least your state to your profile. It helps the moderators and other posters when responding to you.
Just click on "My Account" at the top right of the page.
Yata hey
|
USP222
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19th, 2009 12:18 am |
|
| Just updated thanks for the INFO... Happy Holidays to you all its dinner time talk to you guys later..
|
We-the-People
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Jan 6th, 2010 06:03 am |
|
I was out of the country for the holidays and just got a break from school work......any new information on this case?
|
Dannny L
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 26 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14th, 2010 12:11 am |
|
michael1131988 wrote: well actually i know joe. he has been diagnosed with schizophrenia and also that library is also a GOVERNMENT LAW library which is GOVERNMENT owned library and in the case of him having the fire arm it was loaded with a round in the chamber which not even a person with a concealed handgun permit can have and do to the fact of him being a schizophrenic he is not allowed to be in possession of any weapons. and i know that people are going to say then how could he get one. easy his uncle has bought multiple firearms for him including a single shot 12 guage shot gun and a russian 7.62x54mm mosin nagant rifle in which he has been know to threaten people live with.
Doesn't matter if he was diagnosed with schizophrenia it only matters IF he ever had a civil commitment to a mental hospital by a judge. Statute 456.130
Hope my link works. http://www.leg.state.or.us/01reg/measures/hb2300.dir/hb2397.intro.html
Yes michael needs to read some gun laws.
Last edited on Thu Jan 14th, 2010 12:22 am by Dannny L
|
We-the-People
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14th, 2010 06:00 am |
|
Okay, so I'm back from Europe (as previously mentioned) been pulling 16 units in school and my father passed on New Years (memorial was last weekend). So I've been a bit busy but I'm still trying to find out anything on this Klamath case.
Any updated news anyone?
Also, anyone heard anything about the Jeff Maxwell case against WOU and the OR Univ System for their harassment of him for CCing (lawfully) on campus and then barring him from ANY OR Univ System school?
|
Grapeshot
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14th, 2010 05:21 pm |
|
We-the-People wrote: Okay, so I'm back from Europe (as previously mentioned) been pulling 16 units in school and my father passed on New Years (memorial was last weekend). So I've been a bit busy but I'm still trying to find out anything on this Klamath case.
Sorry to hear of the loss of your father.
Any updated news anyone? Also, anyone heard anything about the Jeff Maxwell case against WOU and the OR Univ System for their harassment of him for CCing (lawfully) on campus and then barring him from ANY OR Univ System school?
Do you have a link on this?
Yata hey
|
We-the-People
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14th, 2010 10:12 pm |
|
Grapeshot wrote: Do you have a link on this?
Yata hey
LOTS OF LINKS.....this story is a pet peeve since I'm a student advocate of 2A rights!!!!!
As an update, I just found that he has been re-admitted to OSU under an agreement negotiated by his attorney that "stays" the "sentence" he received until the case makes it through the court system. At least that is something. HOWEVER, the way he has been treated is absolutely disgusting and those responsible need to be held accountable at all levels!
This was reported by Oregon War Veterans (ODVA) on July 11, 2009 but their blogging system isn't very user friendly so this is the first I've seen it. It's thr fourth story on THIS LINK: http://oregonwarvets.typepad.com/owva_blog/
If you go to this link the third and fourth "pages" or articles are about Jeff's plight from early on (April 2nd and 23rd of 2009). The fourth is the one that describes his being banned from ANY OUS school and the third gives some other information on the case. http://oregonwarvets.typepad.com/owva_blog/2009/04/index.html
A couple of OFF ALERTS on the Maxwell story/case: http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/02.10.09%20alert.html http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/08.07.09%20alert.html
All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. I chose to be a vocal second amendment advocate because, if no one speaks up, we will soon have no second amendment and if we lose the second, the others shall surely follow in short order as the people will no longer have the means necessary to ensure that government respresents THE PEOPLE.
|
Grapeshot
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Thu Jan 14th, 2010 10:32 pm |
|
We-the-People wrote: Grapeshot wrote: Do you have a link on this?
Yata hey
LOTS OF LINKS.....this story is a pet peeve since I'm a student advocate of 2A rights!!!!!
As an update, I just found that he has been re-admitted to OSU under an agreement negotiated by his attorney that "stays" the "sentence" he received until the case makes it through the court system. At least that is something. HOWEVER, the way he has been treated is absolutely disgusting and those responsible need to be held accountable at all levels!
This was reported by Oregon War Veterans (ODVA) on July 11, 2009 but their blogging system isn't very user friendly so this is the first I've seen it. It's thr fourth story on THIS LINK: http://oregonwarvets.typepad.com/owva_blog/
If you go to this link the third and fourth "pages" or articles are about Jeff's plight from early on (April 2nd and 23rd of 2009). The fourth is the one that describes his being banned from ANY OUS school and the third gives some other information on the case. http://oregonwarvets.typepad.com/owva_blog/2009/04/index.html
A couple of OFF ALERTS on the Maxwell story/case: http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/02.10.09%20alert.html http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/08.07.09%20alert.html
All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. I chose to be a vocal second amendment advocate because, if no one speaks up, we will soon have no second amendment and if we lose the second, the others shall surely follow in short order as the people will no longer have the means necessary to ensure that government respresents THE PEOPLE.
Thanx. Don't know how I missed this one previously.
Major wrong there. He deserves to win 200% +
Yata hey
|
We-the-People
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15th, 2010 12:08 am |
|
I'm in contact with Jeffs attorney and he said that while he can't say anything right now, in 2-3 weeks I should message him again and he might be able to give some more information.
|
Capn Camo
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17th, 2010 06:17 am |
|
Y'all are citing the WRONG SECTION of Oregon Code. Read the PREEPMTION statute:
166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places. (1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(a) A law enforcement officer in the performance of official duty.
(b) A member of the military in the performance of official duty.
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
(d) A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building or court facility under ORS 166.370. [1995 s.s. c.1 §4; 1999 c.782 §8]
The question is "where" and the answer is "County Library."
Fortunately they cant get away with that crap in WA. WA preemption doesnt allow any more restrictive.... You all need to work on the OR Legislature to fix that.Push the Legislature to adopt the "not make more restrictive LAWS and PENALTIES.
The OR Legislature has made a MESS of this because it provides for a myriad of laws that are against the idea of pre-emption which means (or should) 'same laws everywhere.' The purpose of pre-emption in WA is that there are no conflicting laws in Counties and Cities.
Last edited on Sun Jan 17th, 2010 06:26 am by Capn Camo
|
We-the-People
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17th, 2010 09:52 am |
|
Capn Camo wrote: Y'all are citing the WRONG SECTION of Oregon Code. Read the PREEPMTION statute:
166.173 Authority of city or county to regulate possession of loaded firearms in public places. (1) A city or county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the possession of loaded firearms in public places as defined in ORS 161.015.
(2) Ordinances adopted under subsection (1) of this section do not apply to or affect:
(a) A law enforcement officer in the performance of official duty.
(b) A member of the military in the performance of official duty.
(c) A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
(d) A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or on a public building or court facility under ORS 166.370. [1995 s.s. c.1 §4; 1999 c.782 §8]
The question is "where" and the answer is "County Library."
Fortunately they cant get away with that crap in WA. WA preemption doesnt allow any more restrictive.... You all need to work on the OR Legislature to fix that.Push the Legislature to adopt the "not make more restrictive LAWS and PENALTIES.
The OR Legislature has made a MESS of this because it provides for a myriad of laws that are against the idea of pre-emption which means (or should) 'same laws everywhere.' The purpose of pre-emption in WA is that there are no conflicting laws in Counties and Cities.
The county library is ONLY off limits to those who do not have a CHL. Since there is no information on whether the individual had a CHL or not, we don't know.
The section you quoted above is NOT relevant as it only applies to cities and counties ability to restrict LOADED carry and has no authority over anyone with a CHL (note the exemption in 2.d).
So, the question remains, did he or did he not, have a CHL. Since he was arrested I would guess that he did not in which case he broke the law as ORS 166.242 specifically prohibits the police from arresting for possession of a firearm in a public building if one has a CHL in possession.
|
SoldierBoi
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jan 18th, 2010 12:58 pm |
|
| Ok to answer all of your questions about this episode. This individually did not just OC into the library. He was showing it off to other patrons(brandishing). As well as talking about it in inappropriate manners. How it was loaded and such. The cause for alarm was his overall attitude. He is a disgrace and this should not be an open carry case. But a stupidity trial.
|
N6ATF
Banned
|
Posted: Mon Jan 18th, 2010 06:28 pm |
|
SoldierBoi wrote: Ok to answer all of your questions about this episode. This individually did not just OC into the library. He was showing it off to other patrons(brandishing). As well as talking about it in inappropriate manners. How it was loaded and such. The cause for alarm was his overall attitude. He is a disgrace and this should not be an open carry case. But a stupidity trial.
Video of it outside the holster?
|
Current time is 08:02 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
