Oh, POOP!

Oak Harbor police chief loses gun in grocery store bathroom | KOMO:
(March 31, 2016)

OAK HARBOR, Wash. -- Oak Harbor Mayor Bob Severns has reprimanded the city's chief of police for losing his gun in the bathroom of a local grocery store. On the night of March 4, Police Chief Edgar Green informed department officials that he had misplaced his personally-owned Glock .40 firearm. He said the last time he remembered having the gun was roughly an hour and a half earlier in the bathroom at a SAAR's Market on State Route 20. Green said he might have "errantly left it on a towel container," according to a city news release. Green noticed the gun was missing when he got home and immediately contacted the store's manager. Store workers searched the bathroom but didn't find the gun.

[emphasis added]

Right.

Personal comments deleted.
Except to mention that Oak Harbor is on Whidby Island, in the Puget Sound, in the state of Washington.

And I may or may not have a family member assigned to a military facility in that general area, and if he did something like that ... not only would his Military Unit severely chastise him, but I would personally kick his ass.  (Not really .. the alleged family member is would be bigger, tougher and smarter than me.)

The funny thing is, I've been going to IPSC/USPSA matches for 30 years and during that time I have often been obliged to obey the call of dirty, but I've never left my Kimber in the Can.

Why is it that civilians can remember that they don't have a pistol on their hip, but "Professionals" cannot?

Google: "law enforcement officers who have left their pistol in the bathroom"
The results may surprise you!

Well, this makes a lot of sense

Gov. Jerry Brown signs bill banning concealed guns from California schools | Fox News:
Published October 11, 2015

Gov. Jerry Brown has signed a bill banning concealed weapons from California schools and universities, a measure that drew renewed attention after a recent massacre at an Oregon community college. SB707 by Democratic Sen. Lois Wolk of Davis will prohibit people with concealed weapons permits from carrying firearms on school and college campuses. People who have concealed carry permits would be allowed to carry firearms within 1,000 feet of a public or private K-12 school, but not on the grounds.

SO ...  the only people who are certified to have a life-long established record of NOT being "gun-violent" are denied the right to defend themselves in another of the Gun Free Zones ... which are notorious only for being hunting grounds for maniacs.

That's going to help.

Apparently, Governor Jerry (what a simp name ... Jerry!) has decided that he has to do SOMETHING, so he picks on the single group which has never posed a threat to public safety.

Let me see ... searching, searching. searching for statistics to support his thesis that people licensed to carry a concealed handgun have been a threat to college students.

Nope.  Not finding anything.

Concealed Carry allowed at Kansas Universities? I'll believe it when I see it!

Kansas regents prepare to open universities to guns under new law | The Kansas City Star:
- October 05, 2015

BY DION LEFLER

The Wichita Eagle

As the nation mourns those killed in last week’s mass shooting at an Oregon community college, Kansas universities are preparing to implement a law that will allow most people to carry concealed firearms without a permit on campus. Kansas public universities have authority to ban guns on campus. That will change on July 1, 2017, when they’ll be required to open their institutions to concealed weapons. The Kansas Board of Regents, which sets policy for the state university system, is studying where and how guns can be controlled without violating the law, said board chairman Shane Bangerter.

Wow, THIS one caught me by surprise!

Not that they will listen ....

Oregon gunman singled out Christians during rampage | New York Post:

 A former president of the college said that it has only one unarmed security officer and that the community decided against armed guards last year. “I suspect this is going to start a discussion across the country about how community colleges prepare themselves for events like this,” Joe Olson told CBS.

(emphasis added)

College and University Administrators are scrambling for a safe place in the face of an oncoming firestorm of protest against collegiate rules forbidding self-defense on campus, and at least one former Oregon Administrator has pulled his head out of his Academia to ask:  "Is this going to hurt my career?"

Dear Joe, and all the oh-so-Academic-Joes who have been making life-altering decisions for your students for the past century:

Well ... yes.   There probably will be a 'discussion across the country' about this.  Except that the discussion has been going on for DECADES!  This is merely the first indication that someone in Academia might notice it.   (You sanctimonious bastards!)

Campus Carry

Weapons grade: Students fight to pack heat

Unfortunately I was not aware of this before last Friday, but last week was Empty Holster week on college campuses all over America. (Not here in Oregon; instead, students simulated celebrating the event by spending their spare time in a "T.A.G." simulation called "Humans VS Zombies" (HVZ).

That must be a step in the right direction.

The only thing I got out of the event was this poster:



I posted this on the interior wall of my cell cubicle at the office. I wanted to make a statement, but I didn't want to offend anyone.

I guess that I just made a statement about myself, didn't I?


Anyway, I managed to miss the opportunity to wear an empty holster on campus, just as I did in 2007 and 2008.

(I didn't even mention it in 2009, or at least I can't find a reference to the event in my archives from last year. If it means anything, at least I noticed it this year ... even though I didn't get around to writing about it until it was over. Hmmmmm ... Emmerson said that "consistency is the hobgoblin of petty minds". This article is becoming even more revealing than I had ever expected. Perhaps I should move on to a safer topic?)

But before I do, I note that according to the Denver Post, on April 15, 2010, a Colorado court revived a suit seeking to allow guns on Colorado University campus.

The Colorado Court of Appeals ruled Thursday in favor of a group seeking to allow students with concealed gun permits to carry their weapons on campus.

Students for Concealed Carry on Campus had argued that a 1994 University of Colorado policy banning concealed weapons violated state gun laws, particularly the Concealed Carry Act of 2003.

The ruling revives a lawsuit that a judge dismissed last year and could affect other Colorado campuses. Colorado State University approved a campus weapons ban similar to CU's in February.

CU is considering an appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court, university spokesman Ken McConnellogue said.

CSU spokeswoman Michele McKinney said the university is reviewing the court decision, too.

SCCC and Rocky Mountain Gun Owners filed a complaint Wednesday against CSU in Larimer County District Court, saying the ruling clears the way to overturn weapons bans.

Dudley Brown, executive director of RMGO, said in statement Thursday, "CSU's ban only had one legitimate leg to stand on, and now even that's gone."

The article also mentioned that:

Many college campuses nationwide ban concealed weapons, but gun-rights advocates say gun-free campuses make students vulnerable to attack. Currently, 26 states ban concealed weapons on any school property. Twenty-three states, including Colorado, allow individual campuses to decide.

Which takes us right back to the poster, so prominently displayed above.

(If you want your own copy of the poster, which prints so nicely on an 8-1/2" x 11" sheet of paper, see the original WND article here.)

Rally for Jeffery Maxwell

Two weeks ago I reported on a young veteran who was arrested on the campus of Western Oregon University for having a loaded, concealed handgun in his possession. Jeffery Maxwell was NOT breaking the law, but the university administration demanded that he be arrested anyway, so the Monmouth Police Department obliged them.

Later, after public furor made it clear that (according to Oregon Law) Maxwell was within his legal rights, so he was released.

The University, however, placed severe restrictions on Maxwell's welcome on campus, would not allow him to set foot on campus -- let alone attend classes for which he had already paid tuition -- and implied he would be arrested again, this time for trespassing, if he attempted to enter campus whether or not he was carrying a weapon.

In response to this, there will be a rally today (Friday, February 27, 2009) on the front steps of the Capital Building in Salem, Oregon. This news comes from Jeffery's sister, who informs us that the rally will take place from noon to 3pm.

I regret that due to an oversight I did not actually post this notice when I received it ... last weekend. Kim and Jeffery, I do apologize.

Concealed Carry on Campus - Oregon Style

Western Oregon Journal

In a February 4, 2009, article by Erin Huggins a writer for the Western Oregon Journal (apparently an official publication of the Western Oregon University, located in Monmouth, Oregon) announced that a student has been arrested for carrying a concealed weapon (a loaded, concealed handgun) on campus

Even though the student, identified as "Jeffery Maxwell" is the possessor of a Concealed Handgun License (CHL), the story of his arrest was accompanied by blaring headlines:

Mid-morning arrest startles students

Individual brings weapons on campus in violation of state law

The body of the article defines the reason for and the results of the arrest:

Last Wednesday morning at 11:16 a.m., Campus Public Safety (CPS) and Monmouth Police identified, detained and arrested Western student Jeffrey Maxwell in the downstairs student area of Werner University Center (WUC) for violation of ORS 166.370, Possession of a Firearm in a Public Building.
CPS had sent an e-mail on Tuesday, Jan. 27, alerting the campus community about an individual who had been seen loitering around the pool area and the residence halls.
Wednesday morning, CPS received a call reporting a person matching the description given in the e-mail who was carrying a knife on campus. Because weapons were involved, Assitant Director of CPS and CPS Officer Mike Hanson called Monmouth Police Department (MPD) for back-up. Sergeant Kim Dorn, Officer Matthew Olafson and a recruit officer from MPD, along with Hutchinson and Hanson, were unable to locate the individual upon an initial search of the campus.
However, shortly before 11 a.m., CPS received another call about the individual and the MPD officers returned to campus.
Maxwell, who was sitting at one of the study tables across from the Service and Career Learning Center, was approached from behind by Joe Hutchinson from Campus Public Safety and MPD officers. Hutchinson asked Maxwell if he had any weapons concealed on his person.
On first response, Maxwell answered he had a knife. Hutchinson then put Maxwell's hands above his head. The second time he was asked, Maxwell said he had a gun.
After the weapons were removed, officers took him into the Calapooia Room. A few minutes later, he was escorted into one of two police cars parked on Church Street outside of WUC.
Responding to why they did not evacuate WUC, Hutchinson said CPS did not know what weapons were involved and did not want to alert the suspect by a sudden flood of students leaving the building.

The article states specifically that Maxwell was carrying a concealed weapon "in violation of state law."

In fact, the Oregon state law, in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) which regulates the carrying of weapons "in public buildings" [ORS 166.370, subsection (f)].

is apparently nullifed in the specific case of a CHL possessor on University property [ORS 166.262 & 166.370(3)(d) ]


The portions of ORS 166.370 which are pertinent to this situation include:

166.370 Possession of firearm or dangerous weapon in public building or court facility; exceptions; discharging firearm at school.

(1) Any person who intentionally possesses a loaded or unloaded firearm or any other instrument used as a dangerous weapon, while in or on a public building, shall upon conviction be guilty of a Class C felony.

(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, a person who intentionally possesses:

(A) A firearm in a court facility is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony. A person who intentionally possesses a firearm in a court facility shall surrender the firearm to a law enforcement officer.

(B) A weapon, other than a firearm, in a court facility may be required to surrender the weapon to a law enforcement officer or to immediately remove it from the court facility. A person who fails to comply with this subparagraph is guilty, upon conviction, of a Class C felony.

(b) The presiding judge of a judicial district may enter an order permitting the possession of specified weapons in a court facility.

(3) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to:

(a) A sheriff, police officer, other duly appointed peace officers or a corrections officer while acting within the scope of employment.

(b) A person summoned by a peace officer to assist in making an arrest or preserving the peace, while the summoned person is engaged in assisting the officer.

(c) An active or reserve member of the military forces of this state or the United States, when engaged in the performance of duty.

(d) A person who is licensed under ORS 166.291 and 166.292 to carry a concealed handgun.

(e) A person who is authorized by the officer or agency that controls the public building to possess a firearm or dangerous weapon in that public building.

(f) Possession of a firearm on school property if the firearm:

(A) Is possessed by a person who is not otherwise prohibited from possessing the firearm; and

(B) Is unloaded and locked in a motor vehicle.

(4) The exceptions listed in subsection (3)(b) to (f) of this section constitute affirmative defenses to a charge of violating subsection (1) of this section.

(NOTE: References to [ORS 166.262 ] and changes in ORS 166.370 may be referenced by following this link to records of the 2003 Regular Session of the 72nd Oregon Legislative Assembly.)


In terms of the legality of the arrest, Maxwell was well within his legal rights to carry a concealled handgun on any Oregon Universtity Campus. It was not Maxwell, but the officers of CPS and Monmouth Police Department (MPD) who were violating the law.

SEE the Feb. 11, 2009 article from the Western Oregon Journal:

Controversial laws cause questions about school, state procedures

Alleged violations in Maxwell case pending decisions by campus judicial board and state hearing; law clarification left to courts

The article, again by Erin Huggins, describes the misunderstanding about the exemptions from ORS 166.370

As reported by Huggins:

According to Campus Public Safety and Monmouth PD, two separate allegations are involved in this case: how Maxwell's conduct relates to Western's policy, governed by Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), and how his actions comply with the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS).

Because Maxwell's conduct was in compliance with ORS, he has been released from police custody.

However, because his conduct was NOT in compliance with ORA,he has also been asked to leave the WOU campus. (This information not linked to found Internet resources).

From the Western Oregon Journal follow-up story:

Comments posted to the Feb. 4 story on the Western Oregon Journal's Web site (www.westernoregonjournal.com) have questioned the legality of Monmouth PD's actions as well as Western's right to restrict firearms, based on ORS 166.170, which grants the state preemption in regulating firearms.
Other questions regarding ORS 166.170 and its relationship to OAR 580-012-0010, which gives colleges administrative rights to proscribe conduct on campus property, will continue to be debated until they are resolved in a court of law, said Director of CPS Jay Carey.
In regard to the controversy, President Minahan made the following statment: "The University's position is very clear--we expect our students to be carrying books and pencils, not guns and knives. This is a college campus dedicated to learning, not combat. The Oregon University System has the legal ability to establish rules regulating weapons on campus. This has been so for years."

And the comments were almost universally an expression of outrage over the arrest of a man who was not disobeying existing law.

A secondary question, and the crux of the existing controversy, is whether a University has the right to censure a student for conduct which is legal according to existing law. To extend the question, can an employer censure a customer to leave the premises, or fire an employee, when that person is acting in accordance to existing law, has not created a disturbance, or otherwise been a problem to the employer.

This has been a contentious issue on American College campuses for the past two years, and has been directly addressed by the "Empty Holster" campaign waged by the Students for Concealled Carry on Campus website. (I have written about the "Empty Holster" campaign before.)

There have been so many school shooting in this country during the last 15 years that students might be forgiven for saying, as Jeffery Maxwell, said, "I was just scared after Virginia tech. I was just really worried about my safety."

A personal note:
I work on a University campus, and I too am worried about my safety in a "Gun Free School". Six months out of the year, I walk in the dark across campus to my car in 'zone' where I am forbidden to carry any means to protect myself. The law says I am permitted to carry a handgun, because I have applied for and have been issued a CHL.

But if I'm concerned about my safety, I'm also concerned about my ability to earn a salary. The OAC says that if I'm found with a handgun in my possession on campus, despite ORS 166.370, they can fire me. There is no other need for cause, and it is not necessary that I have presented a threat to my colleagues and students. Simple possession of a loaded handgun on my person is Ipso Facto grounds for dismissal. I am not sanguine.

I have attempted to contact Jeffery Maxwell for his side of the story, though his University EMAIL address. He has not responded to my request for an interview, and I have no way of knowing whether that is because he does not care to respond, or because his access to his campus email address has been restricted. I did not, however, receive a note that the address no longer exists. That does not rule out either scenario.

Mr. Maxwell, since I sent you the URL for this website, if you are reading this I do ask you to contact me and to agree to an interview ... either that, or answer the interview questions embedded in the email which I sent to you last week.
x
x
Most of this information was gathered as the result of an Internet search of the Western Oregon Journal website. However, there is no guarantee that the search results will remain consistent or that this URL is still active and valid.

---

Oh, and the response from The Western Oregon Journal?

Recent comments posted to the "Journal" Web site and letters to the editor have alleged that the "Journal" printed false information in the story "Mid-morning arrest startles students" which ran in the Feb. 4 issue of the "Journal."
The "Journal" realizes that a correction is needed. The subhead read "Individual brings weapons on campus in violation of state law," implying that the "Journal" believed Jeffrey Maxwell, in fact, violated state law. The subhead should read: "Individual brings weapons on campus in violation of state law, as stated by Monmouth police."
The "Journal" has no authority in interpreting state law and determining which law(s) take precedent over another. Therefore, the "Journal" has no comment as to whether the allegations and actions brought against Maxwell are in conjunction with state law or in violation of state law.

"Empty Holster" demonstrations at American Colleges

John R. Lotte writes to note the "Empty Holster" passive demonstrations taking place this week (April 21 - 26, 2008) on College campuses around the nations.

Lott notes that "Gun Free Zones are Not Safe", a year and a week after the Virginia Tech massacre proved the point with the death of 32 people, and the wounding of many more ... mostly students.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, that PNW Bastion of Leftest Political Correctness, notes that "UW Students Want To Bring Guns To School". In an April 18, 2008 article, the PI writes:

Next week, students at the University of Washington will be making a fashion statement -- Gunsmoke style.

Students affiliated with the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus and the University of Washington College Republicans will wear empty holsters around campus for a week starting Monday, a symbol that they think concealed weapons should be allowed at the university.

"We have walked around the U-District with targets on our backs for far too long," College Republican Justin Bryant said in a statement Friday. "We need to allow students to defend themselves and make criminals think twice before they brutalize a UW student again."

The UW demonstration will parallel similar events at campuses across the country next week, an effort organized in response to a series of violent events at U.S. universities in the last several years.

"As students at the University of Washington our safety is constantly in question," Bryant said. "It is time something is done so students can spend time worrying about our education, not our safety."

John Lott is impressive, but as a venue to illustrate the ideological chasm between the people who think Gun Free Zones are a predator magnet and those who think that the chances of having a predator show up on campus is a much less credible danger than the proliferation of armed citizens on campus ... you can't find a better showplace for disagreement than the Comments section of the PI article.

Incidentally, the law in Washington includes an exception to Concealed Carry Licensees to the general state law which forbids the possession of firearms on college campuses. However, the University of Washington policy forbids firearms possession by anyone except Law Enforcement Officers on duty, etc. Essentially, if you're in uniform and on duty, and your job requires you to carry a weapon, the University won't stop you. Anyone else found in possession of a weapon will be asked to leave.

And, in the actual event, the chances are very good that a student with a firearm will be kicked out, scholarships rescinded, no credit for incomplete classes, not allowed to re-enroll, and further subject to any other administrative penalty which the university is empowered to impose. Good luck trying to enroll in any other college in Washington.

This is curiously similar to the situation at my 'home' college in Oregon ... where the "Empty Holster" passive protest is also being observed this week (link is to the OSU Student Newspaper: The Barometer).

Empty gun holsters will be seen on campus throughout this week as a sign of a silent protest against state laws and OSU policies that prohibit concealed handguns on campus.
It is unlawful to carry a concealed firearm in the state of Oregon without an appropriate permit, as stated in ORS 166.250. Students also cannot carry concealed weapons on campus, even if they are in possession of an appropriate permit. [Ed: emphasis added]

Brian Tsai, president of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, hopes that this week's silent protest will get the word out to the OSU community about their rights to carry a concealed weapon.
Tsai said that a college campus is no different from any other public place, where carrying a concealed weapon is permitted.
"All people who purchase a gun have to pass federal and state background checks in addition to safety training and mental health checks," Tsai said. "So the chance of a gun owner being irresponsible with their weapon is very low."
The silent protest will take place on more than 600 campuses nationwide with 6,000 students participating in the event.
OSU is among numerous college campuses throughout the state which have adopted an administrative rule, OAR 576-065-0010, prohibiting students from carrying concealed weapons.

There are no 'campus police' at OSU; the campus is patrolled by members of the Oregon State Police.

Here's "The Other Side" of the issue (also from the OSU Barometer article cited above):

"The bottom line is that this protest is not going to change anything," said Jack Rogers, director of public safety at OSU. "The Oregon administrative rule overrides any provision for concealed weapons, and it is very unlikely that the Oregon University System will yield to any change on this subject." [Ed: this is not consistent with the "Open Minds, Open Doors" motto of this university. See below.]
Tsai said that students who carry concealed weapons at OSU are not breaking any laws.
"All that the security personnel can do is ask the person to leave the campus," Tsai said.
Students who carry concealed weapons are looking to defend themselves in a certain situation, added Tsai. They are not vigilantes.
"The only idea here is to try to defend oneself, because response time for police in situations like Virginia Tech can be anywhere from three to five minutes," Tsai said.
Rogers, however, doesn't believe that an average gun owner would know how to use deadly force properly in an extreme situation.
"We in law enforcement have gone through an extreme amount of firearms training," Rogers said. "We're the ones who are the professionals." [Ed: link added]
He also said that students who carry concealed weapons may not be knowledgeable enough to determine when to use deadly force and when to restrain. Rogers believes that firearms in a college environment have to be controlled.
"The bottom line is that we have well-trained and well-prepared staff here who know what the training is all about," Rogers said.
"[The use of deadly force] doesn't come lightly; it takes a tremendous amount of training to use deadly force."

(Emphasis added)

Some who read the opinions of Jack Rogers may consider that the students who were killed at Virginia Tech probably learned the hard way when to use deadly force.

When a gunman is killing your classmates, that is probably a very good time to use deadly force.