Skip to comments.Men armed with assault rifles walk through Portland to 'educate' public on gun rights
Posted on 01/10/2013 9:46:29 AM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Two men seen walking down a Portland street armed with assault rifles told police they were exercising their Second Amendment rights and hoping to educate the public on gun rights.
Several calls were made to 911 on Wednesday afternoon, with alarmed residents reporting two men with guns strapped to their backs walking through the area of Southeast Seventh Avenue and Spokane Street in Portland's Sellwood neighborhood.
When police arrived on the scene, they found two 22-year-old men carrying rifles openly on their backs. The two were also holding valid concealed handgun licenses in Oregon, according to Fox affiliate KPTV.
The men reportedly told officers that they were seeking to educate onlookers about their Second Amendment rights.
"Exercising my rights with a rifle to try to decrease the demonizing of peacefully exercising your rights in public," one of the men, who declined to release his full name, told the station.
Portland authorities later identified the men as Warren Drouin and Steven Boyce. Officers said carrying firearms openly is legal in Oregon and carrying a concealed gun is legal with a valid license, according to the station. But doing one or both may generate 911 calls and possibly tie up resources that are needed for a real emergency.
One of the men told the station that he hoped people would approach him and talk to him, instead of calling police.
"What they really should do is observe the person to determine if the person is aggressive," he said of seeing someone with a gun in public. "We're not doing anything threatening to anyone."
The Portland Police Bureau, however, asks anyone who sees someone armed with guns to immediately call 911.
Good thing they were not carrying a lit cigarette. Can you imagine the outrage?
Judging by a lot of the people I see at the range, hunting, gun shows, shops and CC classes, there are a lot of gun owners/carriers, that simply are not responsible.
Agree with you -- the word "prudent" comes to mind. I have a lot of rights I don't exercise when they upset the social apple-cart to no benefit except to be 'different' and to validate one's own existence.
But these fellows were determined to make a point (rather than just being socially inept), and they did do so. I hope overall it will prove to be positive for them.
Acting insane in public...what exactly are you talking about?
In a discussion the other day on TV a Psychiatrist said in any group of people studied the data shows at least 20-22% had mental problems that could preclude them from owning a firearm.
If those figures are correct or even near correct could this mean that a group(say Congress) That one fifth of those SITTING in Congress are not competent to be writing laws?
It doesn’t take much to inflame a libera. I’m sure we are inflaming a lot of liberals right now by exercising our 1st ammendment rights and posting on this forum for all the world to see.
Actually, if you are in an intense close quarters combat fire fight, your pistol comes in handy if you do not have time to change magazines in your M4.
People with common sense
Rifles and shotguns slung on shoulders or pistols in holsters should never evoke a response of fear but one of well-being, especially if on the shoulders and waists of free men.
When you have enemies...foreign and domestic...you take action. Well, only when you have been under attack for 60 years...I guess. We've lost our way...
The Israelis know how to counter force....
It’s not a smart thing to do.
Let’s say you, or another Freeper or anyone else, is exercising your right to open carry an AR-15, a Weatherby 30.06 or whatever, and some panicky numbnuts sees you, and says, “Holy S**t! It’s a mass-shooter” and blows you away from behind from his bedroom window?
Sure, you’re peacefully carrying a weapon. But the shooter in this hypothetical doesn’t that. For all he (or she) knows, you’re on your way to blow away a bunch of people at a school, a community center or the local shopping mall.
And in the shooter’s mind, he (or she) has just prevented a massacre.
Large numbers of the public are still quite ignorant about gun laws. And while open display is a reasonable idea, it would have been far more effective if they had conducted a “reasonable public notification” ahead of time.
This actually creates allies and musters public support, if done properly, as well as reduce public anxiety, which is also good.
For example, design a simple 8.5 x 11” paper in such a way that it can be clipped into four parts, each of which has the same message about gun law, what is legal, and that people openly bearing guns will be in the neighborhood on a given day.
Xerox a bunch of these and clip them, then hand out slips of paper to all the local businesses *and* the police, and offer to answer any questions they have.
The big reason is that if somebody sees you with a gun, and runs into a business to call the cops, it creates a double safety. The businessman will tell them to relax; and the police will inform the caller that it is all legal.
Perhaps, but if so, it only appears that way because gun owners have been silent and civilized about the thing. We are not in a minority on the issue, as is evidenced every time this issue comes up on the ballot as well as by recent polls concerning gun control. Gun control proponents have always been in the minority; a noisy, well-organize minority, yes, and now with media help they can appear as a majority.
I used to be against this sort of behavior because I felt that the reality of gun ownership by calm, normal people was the image that was important to present. I believe now that it is important to present an outraged image for precisely the reason you articulated above: we look like we're a quiet, cooperative minority. We need to be loud, passionate, in-your-face because that's the coin of the political realm at the moment. Not irresponsible or reckless, but I'm thinking anger is no longer out of bounds. IMHO, of course.
And I just hope this sort of behavior doesn’t prove to be positive for the anti-gun people. We’ll see
Class III ATF regulated full automatic firearms are legal in Oregon with the proper tax stamps and registrations. Then you get to pay for the firearm itself. A Class III M16 goes for approximately $15,000 these days.
This done, now, you get to carry your M16 (or Thompson or MAC10) open, right? I would think so ---
Right now, the 1st amendment isn’t being questioned
Mrs WBill is fond of saying, "Just because you can does not mean that you should."
I'm not sure that I can think of a situation where it's more applicable than this one.
And additionally...I think the poster who speculated that this pair was a couple of anti-gunners trying to stir up trouble, may be on to something.
The choices of criminals cannot trump the rights of the law-abiding.
Lying low and not questioning our leaders for even bringing the 2nd amendment issue up is the best response?
We’ve tried being responsible, reasonable, compromising and while our freedoms die from thousands of incremental tiny bites. Our opponents tire of the small bites and seem to want to “finish their meal”.
We are the ones inflaming the populace?
I don’t think it just appears that way, look who got elected. I have never had anything about gun control on any ballot I’ve seen.
One of the most shockingly ignorant things I have ever read on FR.
I have, but not within the last couple of years. I-676 in Washington State was touted as a gun control slam-dunk and ended up losing hugely even in liberal Seattle. The other guys have the megaphones, we have the votes, which is why it seldom is voted on these days and also why 0bama is looking to implement by Executive Order.
Who or why doesn’t really matter, it’s the consequences that matter. Lots of freepers here remember when they could walk around with a weapon in their home town, but the people that are making the stink and the laws and are big influences in the anti-gun group, do not live in these towns, they live in cities. Cities are where the influential people are and no one walks around with weapons showing, without negative consequences.
I always thought we needed the 2nd ammendment to protect the 1st. My position is that if we live in fear of inflaming the liberals and are afraid of openly exercising any of our rights then they have won. That’s the same as negotiating with terrorists as far as I’m concerned.
No, it’s the ones that go around carrying rifles in public that are. All it takes nowadays, is 1 or 2 individuals doing this sort of thing every month or 2, and it’s global and it’s blown out of proportion and it generates negative consequences. It’s just not smart.
As far as I know the 1st ammendment is under question and has been gradually for a long time. What about healthcare and “free exercise of religion”?
Stevie_d_64 : I’m not sure of your meaning, but in Texas open carry of a long rifle is quite legal... and of course concelaed carry pretty much is a state requirment !! The legislature is working on open carry of firearms as in Arizona because the fear of accidental exposing a concealed weapon keeps many from carrying... and carrying is a GOOD thing for law-abiding citizens !! Let’s hope the folks in Austin don’t get hung up on this politially correct banning bandwaggon that will do nothing but hamper the rights of the law-abiding and allow the criminals easier means of committing their crimes !!
I agree.. A right that isn’t allowed to be exercised is not a right at all. When people see guns openly carried in public, especially in a very liberal area, they freak out. I don’t even think many of the people realize it is perfectly legal to open carry in certain states.
When something is forced to remain hidden, such as guns and gun rights, it becomes much easier to defame it and spread disinformation or prevent proper education. Over many years in many parts of this country guns have become scary and evil things to many people due to lack of proper education and familiarity with firearms. Exposing people to guns consistently can in itself create an environment where guns are more acceptable. Most of these people freak out because they don’t own guns, never see guns, are uneducated about guns, and have become brainwashed by the media and politicians. Educating and familiarizing people with guns and gun rights would go a long long way to reverse the stigma that has been attached.
This is just my opinion and yes, this is my first post! :)
What makes the responder a panicky numbnuts? By the time the mass shooter lifts his weapon and starts firing, it’s really too late. Isn’t that the whole point of arming the good guys? I can’t tell anything about your intentions just from looking at you.
I don’t care about inflaming anyone, I care about my rights as a gun owner and I think this sort of behavior is detrimental to that.
There’s a popular saying here on FR...actions have consequences
Great first post!
I don’t want to purposely inflame anyone either, but we are dealing with illogical people that are inflamed by the exercise of every right we have. We are being conditioned to be afraid to openly exercise our rights, not only 2nd ammendment.
What they did was within their rights. It’s legal, it’s not provocative. It has become so thanks to our media hyperventilating when they see a gun and expecting their mind numbed viewers to do the same.
Tell me why 500 violent deaths in Chicago are not a national outrage? Tell me why we as a nation euthanized 1/3 of a million unwanted “bits” of tissue in 2012. An no one is inflamed?
You are concerned that two people doing something completely legal and moral are going to make you look bad? Make your situation worse?
It doesn’t compute.
The first four...what is that behavior which you consider as acting insanely, that would generate a call to the police?
You said a few decades ago...1980’s, someone acting insane would warrant a call to the police while nowadays, it wouldn’t. I’m just trying to figure out what that behavior is.
“Idiots for not knowing the proper time and place to exercise their Constitutional rights.”
As determined by whom? You? Obama? Biden? Feinstein? Would you care to amend and extend your remarks after a careful reading of the relevant reference material provided by Paine, Henry, Thoreau, Locke, et. al.?
Great first post, Render. Welcome to Free Republic.
Apparently someone was provoked, or we wouldn’t be talking about it.
Lots of people are inflamed about all those things you mentioned.
I don’t care how it makes me look, I care if it results in my gun rights being reduced.
reboot your computer
By me of course, I’m the one that said it.
Make your move.
There are a surprising number of Freepers who get all watery in the knees over open carry.
Your comment pretty much proved a point that I've been making for quite some time. Specificially, when push comes to shove, you're going to be on your own since your neighbor's going to be too busy with his job, paying his mortgage and making payments on his Sea Ray and new Ford 1500 and his kid's college education to want to get involved in the "Revolution".
Because just like you, they're all going to be staying home saying there's got to be "the proper time and place" and today I'm just too busy.......LOL!
Well, I'd like to join many thousands of my fellow rifle-carrying idiots for a stroll past City Hall at high noon.
So what would you suggest I do? Should I go live in the woods and store up provisions? Should I walk around dowtown Norfolk with my weapon on? Should I stand out in my front yard and start yelling about how they’re going to come take my guns away? Should I start up a militia in Chesapeake VA?
What exactly is it that you think people should do? I already go through about 500rds a month at the range, I can hit pretty much what I need to hit and so can my wife.
If their were thousands, I be behind it 100%. I’ve sent a letter to Richmond saying I’m all for CC without a permit...Bob didn’t even reply!