 |
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Oregon Ping List.
Posted on 07/25/2008 7:44:49 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
Eugene, OR (AHN) - Eugene city officials fed up with crime are mulling an ordinance that will keep convicts and would-be criminals out of the downtown area for up to one year.
Under the proposal, which is awaiting the council's vote pending the conclusion of a public hearing, a person charged with a crime such as robbery or assault would be banned from downtown Eugene for 90 days. Convicted criminals will not be allowed downtown for one year.
The proposal from councilors Andrea Ortiz and Mike Clark drew mixed reactions from the police and merchants supporting the ban and human rights advocates opposing it. The proposed ordinance would be effective in fighting crime and blight that have picked up due to the economic downturn, Chief of Police Robert Lehner told ABCNews.com.
Exclusion of offenders should be left up to the municipal court's decision, lawyers of the American Civil Liberties Union said in a public hearing on the ordinance on Monday.
If they are even half as crooked as the courthouse in this supposedly conservative area of Josephine County Oregon, they might just put a double wire fence around the place...
Oregon courts are full of the most vile grifters.
Other cities are using this same method to restrict where known gang members can congregate, who they can associate with and curfews even for known adult gang members.
And what exactly should the city do? I'm having a hard time understanding how this conservative forum would not be opposed to what amounts to a condition of parole.
Am I mistakenly on DU?
How about, “What goes around, cannot come around.”
Ummm - who decides who might be a "would-be" criminal?
And what happens to the outlying towns that will then be dealing with the criminals from the city?
They'd best be getting up some ordinances that say: "Deal with your criminals yourself!"
Doesn’t really matter since Oregon is essential a Sanctuary State. BTW, the title misled me, I thought this was about Oregon City, Oregon rather than Eugene, Oregon. I expect this liberal clap-trap from Eugene, but O.C. is still a fairly safe conservative haven for refugees from the Portland-Metro, Multnomah, Lane, Marion and Benton County areas.
NOPE.
True!
Arrest, try and convict the criminals. If they are bad enough to be banished they are bad enough to be jailed.
Banishment worked when the world was large, and it was enforced with the death penalty. It also flies in the face of our Constitutional right to travel and free association.
So you think a crime ridden city that evidently can't control said crime - should just be allowed to dump their criminals on other towns and people?
That's like someone with too much garbage gets to just dump their access on you...you be okay with that?
So they manage to repeal the 5th Amendment and negate Coffin v. US, 156 U. S. 432 (1895) and the thousands of years of jurisprudence referenced therein.
I take it that law isn't one of your strong suits. The city must extend due process - notice and an opportunity to be heard before putting in place a specific restriction.
to what amounts to a condition of parole.
In America, you have to be convicted before you are placed on parole. There can't be a criminal penalty for an arrest, just a conviction.
Perhaps you'd be more comfortable some place like China, where those pesky constitutional provisions don't get in the way of maintaining order.
The title is a bit misleading. It should have said “Eugene City Council” since there is an Oregon city named “Oregon City”.
Leave it to Oregon, huh?
Eugene is in Lane County. But I would guess it is probably a Sanctuary City.
|
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Oregon Ping List.
You would be surprised how many people would support what makes China's streets safe day or night. As the saying goes, what do they have to be afraid of if they are not breaking the law.
Now educate me, how is it that a city can not restrict and area to parolees? Are you saying parolees can be in a bar? What am I missing here?
Possibly this:
"..., a person charged with a crime ..."
You do know the difference between a charge and a conviction, don't you?
“Is it Constitutional to punish someone whose has been arrested, but not convicted?
NOPE.”
Ah, actually it is, if the alleged perp is a conservative commentator; or, if a public official, has an “R” after his name. (On the other hand if he has a “D” after his name, he gets to be President, or, at the very least, a Senator from a place like, say, Massachusetts).
Now, for a little gallows humor:
“Where there’s rope, theres hope.”?
I love the careful use of language, they said law enforcement had some questions about the policy. Apparently they didn’t want to use the term ‘laughed their asses off’ in the story.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.