LEAD STORY SIDEBAR

Packing Heat
More Portlanders than ever are carrying legal weapons. Why?

BY PATTY WENTZ
pwentz@wweek.com

State Reps. Randy Leonard and Ron Sunseri and broadcaster Lars Larson (above) are among the 30,000
tri-county residents licensed to carry loaded guns.In the state of Oregon there are 89,391 concealed-handgun licenses. Men hold 69,054; women, 20,330.

 

A concealed-handgun license costs $65 the first year, then $50 to renew every four years. An application will be denied to anyone who has on his or her record a felony, a misdemeanor within the past five years, an open restraining order or a pattern of misbehavior.

 

Since 1990, there have been 3,335 concealed-handgun licenses revoked in the state, including 422 for licensees who endangered themselves or others and 26 revocations because of mental health problems.

 

 
In the past 10 years, the chances that you know someone who is legally packing heat have increased exponentially.

In 1989, then-Speaker of the House Vera Katz led excruciating negotiations over an omnibus gun bill that resulted in a 15-day waiting period for all handguns purchased. There was a trade-off, however: The bill also made it much easier to legally carry a loaded gun in Oregon by loosening the requirements for a concealed-handgun license.

Since then, there has been an explosion in the number of license holders. In 1988, only 11 people in Multnomah County had concealed-handgun licenses. Today, there are 11,907 license holders. In Washington County, there are 8,400; in Clackamas, it's around 9,600.

A concealed-handgun license does exactly what it says: It gives the holder the legal right to carry a handgun hidden on his or her person or out of sight in a vehicle. Without this permit, handguns must be visible at all times, whether carried on the hip or in the car. The city of Portland has an additional ordinance that says unconcealed weapons must not be loaded.

A concealed-handgun license gives the holder carte blanche to take a loaded gun anywhere. With so many licensees in the metro area--in grocery stores, movie theaters, parks and bars--more than two in every 100 people could be armed. But are they dangerous?

Probably not. In spite of the dire warnings of opponents, blood has not been running through the streets.

John Nichols of Oregon Gun Owners worked on the 1989 gun bill with Katz. He recalls that very few people were pleased with the concealed-handgun license provision.

"They thought there was going to be a shootout at every fender bender," he says. No one keeps statistics on how many crimes or shootings--whether in self-defense or otherwise--have been committed by concealed-handgun license holders. Nichols says he knows of only three incidents in the state where concealed-handgun licensees have been questioned about shootings, and all three were dismissed by a grand jury.

"John's right," says Multnomah County Sheriff Dan Noelle. "That's what we thought, and it just didn't turn out that way."

Noelle remembers well how he felt with the passage of the 1989 law: "I was pissed." He and other law-enforcement staff believed the screening process for issuing the licenses would be inadequate and that routine traffic stops would become showdowns with an armed citizenry.

Now he says his fears were unfounded. Still, he wonders what the point of the law is. "Where is the value?" he asks. "I don't know where a whole lot of people with concealed-handgun licenses have defended themselves."

License holders come from all walks of life and live anywhere, from the politically correct funkiness of Southeast Portland to the West Hills and Beaverton. On the list are married couples, families, single women. And a few people you might recognize, including state Rep. Randy Leonard of North Portland, state Rep. Ron Sunseri of Gresham, broadcast journalist Lars Larson, Republican strategist John DiLorenzo and Multnomah County judges Stephen L. Gallagher and Charles Guinasso.

Leonard says he applied for a concealed-handgun license as soon as the new law passed, because he likes to have his SIG Sauer .239 handy when he goes camping and fishing. It's always tucked away in his briefcase--even when he goes to work in Salem. Concealed-handgun license holders can pretty much take their guns into any Oregon public building, including the Capitol.

Leonard supports gun control and made several impassioned speeches urging passage of a bill that would require background checks on gun-show sales. Afterwards, he says, he got several threatening e-mails from gun advocates.

"During that time, I made sure to have my briefcase with me all the time," he says.

For the most part, however, he carries it to protect himself and his family against crime.

"I just would hate to be in a position where bad people came upon us and there was nothing I could do to protect my family," he says. "Or be in a position in the last few moments of my life where I think, 'Damn, I wish I would have brought my gun.'"

Susan Reese is a lawyer who has been practicing criminal and family law in Portland for more than 20 years. She was in the Multnomah County Courthouse on Valentines' Day 1979, the day family-law lawyer Candy Jones was gunned down in a courtroom by the angry husband of one of her clients.

Reese has had a concealed-handgun license for nearly 10 years. She says she has taken it to her office only once, when she felt threatened by a hostile client. She doesn't carry it in her briefcase or purse, but she does take it on working trips around the state. When she's driving the lonely roads of Oregon late at night, she says, her .38 sits on the console of her car.

"I think cell phones are a lot more helpful than guns...a stronger assailant could always grab the gun and use it against you," she says. "But when I'm out of town or out of cell-phone range, it's good to have."

Her pistol is a "basic cowboy type," she says. "I don't like semi-automatics. I don't like Glocks."

Reese considers herself a Portland liberal and is unabashed about going against the stereotype, although she admits that it's not something she talks about much. Still, several of her women friends are licensed to carry. "I like the option--if the situation arises where it feels it might be necessary," she says. "It's a piece of protection I can have and use if I need to."

Kevin and Sandy Pendell own a copy-machine repair business in Southeast Portland. They are both licensed to carry. Sandy keeps her handgun on her person at all times, in a $7.50 fanny pack she bought at Wal-Mart.

"I carry because of protection," she says. "The way the world is now, you can't walk down the street and be safe. It's something that makes me and Kevin feel safer. He doesn't like me going anywhere without it."

Neither of the Pendells has used a gun for self-protection, but both say they are ready to if necessary. "You don't buy a gun because you want to, you buy a gun because you have to," Kevin says. "But I hope I never have to use it."

He says people who think they're safe without a gun are just plain naive.

"There is a great deal of ignorance in this country," Kevin says. "There are people who don't believe that evil happens. They can't conceive of someone breaking into their house. They just can't conceive of it."


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Willamette Week | originally published October 20, 1999



 

LEAD STORY SIDEBAR

Fighting Dirty
Crime Victims for Justice is right on the issues but runs a smelly campaign.

BY PHILIP DAWDY
pdawdy@wweek.com
Formed in July, Crime Victims for Justice had $46,000 in cash as of Oct. 4, contributed mostly by criminal defense lawyers and the ACLU. Its campaign is run by Geoff Sugerman and former WW reporter David Smigelski  
Although we join opponents of Measures 69 to 75 in calling for the defeat of these measures, we'd like to give their political action committee, Crime Victims for Justice, a kick in the pants for creating a campaign of distortion and witchcraft.

We understand the dilemma that opponents of the measures find themselves in. To be sure, the measures would unnecessarily meddle with the Oregon Constitution. And they threaten our civil liberties. Unfortunately, those two arguments are almost guaranteed losers. Most Oregonians aren't overly concerned about the sanctity of the state constitution; nor do they care about the rights of people who have allegedly committed a crime.

In response, Crime Victims for Justice have seized on two bogus arguments.

First, in an effort to out-"victimize" the other side, opponents of Measure 70 claim it will "force rape victims to testify before a jury even if they object." Here's their reasoning: This measure would allow prosecutors the right to always demand a jury trial. A prosecutor, of course, might want the victim to testify--in which case the victim would be describing her rape in front of a jury.

But the fact is that under the current system, rape victims sometimes are forced, at the request of defense lawyers, to testify before a jury. We fail to see why district attorneys, who would be prosecuting an alleged rapist, would be more inclined to put the victims on the stand. So what is the opponents' point?

The other red herring opponents have tossed into the debate smells the fishiest. They claim that these measures, especially Measure 73, would give district attorneys "the same powers abused by Kenneth Starr."

Nonsense. The infamous Whitewater special prosecutor had an unlimited budget and, more important, was accountable to no one. In Oregon, district attorneys are elected and have limited budgets; if they exceed their authority, voters know what to do.

Crimes Victims for Justice will probably be outspent by a 3-to-1 margin. Maybe the campaigners are feeling desperate enough to toss sense and sensibility out onto the street and rely on emotional thumbnail sketches.

But that's no excuse for people who who claim that reason and precedent--rather than inflammatory anecdotes--should shape the law. Turning their backs on these principles just because it's campaign season should never be an option, even when the going gets tough.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Willamette Week | originally published October 20, 1999


For Movie Times and Locations, See our new MovieLink site! file:///Sangfroid/#Web%20Pages/pages-archive/Portland%20Travel%20Specials!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

search site rogue of the week scoreboard news buzz 500 words News Stories Lead Story feedback site map search site personals classified webxtra culture news