Eugene gives downtown 'exclusion zone' another year
EUGENE, Ore. - Urinating in public downtown will no longer get you "excluded" from the Downtown Public Safety Zone.
The Eugene City Council renewed the "exclusion zone" for up to another year.
The zone allows law enforcement to order someone accused but not yet convicted of a crime to stay out of the downtown core.
Some lesser offenses, like public urination, possession of less than an ounce of marijuana and criminal mischief, were removed from the list of offenses for which someone could be excluded.
I think those needing to urinate in public should be directded to Mayor Piercy's address.
I have worked in downtown Eugene for 40 years. Three days a week I make point of walking around the downtown core. I have witnessed many incidents where local law abiding citizens are denied their rights by the criminal activities of other individuals. Such as a young man picked up a salt shaker from an outdoor cafe table, threw it at an elderly woman walking ahead of him. She ran into a store for shelter. The young man laughed and thought it was hilarious. This kind of stuff goes on and a lot worse. Come on down and see. We need to keep certain dangerous creeps out of the downtown and the whole city. But isn't this what the police were hired to do for the whole city?
 @invisibleman One of their jobs is to uphold the Constitution.Â
@invisibleman
Â
The police force needs to be given the latitude to perform their job properly. Very difficult to operate in this 'wacko' community.Â
I know Eugene is having budget problems, and I'm not a fan of having my tax dollars go to lawsuit... but I hope Eugene is sued for MILLIONS over this.Â
Why does this topic even have to be voted on by the Eugene City Council so often. If you have people with bad behavior repeadly exclude them from the zone. Maybe you should put it up to a public vote. It seems that you keep extending the policy. Urinating in public is a crime along with marijuana and criminal mischief. These people have not earned the right to visit the downtown zone.
 @Ah Shucks Wow... Constitution comprehension fail. It's voted on so often by city council because it is obscenely controversial, so they're keeping it a "temporary" measure, rather than trying to push for it to be permanent. "These people have not earned the right to visit the downtown zone." ... Are you freakin kidding me? If you have to earn something, it's a privilege, not a right. And make no mistake about it, freedom of movement through public space is a RIGHT that governing bodies don't have the RIGHT to take away without a conviction... and even then, it would be a sketchy ordeal.
Â
@PleaseBeSmart @Ah Shucks
.....and blocking someone's way is considered what exactly? Impeding a personâs RIGHT OF MOVEMENT THROUGH PUBLIC SPACE (as you so eloquently put it) is considered what exactly? How about this, leave your heart out of it for ONE moment and use your brain. This usually happens AFTER your 20's.
 @mz Something not being done about it up to this point does not prove it's not a Constitutional violation. It quite clearly is. But hey, since you're saying it's not... feel free to explain to me when the government gained the power to remove someone's freedom of movement without a conviction.Â
 @mz I have no idea what you're talking about concerning blocking someone's way or impeding a person's right of movement. Maybe after you explain that, I can reply. And feel free to keep your insults to yourself.Â
Â
lol....and furthermore, you don't think for one moment IN THIS TOWN, that if it were a violation of someone's rights that some first year attorney  wouldn't get all 'fired up' and take this on??! PUUUHHHHLEASE, a constitutional violation this is not.