• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

Canton Mayor To "Address" Gun Bill Tonight

mountainpass

Default rank <2500 posts
ODT Junkie!
15   0
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
2,445
Reaction score
199
Location
jasper
http://cherokeetribune.com/bookmark/25018201

The mayor said he’s worried by the legislation, because the city will have to add security measures for guns to be banned in the building, measures likely to cost money.

“I think we can restrict guns in City Hall, but it’s going to cost us more than it has been,” Hobgood said.


Frankly that offends me as a law abiding person.

When only words on paper was keeping the building save it was OK. Only criminals were carrying in there and it was deemed safe enough.

But now that law abiding citizens might carry in there, we gotta do something!!
 
Yeah the building they're referring contains a municipal court...means it's one of those gotcha off limits places that you might not know it's illegal to carry in. I think in this case additional security might save someone from accidentally breaking the law.
 
Yeah the building they're referring contains a municipal court...means it's one of those gotcha off limits places that you might not know it's illegal to carry in. I think in this case additional security might save someone from accidentally breaking the law.

Is there security at the door now?
 
I just sent this email off to my council:

Honorable Gene Hobgood and esteemed members of the Canton City Council,

I have been made aware that you will be considering instituting a ban on lawful carry of weapons in City Hall. This is no doubt in reaction to the newly signed state bill, HB60 which will be law as of July 1, 2014.


To address Mr. Gene Hobgood's quote: "I think we can restrict guns in City Hall." I ask the question:


HOW?


Are you proposing passing a referendum that would ban ONLY law abiding citizens from carrying a weapon into City Hall? Think about that for a moment. Criminals don't follow the laws on the books now, hence, they are criminals. Passing laws (referendums) only restrict law abiding citizens from doing those things. Criminals pay no attention to laws.


Let's put it another way:
If the referendum is passed and law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry into City Hall, you are effectively creating a victim zone. I am sure you heard about the tragic workplace shooting this week at FedEx where law abiding citizens are prohibited from carrying guns into the building. Ironically, the guards are also prohibited, but the fact is, a sign, a rule, and even a guard at the door did NOT deter a criminal from carrying a firearm into the building and injuring his co-workers.


Now I will ask another question:


WHY?


I will not hypothesize on the reasons you would want to restrict law abiding citizens from exercising our right (or privilege if it can be taken away by politicians) just by entering a building. I would however, like to hear the reasoning behind this.


Thank you for your time and I sincerely hope you consider all aspects of this issue before once again restricting the rights of law abiding citizens.


Remember: Government is made up of 'the people'. Therefore, Government buildings are the buildings of and for 'the people'.


Sincerely and respectfully,
Shawn

 
Shawn the only way he can legally stop carry there under the law is manned security at the doors. What is that going to cost the taxpayers?
 
Back
Top Bottom