Hoplophobes Voted Down in Mishawaka
A weapons ban proposed in Mishawaka Indiana by Mishawaka Mayor Jeffrey L. Rea and City Attorney Cory Hamel has been voted down, 5 to 4. The ban would have prohibited guns, knives and pepper spray from the Mishawaka City Hall, the police station, the Battel Center, and Mishawaka Utilities main building.
The mayor and city attorney were the only two people in a large crowd to speak out in favor of the ban at a packed city council meeting tonight.
They became concerned and proposed the ban after a man exercising his right to open carry entered the city hall with a holstered gun and a billy club. No overt threats were made, but the mayor and city attorney still felt threatened enough to propose the ban. "What we're trying to do is prevent people who walk in with no agenda, but while he's inside with a gun, gets irate and may do something drastic," claimed Hamel.
Among the large crowd in attendance was State Representative Jackie Walorski, one concealed carry permit holder among many. Walorski says she always carried her concealed gun, even at the state house, but a computer printed sign taped to the door of the Mishawaka City Hall compelled the state representative to be unarmed in order to attend the meeting. "We have a Castle Doctrine that says wherever your castle is; house, car; and you have a threat on your personal space, you have the opportunity in this state to defend yourself," said Walorski.
Walorski and the rest of the crowd told the City Council that taking away law abiding citizens' right to bear arms will do nothing but put everyone in danger.
They pointed out if a person wants to commit murder, they will. Prohibitions will not stop the acts of criminals. An illustration of that cold reality was the killing of five people at a city hall meeting in Kirkwood Missouri, including police officers and city officials.
The vote against the weapons prohibition for law abiding citizens in Mishawaka Indiana was close. Five to Four. There was possibly one swing vote, although nobody can know for certain. What is certain is gun owners and concealed carry permit holders packed the council meeting and presented their case in a rational manner against appeals to emotion by the mayor and city attorney. They won. They won because they were there, because they showed up, and because they spoke out. Threats to concealed weapons holders come in all forms, both criminal and legal. We must know how to effectively combat both.
The mayor and city attorney were the only two people in a large crowd to speak out in favor of the ban at a packed city council meeting tonight.
They became concerned and proposed the ban after a man exercising his right to open carry entered the city hall with a holstered gun and a billy club. No overt threats were made, but the mayor and city attorney still felt threatened enough to propose the ban. "What we're trying to do is prevent people who walk in with no agenda, but while he's inside with a gun, gets irate and may do something drastic," claimed Hamel.Among the large crowd in attendance was State Representative Jackie Walorski, one concealed carry permit holder among many. Walorski says she always carried her concealed gun, even at the state house, but a computer printed sign taped to the door of the Mishawaka City Hall compelled the state representative to be unarmed in order to attend the meeting. "We have a Castle Doctrine that says wherever your castle is; house, car; and you have a threat on your personal space, you have the opportunity in this state to defend yourself," said Walorski.
Walorski and the rest of the crowd told the City Council that taking away law abiding citizens' right to bear arms will do nothing but put everyone in danger.
They pointed out if a person wants to commit murder, they will. Prohibitions will not stop the acts of criminals. An illustration of that cold reality was the killing of five people at a city hall meeting in Kirkwood Missouri, including police officers and city officials. The vote against the weapons prohibition for law abiding citizens in Mishawaka Indiana was close. Five to Four. There was possibly one swing vote, although nobody can know for certain. What is certain is gun owners and concealed carry permit holders packed the council meeting and presented their case in a rational manner against appeals to emotion by the mayor and city attorney. They won. They won because they were there, because they showed up, and because they spoke out. Threats to concealed weapons holders come in all forms, both criminal and legal. We must know how to effectively combat both.
Labels: CCW, Gun Advocacy
posted by Xavier at 10:38 PM
6 Comments:
Xavier,
the Second Amendment Patriots http://www.2ndamendmentpatriots.org/ had a large hand in making sure that the ban in Mishawaka didn't pass this week.
The group was also instrumental in making sure that South Bend did not pass a similar ordinance about a month ago.
The group is very active in local and state politics in the state of Indiana. Their website is down for a major upgrade, but should be up again soon.
--Jim
I'd like to see this ban done away with in Texas. Concealed weapons cannot be taken into public buildings like post offices and court buildings.
If the State is going to strip me of my ability to protect myself, then it is about time that they start accepting the liability for failing to protect those who are harmed under their watch.
They say, "...people who walk in with no agenda, but while he's inside with a gun, gets irate and may do something drastic."
So why in hell would would a simple guy with no agenda suddenly get all irate and go drastic - unless THEY weren't doing their job right? Maybe the City has too many damn laws on the books that makes a person, what... spontaneously combust? That's drastic - and the City Attorney should be busy getting rid of that layer of crap-law instead of covering Teh Cityz Ass with more self-serving laws.
Maybe it's the responsibility of the City personnel to DO Their Job Right which means complying with the Citizenry - instead of screwing with people until they get all drastic. Sheesh.
Great example of citizens actually taking personal time to stand up for their beliefs. I think we'd be in a better place if more gun owners would follow suit.
I bet they try it again, within 6 months, and get it through. A little arm-twisting in the right place(s), or a couple of the pro-gun voters out of town, and that will be that.
Weasels will do what weasels do.
Vigilance, folks.
If a man open carries into city hall, then it does not necessarily follow that this man is an oustanding and/or sane citizen simply because he's 'exercising his right to open carry'.
In fact, since most reasonable people would choose to carry their weapon concealed anywhere they may be, one could be concerned that this open-carrying man is making an overt threat or at least an attempt at intimidation. Or that he's simply not playing with a full deck.
One would be reasonable in these circumstances to be wary of such a man an consider him a threat. I would.
You have to use simple common sense, and if you carry a weapon in the open at certain times and in certain places when and where it demonstrates lack of common sense, people are correct not only to be wary of you, but to make plans to kill on the spot if you happened to make the wrong move.
In this case, maybe the mayor and others are people who don't want to arm themselves, and it is their right. In the face of a man or men who are carrying firearms and not exercising reasonable judgment, it makes perfect sense to deal with the threat by forbidding firearms in the places where they feel threatened.
A spade must be called a spade and an asshole with a gun is not a champion of the 2nd Amendment, he's just an asshole with a gun.
Post a Comment
<< Home