Thursday, January 24, 2013

The America I grew up in

Sigh

A levelheadedness not known in the United States Senate
“

Gun Ban Motion Fails - Hilarity Ensues


A citizen addresses the Oak Harbor City Council encouraging them to support firearm owners and firearm safety and a councilman makes a motion for a new ordinance banning firearms in the council chambers which is against our state law.
The councilman then leaves the chambers after the motion fails stating he will not stay in chambers as long as armed citizens are present.

Mayor Scott Dudley reminds council members of oath they took to defend the Laws and Consitution of the United States and of the State of Washington.
As an aside, it turns out that the two members voting to ban firearms had previously tried to pass a motion to ban hats at council meetings.  There can be little doubt that their party affiliation is (D).

The story behind this video can be viewed at:
http://www.islandpolitics.org/?p=8732
thoR~ 		”
1/24/2013 08:06:00 AM 7 Comments

"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. "
Argus Hamilton


Posted by at
Labels: , ,

This will be the comment box

7 comments:

Chuck Martel said...

His reelection website says he is "Veteran, Army Airborne Officer". I take it he is not an Oathkeeper.

http://www.rickalmberg.com/

1/24/13, 8:25 AM
Phssthpok said...

For an even FURTHER backstory, see here:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?109689-Is-Oak-Harbor-going-to-follow-Seattle-into-lawsuit-club

These are the folks that actually SPOKE at the meeting!

See also: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?110396-Need-your-support-February-5-Oak-Harbor-6PM

...if you are local.

1/24/13, 10:17 AM
Anonymous said...

Scott Dudley for Gov!

1/24/13, 1:03 PM
DougM said...

The proper response is,
"None of your business, Councilman. If I were armed, I can assure you that I would be legally armed, so there would no legal requirement for me to inform you either way. I would, however, be obligated to inform any law-enforcement officer who approached. If I were illegally armed, I would be under the protection of the Fifth Amendment and would refuse to answer, also."

1/24/13, 3:22 PM
Phssthpok said...

Actually DougM, in Washington state there *IS* no 'duty to inform'.

WA firearms laws, unlike many other states, are short, clearly written, and minimal in their scope.

RCW 9.41.270, .290, and .300 are the most critisal sections to know for legally carrying in WA.

1/24/13, 6:21 PM
Anonymous said...

Later, when you are teasing your liberal friends and family about this, they will at some point undoubtedly whine, "Hats and guns is an unfair comparison." Your reply should be, "You're absolutely right. You do not have a Constitutional right to wear a hat."
GrinfilledCelt

1/24/13, 10:10 PM
pdwalker said...

Unfortunately, there are no consequences for deliberately breaking your oath.

What should happen is at the very least, the assholes trying to pass the motion to ban the guns in the room should have been bounced from office immediately. Perhaps some tar and feathering for good measure.

Until there are actual consequences for oath breakers, then the leftists/statists will continually encroach on your rights day by day.

1/25/13, 12:37 AM

Post a Comment

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)