scream-of-consciousness;
"If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
Pages
▼
Thursday, January 24, 2013
The America I grew up in
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 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."
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
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.
His reelection website says he is "Veteran, Army Airborne Officer". I take it he is not an Oathkeeper.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rickalmberg.com/
For an even FURTHER backstory, see here:
ReplyDeletehttp://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.
Scott Dudley for Gov!
ReplyDeleteThe proper response is,
ReplyDelete"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."
Actually DougM, in Washington state there *IS* no 'duty to inform'.
ReplyDeleteWA 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.
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."
ReplyDeleteGrinfilledCelt
Unfortunately, there are no consequences for deliberately breaking your oath.
ReplyDeleteWhat 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.