Re: Civil Protection Ordinance
Good catch excel.
I wouldn't vote for something like this unless such a provision or item was completely stricken from the language of the ordinance/bill/etc.
The problem is, for lack of a better term, it's a slippery slope. You ban discharge in the borough, but what happens in the future if the borough becomes incorporated into a larger municipality? What if other municipalities adopt similar ordinances using this one as a reference? All of a sudden, a person with 10 acres can't discharge a weapon on their private range because their land is within the borough or municipality. Or, gun clubs within these municipalities are no longer allowed to operate. Or, hunters can't hunt on public land because of this item.
The intent of such an ordinance is admirable, but line-items like this, IMHO, are a poison pill. Even worse, the ordinance can be touted by politicians to appear to support a pro-2A agenda, when in actuality it's a wolf in sheep's clothing.
__________________
"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
-James Madison, Federalist Papers, No. 46.
"America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy." [sic]
-John Quincy Adams
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies."
-Thomas Jefferson
Μολών λαβέ!
-King Leonidas
|