Adams eyes weapons ban - Coeur d'Alene Press: Local News

Adams eyes weapons ban

Current ordinance prohibits weapons at parade, festivals

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:00 am

COEUR d'ALENE - Playing off the momentum of the Idaho State Legislature, Coeur d'Alene City Councilman Steve Adams wants to eliminate a local weapons ordinance.

The ordinance he wants to eliminate bans weapons at parades and festivals within the city limits of Coeur d'Alene.

"It was brought to my attention a while back," Adams said Monday. "I thought 'why not continue this momentum to bolster the Second Amendment and eliminate this ordinance?'"

Adams was referring to the Legislature's recent passage of a law that would allow citizens with enhanced concealed weapons permits to carry guns on Idaho's college campuses.

On Monday, Adams took the issue to the city's General Services Committee. That committee is a subset of the city council and screens most issues before they come to the city council for consideration.

Adams, who sits on the committee with council members Amy Evans and Ron Edinger, said he thinks the law is unconstitutional and unnecessary.

"I don't want some poor guy with a concealed weapon attending a parade to be subject to a misdemeanor," he said, adding the law has really never been enforced.

Councilman Edinger said he would like the city attorney's office to review the constitutionality of the law before taking it to the city council.

Adams agreed with that decision and they voted to send the issue to staff.

City Attorney Mike Gridley said the ordinance was enacted several years ago because there had been conflicts between marchers and spectators at parades.

The Aryan Nations used to march annually in downtown Coeur d'Alene, which drew many protesters. At times, Gridley said, protesters would become aggressive.

In one case, after the ordinance was enacted, a protester became very aggressive with his protest sign and police cited him for using the sign as a weapon.

The protester challenged that citation in court and the case went all the way to the U.S. Ninth District Court of Appeals, which sided with the protester saying a protest sign is not considered a weapon.

Gridley said the ordinance was amended to reflect that verdict.

"Other than that, I don't think the ordinance has ever been challenged," he said, adding he is unsure if there are other cities in Idaho that have similar laws.

Adams said the ordinance was also amended to allow military and police officers to carry weapons while marching in the Forth of July Parade.

"I think the whole thing was just a knee-jerk reaction to the Aryan parades," he said.

Once Gridley reviews the law and comes back with his report, Adams said he plans to take the issue back to the General Services Committee and ultimately the city council.

Since he is on the committee, the other members of the committee cannot prevent the issue from elevating to the council level.

"It would have to be a unanimous vote to table any issue," Adams said.

More about

More about

More about

  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.

44 comments:

  • It Is Not My Fault posted at 9:54 pm on Mon, Mar 31, 2014.

    It Is Not My Fault Posts: 60

    "Irregardless" is not a word

     
  • It Is Not My Fault posted at 9:53 pm on Mon, Mar 31, 2014.

    It Is Not My Fault Posts: 60

    LOL

     
  • It Is Not My Fault posted at 9:52 pm on Mon, Mar 31, 2014.

    It Is Not My Fault Posts: 60

    If I remember there was like 10 on one and he shot two of them. I also believe it is a crime to carry a gun when you have been drinking so I would hope his CWP was taken away.

     
  • fiepie posted at 7:27 pm on Wed, Mar 26, 2014.

    fiepie Posts: 3051

    fisher....yes, gun associated deaths have decreased. Non-fatal injuries, gun related have increased.
    Criminologists credit the changes in the crack cocain (sp) market as the biggest factor for the lower death count.

    Irregardless of whether higher or lower, the United States has about 20 times more gun related incidents than most other civilized countries.
    That means you have 20 times more likely a chance to be involved in a gun related incident, here in the USA, than almost any other country in the world.
    Now, as we arm more folks that number should rise...

     
  • Righty-O posted at 1:13 pm on Wed, Mar 26, 2014.

    Righty-O Posts: 490

    Name calling? All that person said was that they felt Steve was worthless as a politician. Please tell me how that is name calling? I see it more as a person point of view. LMYCDA didn't resort to anything more specific than saying they voted for Mr. Adams and that he had accomplished nothing in regards to the city council. However, XRGRSF you make yourself look just as petty if that is how you wish to respond to ones opinion. I see nothing in your comment that you are using "reasoned discourse" you go on to call them "shallow", "Pitiful", "Bitter", "Sarcastic", and you then claim them to be aggressive when there was nothing there that would indicate more than a discouraged previous voter. You sir need a reality check, look in the mirror, and proof read your comments before you get all hypocritical in your own post.

     
  • Fisher posted at 1:08 pm on Wed, Mar 26, 2014.

    Fisher Posts: 168

    Feel free to cite your sources when you proclaim to have factual data. Violent gun crime has dropped dramatically in the past two decades, but the majority of Americans think it's more of a problem now than ever, according to a Pew Research Center study released Tuesday.

    According to the survey, done in March, 56% of Americans believe gun crime is worse today than it was 20 years ago. And 84% believe in recent years, gun crime has either gone up or stayed the same — when the reality is that it has dropped significantly.

    The rate of non-fatal violent gun crime victimization dropped 75% in the past 20 years; The gun homicide rate dropped 49% in the same period, according to numbers Pew researchers obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Don’t want to credit a rise in gun ownership and concealed carry by law-abiding citizens for this good news? Fine. But then, don’t imagine that gun legislation is the reason or answer either. Leave that illusion to gun-control cheerleaders in the media.

    Again, those pesky fact, tripping you up.

     
  • Righty-O posted at 11:52 am on Wed, Mar 26, 2014.

    Righty-O Posts: 490

    I'd also like to point out that the one thing that the top 10 murder rates in the USA have in common.. Gangs with lots of guns. That is the common denominator for deaths by guns. Does Idaho have a large gang problem I am unaware of?

     
  • Righty-O posted at 11:46 am on Wed, Mar 26, 2014.

    Righty-O Posts: 490

    @ Fisher-

    You have made up this statement, other than the District of Columbia, which has outlawed handguns and is showing a decline the per capita murder rate. FYI its gone down 4% in the last 1-2 years.

    "Do you also know where the majority of gun crimes takes place? Hint: it takes place where the law abiding are not allowed to defend themselves. The states with the highest gun crime rates are also those with the highest degree of gun control."

    This is so wrong that it pretty much makes any argument you state further invalid. You don't even fact check yourself. Per capita. Take a look at Louisiana, Alabama, Missouri, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, North Dakota, Florida, Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, and Nevada. Those states all have higher per capita murder rates than New York. I like that you make up your own stats though, did that go over well in the NRA meeting you where having at the time?

    http://www.policymic.com/articles/22686/america-s-10-deadliest-cities-2012

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/4tabledatadecoverviewpdf/table_4_crime_in_the_united_states_by_region_geographic_division_and_state_2011-2012.xls

     
  • fiepie posted at 10:19 am on Wed, Mar 26, 2014.

    fiepie Posts: 3051

    fisher...as to your responce of 2 a.m. Wed....Apparently I don't understand stats. A friend of mine said, we were talking about how the States with the losest gun laws have seen such a higher rate in gun violence,
    he stated that in Phoenix they had five...5...incidences in the last year.
    The Phoenix authorities list 125.
    So stats are so hard to understand.
    Most gun violence is by someone who knew whom they were shooting, killing. Husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfried, etc.
    Sorry there goes those stats again.

    The records of this past year or so have an increase in the States with the losest laws. The States, such as New York, Illinois, etc with the strictest laws have noticed a decrease...but these are stats again.

    Idaho has a tough cc requirement as you have to shoot some 98 bullets, something like that and other States require you attend a four hour class to qualify for a cc permit...there's those stats again...at least we know the cc's have adequate training.
    And you want more of them?

     
  • Fisher posted at 2:01 am on Wed, Mar 26, 2014.

    Fisher Posts: 168

    You obviously don't understand the data of gun crimes, however I cannot blame someone for their ignorance. Do you also know where the majority of gun crimes takes place? Hint: it takes place where the law abiding are not allowed to defend themselves. The states with the highest gun crime rates are also those with the highest degree of gun control.

    However you position your fantasies of these "wild west" scenarios, they are refuted with simple, factual data. So, please by all means, choose not to arm yourself, you certainly have that right.

    Back to the topic, the restriction was a knee jerk reaction to the Aryan morons, it also prohibited our veterans from parading with their relic Garands. The argument for the restriction has no bearing on crime, it is a useless law but also one that gets everyone's attention. Anything guns gets oodles of press, so of course a politician is going to seize the opportunity, I don't care what side you are on, the sizzle sells.

     
  • nascar posted at 5:38 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    nascar Posts: 6

    All of the arguments against Steve Adams elimination of this city ordinance are invalid because Idaho State statutes prohibit this kind of ordinance. The following is the contents of Statute of Title 18, chapter 3302J. Carefully read item (2)

    TITLE 18
    CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
    CHAPTER 33
    FIREARMS, EXPLOSIVES AND OTHER DEADLY WEAPONS
    18-3302J. Preemption of firearms regulation. (1) The legislature finds that uniform laws regulating firearms are necessary to protect the individual citizen's right to bear arms guaranteed by amendment 2 of the United States Constitution and section 11, article I of the constitution of the state of Idaho. It is the legislature's intent to wholly occupy the field of firearms regulation within this state.
    (2) Except as expressly authorized by state statute, no county, city, agency, board or any other political subdivision of this state may adopt or enforce any law, rule, regulation, or ordinance which regulates in any manner the sale, acquisition, transfer, ownership, possession, transportation, carrying or storage of firearms or any element relating to firearms and components thereof, including ammunition.
    (3) A county may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the discharge of firearms within its boundaries. Ordinances adopted under this subsection may not apply to or affect:
    (a) A person discharging a firearm in the lawful defense of person or persons or property;
    (b) A person discharging a firearm in the course of lawful hunting;
    (c) A landowner and guests of the landowner discharging a firearm, when the discharge will not endanger persons or property;
    (d) A person lawfully discharging a firearm on a sport shooting range as defined in section 55-2604, Idaho Code; or
    (e) A person discharging a firearm in the course of target shooting on public land if the discharge will not endanger persons or property.
    (4) A city may adopt ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit the discharge of firearms within its boundaries. Ordinances adopted under this subsection may not apply to or affect:
    (a) A person discharging a firearm in the lawful defense of person or persons or property; or
    (b) A person lawfully discharging a firearm on a sport shooting range as defined in section 55-2604, Idaho Code.
    (5) This section shall not be construed to affect:
    (a) The authority of the department of fish and game to make rules or regulations concerning the management of any wildlife of this state, as set forth in section 36-104, Idaho Code;
    (b) The authority of counties and cities to regulate the location and construction of sport shooting ranges, subject to the limitations contained in chapter 26, title 55, Idaho Code; and
    (c) The authority of the board of regents of the university of Idaho, the boards of trustees of the state colleges and universities, the board of professional-technical education and the boards of trustees of each of the community colleges established under chapter 21, title 33, Idaho Code, to regulate in matters relating to firearms.
    (6) The provisions of this section are hereby declared to be severable. And if any provision is declared invalid for any reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this section.

    History:
    [18-3302J, added 2008, ch. 304, sec. 2, p. 845.]

     
  • Flash Gordon posted at 4:53 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Flash Gordon Posts: 1644

    The Adams proposal will never pass the city council.

     
  • slave posted at 3:43 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    slave Posts: 463

    Because there are evil criminals everywhere. They say they wouldn't hurt a fly, but then, POW. Dont underestimate others.

     
  • slave posted at 3:37 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    slave Posts: 463

    Wow...Most murders are law abiding citizens. Last i checked, murder was a violation of the law.

    OOPS.

     
  • Humanist posted at 2:23 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Humanist Posts: 3207

    Quote BHirsh: "based upon paranoid prognostications that simply haven't materialized where they don't exist"

    That's odd, that's almost exactly what I was thinking about those who think that every citizen should be packing.

     
  • BHirsh posted at 2:11 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    BHirsh Posts: 12

    Agreed. The ban is ridiculous, based upon paranoid prognostications that simply haven't materialized where they don't exist.

    Too many times (most times, actually) these laws are passed without any supporting evidence as to their ostensible cause at all, only abstract projections.

     
  • fiepie posted at 1:24 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    fiepie Posts: 3051

    Harrison Dan...as with the First Amendment there are laws that don't "infringe" on that Amendment but help us to understand it better.
    Carry a weapon into your local penitentiary for instance. There are folks there that would really like to buddy up to you.
    Yell "fire" in a crowded showhouse.

    If we are concerned about our rights being violated let's do as Australia does...you don't vote...you get fined!
    We should be working on getting folks to vote rather than carry.
    Let's get Mr. Adams to work on something valid for our country....

     
  • fiepie posted at 1:17 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    fiepie Posts: 3051

    fisher...in answer to the question of how many students have been shot on Idaho campus's since they were declared "gun free"...is none.

    Statistics show that less than 1% of gun victims were from mass shootings. That leaves 99% of victims shot by someone except a mass shooter.
    This should ring a bell that the more guns floating around and being carried provide an instant solution to whatever problem they may think they are facing.
    Should ring a bell...but have my suspicions...

    As Why Not pointed out back in the early days of our country guns were carried most places but there were definite reasons for it. As we became a settled country there were towns, cities and many other places, i.e. bars, where guns had to be checked and you didn't get it back if they thought you were drunk or having a fight or for whatever reason.
    They understood that it was too easy for a fool to do something in haste that could result in a bad situtation.

    Not just "bad" people violate laws. Most murders are from usually law abiding people.

     
  • Why Not posted at 12:10 pm on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Why Not Posts: 5242

    Punished, yeah like that drunk Adam who shot and wounded two people a couple years ago because he felt threatened after being obnoxious in a bar? He was a CWC and may still be for all we know.

     
  • searcher posted at 10:28 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    searcher Posts: 365

    I don't care who carries a gun, I just care who is authorized to fire one. If you want everyone to pack heat, fine. Just be darned sure that if they hurt someone accidentally or our of anger, malice or animus that they are punished harshly, and the victim is compensated fully.

     
  • Why Not posted at 9:06 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Why Not Posts: 5242

    I agree with Idaho Mike, we should all diligently guard all of the rights afforded by our Constitution, but use common sense as well. This is encouraging people to carry weapons at public events, exactly why gun ordinances became necessary in the first place. In the old west a weapon was necessary, but leaving it with the town sheriff was also required in most places. People lived and crossed expansive wilderness with bandits, wild critters and other nefarious characters on the loose. Weapons were necessary because there was no Motel 6, no McDonalds and no cell phones. Contrary to popular right wing lore, ruthless killers are not regularly lurking in school halls or showing up at 4th of July celebrations in downtown Coeur d’Alene. The interpretations of our right to bear arms second amendment are not in question, but common sense is. Supporters may find there are unintended consequences down the road by allowing people to carry weapons so freely.

     
  • Fly in the ointment posted at 8:48 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Fly in the ointment Posts: 606

    "... I can only NOT carry in jails/juvenile facilities, schools and courthouses..."

    If it's so "safe" to carry then why is this unlawful?

     
  • Miketeague posted at 8:44 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Miketeague Posts: 2583

    First, Adams is a knee jerk, trying to keep his name in the paper by starting trouble where there is none. In case anyone hasn’t noticed pointy head groups like the Aryan as.bites still pop up from time, with adams at the forefront they would be allowed to march armed, at least the non-felons or does adams want to remove that restrictions too?

     
  • XRGRSF posted at 8:09 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    XRGRSF Posts: 167

    Is that you LMYCDA, the name calling, insulting jerk who we've all come to know, and deplore? Really, can't you do any better than attacking Steve, whoever he is, with taunts, and name calling? Has it ever occurred to you to engage in reasoned discourse or do you need a platform for you bitter, sarcastic aggression? Have you nothing constructive to offer? Are you really so shallow that ridicule is the depth of your debate? Pitiful.........

     
  • Fisher posted at 7:56 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Fisher Posts: 168

    Unless the City Council meeting is in the Courthouse, they are.

     
  • Fisher posted at 7:55 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Fisher Posts: 168

    LMY, you make my point for me. Thank you.

     
  • HarrisonDan posted at 7:48 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    HarrisonDan Posts: 5

    Local Res - Couldn't agree with you more. Criminals and bad guys do not follow the law and in their minds we are just targets. Targets for death, targets for money, targets for secual desires, targets for whatever their minds makeup. I for one refuse to be a target and I carry as do many of the folks I know. Those of us who carry are not looking for anything other than safety for self and our families. Taking the steps to carry CCW or Enhanced CCW is a choice given to us via the 2nd Amendment and by leaders such as Steve Adams in the Great State of Idaho. I applaud Steve Adams looking into this possible infringment! As a second thought, if LMYCDA wishes to be a target then it is also his/her god given right under the Constitution. Enough said!

     
  • milburnschmidt posted at 7:46 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    milburnschmidt Posts: 1160

    I guess the VFW will have to give up the color guard and carry American flags with no staffs. Then others will have to carry tape measures to make sure they are the proper distance from parade gatherings. The absurdity of laws like this is what chokes our courts with frivolous lawsuits and refighting second amendment rights over and over. How about a law against mean and impure thoughts on a public way??

     
  • Flash Gordon posted at 7:43 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Flash Gordon Posts: 1644

    Steve Adams and many others in here are of the opinion that there are no exceptions to the 2nd amendment. Since the Dist. of Col. vs Heller supreme Court decision, that point of view has gained a great deal of momentum.

    I'm not sure any state can go further in the realm of protecting the "absolutism" of the 2nd amendment than the state of Georgia. Apparently Steve Adams is making sure Idaho is not far behind. "It's" a bad idea whose time has come.......

     
  • LMYCDA posted at 7:29 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    LMYCDA Posts: 2288

    Of I know Tom. Don't try to patronize me. Carry you weapons...HANG THEM FROM you NRA LOVING neck. I know, it makes you feel like a real man doesn't it. cough, cough

     
  • LMYCDA posted at 7:28 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    LMYCDA Posts: 2288

    Please answer my question. Is that you Tom? Sounds like you. Please slow down on our residential streets. If you don't obey the speed limit...how I am supposed to think you won't do something illegal with that gun?

     
  • oscar posted at 7:27 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    oscar Posts: 1661

    Guns should be allowed at City Council meeting also.

     
  • local res posted at 7:05 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    local res Posts: 1165

    LMCDA why do you assume that just because there is a law that it is being obeyed? Is there not a chance that there have been many weapons already carried around you each day that you have no clue that they are there? how many criminals became criminals by following the law?

     
  • Fisher posted at 7:02 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Fisher Posts: 168

    There's nothing wrong with open carry at all.

    To your point though, do you think that the Virginia Tech shooter even once considered there were no guns allowed on campus when he massacred those students? Did he see the sign and think twice? Nope. Concealed carry IS allowed in most every place, and state preemption guarantees that. I can only NOT carry in jails/juvenile facilities, schools and courthouses, with the exception of the new ordinance for enhanced carry effective July 1 this year with regard to colleges and universities.

    Open carry is allowed anywhere concealed is, and no permit is needed to open carry. Your correlations to Syria and Iraq are a true reach and quite silly, but it does show the ignorance of the misinformed.

     
  • IdahoMike posted at 6:25 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    IdahoMike Posts: 127

    If we don't fight for our second amendment rights then we are being un-American. Such a position is like the Germans, Austrians, French, English, Irish, Polish, etc., and what do they know about guns and preventing violence, crime, and incarceration rates? Those who try to justify their anti-American stance against the Second Amendment try to do so using their allegedly well-thought out positions, evidence, and any other manner of logic to get their point across. But it would be un-American to listen to such logic if it's not OUR logic (stories about how guns prevented a crime in 2004, 2008, and a you-tube video from 2010). There just ain't no better way to celebrate a parade than waving flags, carrying a gun, and heckling the Democratic floats. Yee-Haw!!! (shoots gun in the air).

     
  • Cdajon posted at 6:24 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Cdajon Posts: 447

    I'm bringing my shotgun next time... Loaded. I'll be good.. Just in case I need it. I'm sure the fuzz would take me down if I did.

     
  • fiepie posted at 6:23 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    fiepie Posts: 3051

    fisher...asked the question of how many students in Utah have been shot since allowing concealed carry on campus there.
    The question asks one to consider how many students in Idaho have been shot since the "gun free" campus became effective?
    One would also wonder why the faculity, the majority of students, the security at the colleges, the local police in those towns all tried to not have this ordinance passed but were ignored.

    Once we get the concealed carry allowed in most areas it will be very difficult to stop open carry in the same and many more places.
    Does anyone see a resemblance to Syria? Iraq? many African towns and countries? Maybe then we can start putting land mines out also. But then we would want that in your back yard, not mine...

     
  • manana posted at 5:57 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    manana Posts: 179

    If a city can willy-nilly declare the 2nd amendment null and void for parades and such then it can do so for any reason ... or no reason. Certainly this ordinance is unconstitutional and eventually more taxpayer funds will be wasted defending it in court.

     
  • Fisher posted at 5:33 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Fisher Posts: 168

    I can understand your fantasies about living in fear of this wild west scenario backed by NRA lunatics really does grasp your attention, it is a common misperception of gun grabbers. What do you have against citizens being prepared to defend themselves? How many killings are taking places in bars again? Please do cite your sources.

    What do you have against students, who are adults, who choose to carry? It is not this bravado/machismo facade you portray, not in the least. You seem to have an inherent fear of some sort of mass killing, I mean what better place to carry one out than where the perpetrator knows everyone is unarmed and defenseless. Are you aware that in the last 50 years every single mass killing of more than three people, outside of the Giffords incident, has taken place in a gun free zone? Hunting preserves for innocent victims.

    I digress. Why is it you perceive this to be a bad thing? How many students have been killed on Utah's campuses where the students can legally carry? Hold the bus...I have the answer for you, zero. In as much as you loathe an armed citizen it is their right to defend themselves, just as it is your right to choose not to arm yourself. Why does that rub you the wrong way? You DO know the reason the parades thing was passed right? I mean, if you are from here, you would know this yes?

    There is no ill intent, a person who carries is no threat to you, in fact, conversely you should feel safer. I will not take your antagonistic bait, so please, keep it civil and help us understand where this perception comes from without data to support it.

     
  • Why Not posted at 5:29 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Why Not Posts: 5242

    How about a little applause for the Waco kid? In honor of our hopeless politicians, lets have an ordinance renaming the city to Deadwood.

     
  • LMYCDA posted at 4:00 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    LMYCDA Posts: 2288

    My correlation with drunks shows ignorance. Wow, Fisher, wow. Guess you don't live near the downtown BARS do you? Oh, and are you from here? Is that you Tom? Speeder Tom?

     
  • LMYCDA posted at 3:58 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    LMYCDA Posts: 2288

    Yes, I am from here. Why do you ask such a question? Does it matter if I was born and raised here or if I moved here?

    Unconstitutional...yikes. I still don't think it is a good idea to let people pack at parades or events. But, republicans like Stevie don't care, he just is looking for votes, which he will definitely need next election.

    Let it happen and when one of the drunks or mentally challenged that has a gun kills people...then let's see how people react to such a stupid idea! Just like letting college kids pack at school. I know, the NRA is backing this too.

     
  • Fisher posted at 3:42 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    Fisher Posts: 168

    LMY - What he is proposing is to remove an unconstitutional law. Nothing wrong with that. You are probably not aware that you are probably surrounded by armed good citizens most every place you go here. Your correlation with "drunks" only shows your ignorance.

    While not illegal to take a drink when armed, I make it a best practice to not carry my weapon if there is even a slight chance of a drink, or just not drink. Idaho law does not prohibit this, but responsible gun owners are acutely aware of the responsibility they are taking on when carrying a weapon. Is this another "blood in the streets" cry that again will have to weight? I for one certainly hope that I never have to use my weapon for any reason other than range practice, that does not preclude me from being prepared to defend my life with lethal force, for it and those of my family are worth protecting.

    Are you from here, Lmy?

     
  • LMYCDA posted at 2:24 am on Tue, Mar 25, 2014.

    LMYCDA Posts: 2288

    You are worthless Steve. Should have never ever voted for you. Now you want everyone to be able to pack their guns at parades...Hey why not the 4TH OF JULY TOO STEVIE BOY. You know so when all the drunks get drunker they can start shooting everybody that bothers them.

    What a ridiculous suggestion Stevie boy. You will never survive another election for councilman. You have done nothing for the city. Nothing. Now you want guns at family events.

     
default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
Not you?||
Logout|My Dashboard

Stocks