• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Proposed Ordinance asks Each Household to Have a Firearm

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
imported post

http://www.fox12news.com/Global/story.asp?S=5437033


Proposed Ordinance asks Each Household to Have a Firearm

Greenleaf, Idaho -- All Americans have the right to bear arms. Some towns have even gone as far as to require each household to have a gun. Now a small Idaho town is contemplating a similar idea-- it's called the Civil Emergencies Ordinance. And although gun ownership is just one piece of this ordinance, it's the part that's getting the most attention.

"We've blessed to be a fairly rural area of the state, so we don't have a lot of crime and I think we'd like to keep it that way," said Lee Belt, Greenleaf city clerk.

Drive about10 minutes west of Caldwell and you'll run into Greenleaf, Idaho, population 860. If city council member Steve Jett has his way, each head of household that can legally own a gun, will. Along with that they're encouraged to have ammunition and appropriate training.

"I think the city council is hoping it will happen andthat it will be a deterrent to crime as the city and region increases in population," said Belt.

The proposed ordinance is modeled after a similar plan that went into place in 1982 in Kennesaw, Ga. In that instance there was a dramatic decrease in criminal activity. Although crime isn't a huge problem for residents of Greenleaf, the growth in neighboring counties leads them to believe they too are in for some changes.

"There's not a lot of crime here, but I think it's coming, it's getting worse everyday," said Art Bailey, owner of the Greenleaf Store.

While the plan does encourages firearm ownership, the ordinance goes beyond that.

"The largest part itself deals with emergency capabilities," said Belt.

The plan will establish an emergency response plan, and promote its citizen response teams and neighborhood watch volunteer groups, aproactive approach to keep the crime rate to a minimum. So how have residents responded? According to almost everyone we spoke to, they already owned a gun or multiple guns, so this would have no effect on them either way.

"I don't know if it is good for every household, but we being hunters have always had guns," said Bonnie Cagle, a Greenleaf resident.

"I think it is an excellent idea," said Bailey."If the citizens are armed were not at a disadvantage."

We did ask to speak with the city council member who proposed the ordinance but hewas out of town. In November, the council will decide whether or not to adopt the ordinance.
 

MADISON

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
19
Location
, ,
imported post

Proposed Ordinance asks Each Household to Have a Firearm
I think the U.S. Congress should make iit a federal law that each person over the age of 21 should be required to have a firearm.

There is a problem there. It would never pass, just as those proposing a National CCW will not see it go into Federal law.
 

lockman

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,193
Location
Elgin, Illinois, USA
imported post

This ordinance sound more advisory than having the force of law.

I object to the one gun a month laws. I can't afford 12 guns a year!:lol:
 

badmonkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
152
Location
Princeton, West Virginia, USA
imported post

MADISON wrote:
I think the U.S. Congress should make iit a federal law that each person over the age of 21 should be required to have a firearm.

There is a problem there. It would never pass, just as those proposing a National CCW will not see it go into Federal law.
We can only dream....we can only dream....*sigh*:?
 

VApatriot

Regular Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
998
Location
Burke/Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

badmonkey wrote:
Score: Us 1; Them 0!!
Sadly, that isn't true.:cry: Honestly any part of the country that recognizes the RKBA is a victory for use (so we are winning for sure), but right now they dohave D.C., New York, Chicago, and a few entire states with very restrictive gun laws.:banghead:
 

vtme_grad98

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
385
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, ,
imported post

Ordinance 208, passed by the City Council on Tuesday, asks Greenleaf's 862 residents who do not object on religious or other grounds to keep a gun at home in case they are overrun by refugees from disasters like Katrina.
This is from another news article on th e same topic. They aren't being forced to arm themselves. The city is just making it official that they encourage residents to arm themselves for personal protection.
 

badmonkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
152
Location
Princeton, West Virginia, USA
imported post

VApatriot wrote:
badmonkey wrote:
Score: Us 1; Them 0!!
Sadly, that isn't true.:cry: Honestly any part of the country that recognizes the RKBA is a victory for use (so we are winning for sure), but right now they dohave D.C., New York, Chicago, and a few entire states with very restrictive gun laws.:banghead:
Good point....*sigh*....too bad.....still point is it's a good measure to recommend it.
 

starbuck

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
78
Location
Commonwealth of Virginia
imported post

I might have the unpopular view on this issue, but I'm against any gun law, whether it be banning the posession of them, or requiring their ownership. Some people, while not specifically anti-gun, just aren't comfortable with them ( I know a few people who fit that mold ), and I'd never think to require them to own one.
I think the ordinance means well, but in the end it's just another law reguarding gun ownership.
 

mattjohnston87

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
155
Location
Billings, Montana, USA
imported post

starbuck wrote:
Ithink the ordinance means well, but in the end it's just another law reguarding gun ownership.

True, but atleast it is in the right direction. I think that mandatory gun ownership would be bad, as there would really be no way of knowing if they recieved the correct training. But this ordinance certainly gets the thumbsup in my book.



Matt
 
Top