apollosmith
Regular Member
imported post
Here's a quick follow up to the story covered previously at http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum52/28403.html At the last city council meeting, the council indicated that they would act to remove or modify the city's gun laws. Now they are saying that they do not intend to modify their laws and that they want to be able to control gun laws at a local level and that state preemption should go away - and they intend to file a formal resolution to the legislature requesting this.
If you are a Logan resident (and even if you're not), act now by contacting the mayor and city council and demand that they begin obeying state law now (after my formal complaint, they've already received and are ignoring a direct dictate from the attorney general to get rid of these laws "as quickly as actionable") and let them know how absolutely insane it would be to get rid of preemption laws. Maybe remind them how well that went for the UofU.
And then let's make a VERY GOOD showing at the city council meeting - should be September 1 @ 5:30, though they snuck all of this in on us by not publishing the agenda ahead of time, so it could happen in August. I'll try to find out.
Here's an article that ran today in Logan's Herald Journal newspaper. http://hjnews.townnews.com/articles/2009/07/23/news/news04-07-23-09.txt
Here's a quick follow up to the story covered previously at http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum52/28403.html At the last city council meeting, the council indicated that they would act to remove or modify the city's gun laws. Now they are saying that they do not intend to modify their laws and that they want to be able to control gun laws at a local level and that state preemption should go away - and they intend to file a formal resolution to the legislature requesting this.
If you are a Logan resident (and even if you're not), act now by contacting the mayor and city council and demand that they begin obeying state law now (after my formal complaint, they've already received and are ignoring a direct dictate from the attorney general to get rid of these laws "as quickly as actionable") and let them know how absolutely insane it would be to get rid of preemption laws. Maybe remind them how well that went for the UofU.
And then let's make a VERY GOOD showing at the city council meeting - should be September 1 @ 5:30, though they snuck all of this in on us by not publishing the agenda ahead of time, so it could happen in August. I'll try to find out.
Here's an article that ran today in Logan's Herald Journal newspaper. http://hjnews.townnews.com/articles/2009/07/23/news/news04-07-23-09.txt
City may request self-rule on guns
LOGAN — Councilwoman Laraine Swenson wants the city — rather than the state — to have the final say on local gun laws.
At Tuesday night’s Municipal Council meeting, a majority of the elected body, at the urging of Swenson, directed City Attorney Kymber Housley to prepare a resolution to send to state legislators expressing the city’s desire to set its own firearms rules.
“I would like for Logan to have that option to make that decision ourselves,” Swenson said. “I don’t expect anything to come of it but I would like them to know.”
Following a state Supreme Court ruling that the University of Utah could not ban students from possessing guns on campus, the state Legislature enacted uniform firearm laws in 2004 saying that residents statewide can carry guns with a permit. State regulations trump local ones.
Along with several other cities, Logan didn’t change its ordinance banning the carrying of guns in the city after the state laid down its law.
Dropping Logan’s ordinance seemed to be a housekeeping issue until Swenson’s move Tuesday.
Councilwoman Tami Pyfer thinks it’s ill-advised. She was alone in opposing the resolution. Mayor Randy Watts was absent.
Pyfer said she would prefer local control but given the overriding state law, “I don’t know what we would accomplish at this point,” she said, noting the blow back from gun rights advocates surely in store.
Housley said: “I guarantee the local chapter of the NRA will be all over this,” he said. “There will be no doubt about what’s going on in Logan.”
In an interview Wednesday, Housley said he spoke with some councilmembers after the meeting. He said they resolved to further review existing laws before taking their case to the state.
As it stands, Logan’s law against carrying guns means nothing — state law rules, Housley said.
“The bottom line is municipalities no longer have the authority,” he said, adding that as far as he understands no councilmember opposes deleting the city’s old ordinance. “Some of them just want to look at a bigger picture.”
A review of court records shows the city hasn’t prosecuted a gun-carrying case in the last five years, Housley said. He doesn’t recall any cases in his 14 years with the city.
Logan’s antiquated gun ordinance hit the public stage earlier this month when Smithfield resident Jared Smith pushed city leaders to do away with it. A group including Smith has persuaded other Utah cities to get rid of their old laws.
Smith, who is out of town on business, said he’s surprised at the city’s approach.
“I think the attorney general has provided more than ample clarification on this issue,” Smith said. “I guess I don’t know what the issue is. It indicates to me the city is out to tighten the noose on gun rights.”
Though the local law carries no real weight, “our beef is people think they are enforceable,” he said.
Housley said the issue should come before the council again in September.