Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Battle Creek commission meeting weapons ban

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    576

    Post imported post

    Tonight at 7pm City Commission meeting, going to vote on the removal of the ordinance on the parks & rec.

    (to remove the ban on firearms)

    Also there is going to be Anti gunners there, from the e-mail that has been received.........

  2. #2
    Regular Member kyleplusitunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lennon Michigan, ,
    Posts
    533

    Post imported post

    Clarification?

    Isn't any firearms ban unenforceable? I'm confused.

  3. #3
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    Just BC it is unenforceable does not mean that the Antis wouldn't want it to stay on the books to muddy the waters.

    If I didn't already have a prior commitment I would try to be there. Those of you in BC would do well to go and show support for it's removal!
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    576

    Post imported post

    Yes it is still on the books, and any police officer can inforce it, as long as it is their it can be enforced period.

    It will get thrown out, BUT that will be after yhou have been handcuffed, taken to jail, seen a judge, etc... do you want to go threw all of that, ?

    Attorney costs, time away from family, lost job etc...

    And there response will be oh well !!!!

    If it is removed they can't arrest for that.

    Maybe for some other BS charge.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Rochester Hills, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    338

    Post imported post

    Until today, they can simply say that these ordinances were on the books either before preemption Law or put in by mistake. If they vote to keep it on the books, then they are in active defiance of the State Law. From that point,Battle Creek PD is much more vulnarable if sued. And, the longer they do it, the worse the outcome will be for the city in the end. This is why many municipalities repeal illegal ordinances (because of MOC efforts as well). They understand increased liability if ignored.

    mastiff69 wrote:
    Yes it is still on the books, and any police officer can inforce it, as long as it is their it can be enforced period.

    It will get thrown out, BUT that will be after yhou have been handcuffed, taken to jail, seen a judge, etc... do you want to go threw all of that, ?

    Attorney costs, time away from family, lost job etc...

    And there response will be oh well !!!!

    If it is removed they can't arrest for that.

    Maybe for some other BS charge.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    396

    Post imported post

    Hey, Mastiff, can you OC at the city hall?



    Not a court, or some other BS reason?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    576

    Post imported post

    Yes

  8. #8
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157

    Post imported post

    I can't be there but thanks for spreading the word.

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. Thomas Paine

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Jackson, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    367

    Post imported post

    i've ben sitting at my buddys house here in BC bored... i just saw this! sorry i'm not there! :-(

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    576

    Post imported post

    It is being removed even after the anti's cried think of the children ploy !

  11. #11
    Regular Member kyleplusitunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lennon Michigan, ,
    Posts
    533

    Post imported post

    so what happened?

    details!!! we get video?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    mastiff69 wrote:
    It is being removed even after the anti's cried think of the children ploy !
    Why would they even bother to debate it? It's not enforcable! Get it off the books!

    Thanks for going Mastiff.

  13. #13
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    :celebrate good job!
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  14. #14
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    mastiff69 wrote:
    Yes it is still on the books, and any police officer can inforce it, as long as it is their it can be enforced period.

    It will get thrown out, BUT that will be after yhou have been handcuffed, taken to jail, seen a judge, etc... do you want to go threw all of that, ?

    Attorney costs, time away from family, lost job etc...

    And there response will be oh well !!!!
    Um, no.

    The police responses will be captured in videtaped depositions taken after service of process which will show that they had actual notice that the law was invalid and therfore will not prevail in a qualified immunity defense to their violation of the Fourth Amendment and other tortious acts against the gun carries.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •