Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Local Ordinance question...

  1. #1
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,753

    Post imported post

    Found this bit of stuff in the local ordinances of St. Charles Michigan under "parks".

    http://library1.municode.com/default...ction=whatsnew

    Sec. 14-33. Enforcement.

    (a)Officials. The director and any park attendant shall, in connection with their duties imposed by law, diligently enforce the provisions of this article.

    (b)Ejectment. The director and any park attendant shall have the authority to eject from the park any person acting in violation of this article.

    (c)Seizure of property. The director and any park attendant shall have the authority to seize and confiscate any property, thing or device, in the park, or used, in violation of this article.

    Isn't this giving police powers to local officials?

    Oh... here is a great resource for finding local ordinances:

    http://www.law.msu.edu/library/substantive/local.html

    Sorry all... was in a hurry when I posted before and didn't add cites for ya's. I guess I lose 10,000 atta boys now.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Wheres the article?

    It would be ill advised for anyone not wearing a police uniform to attempt to disarm a law abiding citizen with a gun. (or a criminal with a gun)

  3. #3
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,753

    Post imported post

    stainless1911 wrote:
    Wheres the article?

    It would be ill advised for anyone not wearing a police uniform to attempt to disarm a law abiding citizen with a gun. (or a criminal with a gun)
    Sorry.... I edited the OP to give more info....

    I've already sent a letter addressing the illegal ordinance concerning firearms in the park.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Bikenut wrote:
    I guess I lose 10,000 atta boys now.
    :PAw c'mon, now. U R fine.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,753

    Post imported post

    Bump... because I'm really curious about the ordinance contained in my OP.... and I hope someone has some comments?

    I can't imagine what would happen if a park official tried to seize someone's OC'ed sidearm.........
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  6. #6
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,336

    Post imported post

    There is so much wrong with these ordinances, I am not sure where to begin. It certainly does not sound like you can have "any" fun in this park if they wanted to enforce "letter of the law".

    The following screams out like authorized stealing/seizure:

    (c) Seizure of property. The director and any park attendant shall have the authority to seize and confiscate any property, thing or device, in the park, or used, in violation of this article.
    My thought is that this would directly violate the 14th Amendment statement below.

    nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
    IMO, the Due Process of Law includes a trial of some kind not just a single individual, like a park attendant, determining outcome of property ownership.

    I would pose the question to the ACLU and see what they say about this ordinance (not that I like this group, but they might have a use here).
    Rights are like muscles. You must EXERCISE THEM to keep them from becoming atrophied.

  7. #7
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337

    Post imported post

    You would most likely get a summons in the mail with the confiscation. The practice of giving the power to enforce ordinances is common... think building inspector. I know that animal control officers, although not given general police powers, have police powers when they are dealing with animals...and this power comes from their position with a city or county. They are not required to have MCOLES training.

    Example:

    City Code of Grand Rapids
    ARTICLE 2. - DOGS
    Sec. 9.208. - Enforcement.
    This Chapter may be enforced by any Grand Rapids Police Officer, any State or County law enforcement officer, any Animal Control officer or other authorized employee of the Kent County Health Department or by any City employee authorized to do so by the City Manager.
    (Ord. No. 2003-06, § 1, 1-28-03)

    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  8. #8
    Regular Member eastmeyers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,383

    Post imported post

    "Bam, I like saying bam when I cite something, in fact I think I shall do this from here on out, as long as I remember.
    Bam!" - eastmeyers

    "Then said he to them, But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his sack: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
    Luke 22:36
    God Bless

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,440

    Post imported post

    Either way, the park ordinance is all sorts of wrong. Email, then visit city council. Seems to be a very effective one-two punch.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,753

    Post imported post

    scot623 wrote:
    Either way, the park ordinance is all sorts of wrong. Email, then visit city council. Seems to be a very effective one-two punch.
    Did the email on the park ordinance... waiting for reply.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

Posting Permissions

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