• 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.

Council meeting for Pontiac

Glock9mmOldStyle

Glock9mmOldStyle

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
2,038
Location
Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
DetroitBiker said:
What time does this party start? and you might want to post address for anybody that has not been there before.
Click to expand...

http://www.pontiac.mi.us/council/

From their POS website:

"City Council meets every other Thursday at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Pre-formal Council meetings are conducted at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room on those Thursdays. On the Thursdays in between, the Council meets for an Agenda Review at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Substandard Housing Meetings are every third Wednesday at 5:45 p.m. in the Council Chambers. These dates are subject to change"

Map link
http://maps.yahoo.com/map?q1=47450 ...&q1=47450 Woodward Ave Pontiac, MI 48342-5009
 
Last edited:
DanM

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
If you wish to address the council as a member of the public, please take note of the following (especially that you need to give the staff a "public discussion card" before 6pm):

"The public may address the council during the public discussion portion of the agenda. You must
complete a public discussion card located in the City Council Office. Please indicate on the card your name, address, and topic(s) for discussion, and leave your card with the City Council Office staff prior to the start of the meeting at 6:00 p.m.
Citizens will be allowed five (5) minutes to discuss city business during a council meeting; and
provided further, the Council President shall determine the order in which each person may speak.
City Council Rule VI-D (Adopted 2/27/03)"
 
DanM

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
lapeer20m said:
who is planning to speak tonight? or should i plan to write my own speech?
Click to expand...

I plan on saying something just on my own behalf. I'm an Auburn Hills resident, but I am in Pontiac a lot and am concerned.

I encourage residents and non-residents alike to voice, even briefly, their concerns. If you live in or visit Pontiac, this affects you.
 
sprinklerguy28

sprinklerguy28

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
666
Location
Michigan
More of the same. They clearly understood it effects both CC and OC. Several council members stated we should stay in our own communities and leave theirs alone. I will support that for now. I have drafted a letter to one of my business' suppliers and informed them that I will no longer purchase from them as they are a Pontiac based business and the city does not want my money or me in it.
 
sprinklerguy28

sprinklerguy28

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
666
Location
Michigan
stainless1911 said:
I was in Rose Twp tonight, so I couldn't make it.

SG28, we just can't give up on Army74, or Pontiac.
Click to expand...

Who said I was not supporting Army74? I will continue to work towards resolving Pontiac's issues, with the support of everyone as a group as we have in many other cities. I will however refrain from spending money in Pontiac, just like I do with any other businesses who do not allow firearm carry.
 
stainless1911

stainless1911

Banned
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
8,855
Location
Davisburg, Michigan, United States
Fair enough. We should not give them our business, but we must continue to open carry.

Where there is a business that will not support A2, I don't go back, but we cannot do that with cities, towns, police departments, schools, and the like.
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
May I suggest that it may be time for national news coverage of a city council (surely there is audio/video of who said what at that meeting) that refuses to obey the law and actively endorses police harassment of law abiding citizens....................

And may I suggest that the only national news outlet that would be interested in such a thing would be FOX....

Perhaps it is time to go national and make the entire nation aware that there are units of government right in their own back yards ignoring the law and endorsing illegal acts by their police depts. Because Pontiac isn't the only city/village/township that considers themselves above the law.

Maybe folks will catch on that if a city is willing to ignore a hot button issue gun law... what other laws are they ignoring????? What other illegal things are the councils telling their police depts. it is OK to do to citizens???

Edited to add....

Legislators might also be interested in knowing about Pontiac's council's behavior... especially if mention is made that a national news outlet has been contacted....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

army74

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
285
Location
Pontiac, Michigan, USA
Thank you

Thanks to everyone for there support and seeing how the council acts on a regular basis including secreatary's that work there im going to have to get in contact with my state rep since it is a election year. Thanks again for ev1 who came and others who support this.
 
G

ghostrider

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
Bikenut said:
May I suggest that it may be time for national news coverage of a city council (surely there is audio/video of who said what at that meeting) that refuses to obey the law and actively endorses police harassment of law abiding citizens....................

And may I suggest that the only national news outlet that would be interested in such a thing would be FOX....

Perhaps it is time to go national and make the entire nation aware that there are units of government right in their own back yards ignoring the law and endorsing illegal acts by their police depts. Because Pontiac isn't the only city/village/township that considers themselves above the law.

Maybe folks will catch on that if a city is willing to ignore a hot button issue gun law... what other laws are they ignoring????? What other illegal things are the councils telling their police depts. it is OK to do to citizens???

Edited to add....

Legislators might also be interested in knowing about Pontiac's council's behavior... especially if mention is made that a national news outlet has been contacted....
Click to expand...
That's a great idea!

Then there will be a national reaction just like Royal Oak, only there will be larger amounts of people lobbying to have the GFZ's expanded, and even more people coming out of the woodwork who are so enraged that they are spurred to action against us. Maybe people aren't paying attention, but Royal Oak was nothing more than a pyrrhic victory because it managed to stir up support for the anti's with little opposition from our side.
 
sprinklerguy28

sprinklerguy28

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
666
Location
Michigan
ghostrider said:
Royal Oak was nothing more than a pyrrhic victory because it managed to stir up support for the anti's with little opposition from our side.
Click to expand...

I would have to disagree with this statement. How can one say that the win in Royal Oak will lead to our defeat? Yes the anti's spoke up but so did those in support. Many of us have also spoken directly with Representatives and Senators from the State. They have clearly stated they supported us and would never vote in favor of tougher restrictions.

IMHO this type of theory continues the notion that we should stop fighting and ignore illegal actions of cities out of fear of them retaliating against us by pushing for tougher legislation. Personally if they call for stricter laws it is the responsibility of all gun owners to speak louder in the ears of the elected officials.
 
jt59

jt59

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
1,005
Location
Central South Sound
Hey folks,

Keep up the effort!...lots of people of cheering for you.

As you progress this, I saw a one post about asking the AG. That's a good way to go, and (assuming) an opinion in your favor, will go far to add weight to your efforts, however if it is anything like us in WA, the AG's office can only accept a request for a legal opinion from a legislator or an elected official.

Sounds like you have some 2A friendly legislators, they may pick up the banner for you a bit there if you ask...timing is good with the election cycle too, if you can show them some votes maybe....

sprinklerguy28 said:
I would have to disagree with this statement. How can one say that the win in Royal Oak will lead to our defeat? Yes the anti's spoke up but so did those in support. Many of us have also spoken directly with Representatives and Senators from the State. They have clearly stated they supported us and would never vote in favor of tougher restrictions.

IMHO this type of theory continues the notion that we should stop fighting and ignore illegal actions of cities out of fear of them retaliating against us by pushing for tougher legislation. Personally if they call for stricter laws it is the responsibility of all gun owners to speak louder in the ears of the elected officials.
Click to expand...
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
ghostrider said:
That's a great idea!

Then there will be a national reaction just like Royal Oak, only there will be larger amounts of people lobbying to have the GFZ's expanded, and even more people coming out of the woodwork who are so enraged that they are spurred to action against us. Maybe people aren't paying attention, but Royal Oak was nothing more than a pyrrhic victory because it managed to stir up support for the anti's with little opposition from our side.
Click to expand...

Just bouncing off your post... nothing personal intended........

I've heard the same thing said by CC'ers about OC. It is basically a "don't rock the boat and maybe they will allow us to keep our guns" mindset.

No battle was ever won by not showing up to fight because of the fear of losing.

If we are afraid of a backlash and quit because of that fear... then the anti's win without having to even bother to fight because we left the battlefield with our tails tucked between our legs dragging our rights in the mud behind us in sorry defeat.. without even trying.

The day of OC causing a major battle between those who believe in rights... and those who believe in control and/or prefer the illusion of safety by being controlled... was only a matter of time. Because it was never about OC or CC................ it was, and always will be, a matter of rights vs control.

To not stand up and fight for rights and to require government to obey the law regardless of who says what or what they might do about it is, to me, the totally unacceptable concept of conceding defeat just because I was afraid of what people would say or do.

And Royal Oak was a very definite victory... a victory that had nothing to do with guns but everything to do with requiring a city to obey the law in the same manner that individuals are expected to do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top