I'll be at BOTH!
It has been conveyed to a member of MOC by an official in Taylor that it would be in the best interest of Open Carriers to address Taylor about their terribly written ordinance update before the years end. We should attend their study session on Monday the 20th at 5:30pm and Tuesday's Council meeting at 7:00 pm to express our concerns with the gun ordinances changes made. Only 5 or 6 people are needed to attend the study session on Monday. If you can only attend one meeting, it should be the Council meeting on Tuesday. We had a great turnout when we visited Taylor in the past, let's show them we are not one trick ponies and fill the room again.
To review the ordinance, please visit this thread.
Last edited by dougwg; 12-17-2010 at 10:22 AM.
I need to change a shift at work, if all goes well(it usually does) I'll be there Tuesday.
I'll be in nashville visiting the in-laws, hope you guys have a great turnout and maybe you can get something through the thick skulls of the city council
I'm in for both!
If I can get off work, I'll be there Tuesday.
I can be there on the 20th. Will everyone be OCing there? If so, is NON-CPL OC allowed there?
I'm in for Monday & Tuesday
"Liberty's too precious a thing to be buried in books...Men should hold it up in front of them every single day of their lives and say: 'I'm free to think and to speak. My ancestors couldn't. I can. And my children will."
,,, So Mote Be
Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.-- JC
Had to get some stuff done, and wasn't able to make it down that way in time... how'd it go?
Sent from my Droid Incredible using Tapatalk.
They think we're a joke.
"The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi . . ."--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr
“He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.”--M. K. Gandhi
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." --M. K. Gandhi
We need to show up, we ALL need to show up.
We need to fill this council meeting and stop their childishness.
I'm not looking for an argument nor condemn anyone's actions. I just want to try and understand why so much energy is being focused on changing city ordinances that are not enforceable anyway. I could see if someone was being charged and jacked over because of it, then fight for changes.
May I have a "calm" explanation?
I'm not sure what everyone is concerned about. I don't remember the exact wording of the Taylor law that they revised but I do remember that it was the same law with a clause to allow state law to govern the guns.
I don't see the problem with this!!!
They used the law to regulate all items that could be weapons that they feel they need to regulate while allowing state laws to govern the guns.
Look.... the state writes laws the same way by restricting things then including the exceptions.
Maybe that is why they think we are a "joke". I was with you guys at the first city meeting and have had contact with TPD since and I think we have done a good job of promoting OCg.
I think some are just concerned with the wording, but I think it is inclusive of state gun laws now.
Maybe someone can repost the new ordinence from Taylor and have another discussion on it.
OK, I went back a read the ordinences. Both have the phrase "contrary to state law". This is where they uphold the state laws on guns, while still regualting everything else.
Last edited by Wglide90; 12-21-2010 at 11:38 AM.
Ok.. I have a silly question.........
When the wording... "in accordance with State law" ... or ... "not contrary to State law"... or ... "as allowed by State law" .... is used does that refer to actual black letter law already passed and on the books?
The reason I'm asking is........... if there is no law that restricts an activity (OC) is the lack of a law.......... the law? Or does there have to be a law to reference for "as allowed" or "not contrary" or "in accordance with".
So... is the lack of a law a law? Or are these phrases booby traps since they refer to a law on the books and not the lack of a law on the books.
I hope I've not confused y'all.... I did confuse myself though.
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.
They had 3 bad ordinances to date they have updated only 2. The updates they made would leave the average person who read the posting in the local paper to think that they may have to go to court to get Taylor to recognize their right to self protection carrying a firearm. Clarity is the issue. I asked if they read what was published in the paper and was told "no we don't get the paper".
Judge for your self. If you just moved to Taylor would you think it was okay to open carry from what they published?
Last edited by Glock9mmOldStyle; 12-21-2010 at 03:17 PM. Reason: typo
P.S. Where can I get a hat like that? Also we should go to Arthur's Pizza again in the near future, your thoughts oh wise one?
Last edited by Glock9mmOldStyle; 12-21-2010 at 03:26 PM. Reason: brain fart!
Several municipalities are trying this crap.
They are side stepping the issue, that being clarity in law.
We need to go after them one by one.
Concentrate our efforts and make them do their jobs.
Then we move to the next city.
Very soon we won't need to all show up in large groups. All we'll have to do is show them what happened in other cities and demand they comply.
They want to keep these laws on the books so they can intimidate the little people.
I'll be there.