Knitebane Manor Illos libenter devoramus qui nos opprimere velint

8Feb/11Off

There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.

 

HERE is the "revised" version of the Johnston County North Carolina proposed anti-gun ordinance.

Here the response I mailed to the Johnston County commisioners:

I am in opposition to this ordinance.

After reading both the initial ordinance and this revised version, I am even more in opposition to the idea of an ordinance on this subject no matter what minor adjustments are made to it.

This ordinance is wrong and wrong-headed. We have been reassured that this measure will not affect those that act responsibly with guns. For almost 80 years the gun owners of the United States have repeatedly been told that. Those that insist that these measures are necessary always say that. They insist that they are well-meaning. They tell us that the laws will only apply to "them," not "us."

Well I know one "them" that it most certainly applies to. That them is me.

The proposed ordinance states: "It shall be unlawful for any person to utilize a firearm in the county carelessly and heedlessly, so as to endanger any person or property, or discharge a firearm that results in a projectile crossing the property of another person without their permission, or utilize a firearm while under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance."

A controlled substance.

Seems benign enough, right? After all, we wouldn't want hopped up meth heads or heroin junkies shooting guns.

And I note that there exceptions for law enforcement, self-defense, turkey shoots. Fair enough.

But no exemption for target practice on my own land.

Got a family member on hormone replacement therapy? Sorry, no shooting for you, testosterone is a controlled substance.

Got a friend with a bout of diarrhea? Too bad, Paragoric and Lomotil are controlled substances.

Depression? Sorry, Xanax, Valium and Zoloft are controlled substances.

Had trouble getting to sleep last night? Too bad Ambien is a controlled substance.

What about your nephew? Want to invite him over and teach him to shoot? Sorry, he's got ADD. Ritalin and Focalin are controlled substances.

I have a rather chronic sinus problem. Today I felt some sinus pressure so I took a 12-hour Sudafed.

It's an over-the-counter, non-prescription medication and is quite legal to take.

But now I can't shoot because North Carolina considers Sudafed a precursor for meth and regulates its sale. It's a controlled substance too.

So that leaves me out too. It appears that I'm the "them" that you don't want to shoot guns.

"But that's not what we meant!" will come the protest.

Maybe so, gentlemen, but that's what you wrote. Even if I give the platitudes about how this isn't an anti-gun ordinance any credence.

Which I don't.

Because while it may not be named the "The Anti-Undesirable, Anti-Target Practice Ordinance" or the "Keeping Our Neighbors From Being Well Regulated" that's exactly how it will be interpreted and acted upon.

So count me out.

I can't support ANY ordinance that attempts to regulate who shoots on my property. ANY attempt to do so will have unintended consequences. I've just pointed out that very fact in this draft. Why should anyone think that any other ordinance will be any better?

And I'm not even an activist judge. I've only pointed out the logical fallacies in this document. Someone less interested in the written document and more interested in discovering a "spirit" against shooting will have much to work with.

While I concede that a bullet leaving my property and hurting a person or damaging property is my responsibility, I do NOT concede that this ordinance is the answer. Shooting a neighbor or punching holes in his house, car or dog is already both illegal and civilly actionable.

This ordinance will only do what? Make it "more illegal-er-est"? "Double secret illegalness"? And at the same time be a nice back door into what I can do on my property and with whom and at what time? And make me responsible for where my bullet MIGHT go? Leave it up to some bureaucrat to decide what "heedlessly" means?

I don't think so. Wrong and wrong headed, gentlemen.

Gun issues are a litmus test for politicians. Those that mean to serve have no fear of what their neighbors are doing with their guns. Those that mean to rule are constantly concerned on that very issue.

So cast your votes. We will be watching. And we will remember in the next election cycle.

Thank you for your time.

Posted by Knitebane

Comments (0) Trackbacks (0)

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Trackbacks are disabled.