A controversial gun control measure that would propel this politically moderate -- and comparatively low-crime -- South Bay city to the forefront of what had been a stalled national movement to restrict firearms, had an insurmountable lead late Tuesday.
Measure C -- which requires gun owners to report a loss or theft of their weapon to police within 48 hours, to keep firearms locked up when not in the owner's direct possession and prohibits ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds -- received 66 percent support with all precincts counted, with 34 percent voting no. It was a resounding victory for Mayor Tony Spitaleri, who decided to push for the new law after last year's massacre in Newtown, Conn. The returns are unofficial with provisional and last-minute mail-in votes still to be counted.
Mike, with California having a state preemption law, this vote can ultimately be nothing more than symbolic unless they want to spend the taxpayer's money to lose in court.
ReplyDeleteThis is California. What else do you expect from many of the wacky enclaves in that deeply flawed state? Let's hope the NRA, et al., sue this town into bankruptcy.
ReplyDeleteNice, wish a whole town bankruptcy because the majority voted for something you disagree with,
DeleteSteve,
DeleteA better question would be, why would this even be put on the ballot. Sunnyvale has a population of over 140,000, so I'm thinking they likely have an attorney to consult on stuff like this. This likely had to go through the city council first, someone should have brought up that is violated the state preemption law.
Perhaps its only a symbolic law like the one passed in Kennesaw,GA requiring the ownership of firearms, or the many places that banned nuclear weapons in their jurisdiction.
The lawsuits will only start if the city attempts to enforce the ordinance. Then an aggrieved party can file suit. Perhaps the gun store owner that we discussed earlier.
Earlier this year, the Brady Campaign actually filed suit against a town in Georgia which passed a symbolic law requiring gun ownership. So, if its ok for the Brady Campaign to file suit in this case, how is it bad when and if the NRA files suit against Sunnyvale?
"WASHINGTON, DC –The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and the City of Nelson, Georgia have agreed to settle the Brady Center’s lawsuit against the City’s mandatory gun ownership ordinance. Under the settlement, which the City Council unanimously approved at its Tuesday meeting, the City will amend the ordinance to make clear that the Constitution protects the individual right to maintain a gun-free home. The amended statute will say that the gun ownership mandate cannot be enforced and that there will be no penalties for non-compliance."
http://www.bradycampaign.org/?q=nelson-georgia-agrees-to-settle-lawsuit-over-mandatory-gun-ordinance
I haven't done my homework yet, but I'm wondering if that "preemption law" might not mean what you guys keep saying.
DeleteMikeb, you never do your homework. That's why your arguments keep coming up short.
DeleteThen it will be found unconstitutional through court challenge. Just as some State's new restrictive voting laws are being found unconstitutional through the court process. That's what the Judicial process is all about. They have a right to vote they way they voted, even if they proven wrong. I don't think a correct response, is to wish the town ill will, or bankruptcy.
ReplyDeleteWhile that is the likely outcome, it's a fight they chose with their eyes wide open. I haven't read anything that the law is intended to be symbolic, so I'm presuming that there intent is to enforce the law. Especially since there are potential fines and jail time for violations.
DeleteIf the town was evil or stupid enough to vote in something like this, they deserve what will be done to them.
DeleteNow the whole town is evil? Is this how you always debate a subject?
Delete"Steve," stop being tedious. The town made a stupid decision. I feel sorry for the people who voted against this law, but communities suffer the bad decisions of the majority. But if this town is punished for what it did, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
Delete"Tedious"?
DeleteYou wished the town went bankrupt, then called the town evil. Just because they wanted something you disagree with. Stop being a nasty jerk.
Greg, you did call the town evil. Don't you think that's kinda silly?
DeleteA majority voted in this evil. They deserve to suffer the same fate that evil organizations of any kind get when they try to violate the rights of Americans.
DeleteShould all evil be destroyed and killed?
DeleteWho said anything about destruction or killing? I'd be satisfied with running the town into bankruptcy.
DeleteIf it's evil, shouldn't it be destroyed?
Deletess,
DeleteGov. Perry of Texas is now defying a judicial order. This is the kind of lawlessness that Greg supports. If authorities ignore judicial findings, then we have anarchy. If the law cannot settle these legal arguments, then there is no law. Even if one thinks the courts decide wrong, to ignore judicial findings mean we no longer live by the rule of law, but by the lawlessness of of those like Greg. Guys like Greg have an option, to legally change the laws he does not like, but his comments show he will not chose that path, and he is not the only one promoting to simply ignore, break the law. I'm sure Greg finds Gov. Perry's defying judicial orders as his patriotic duty. I find Perry's act a violation of his oath and promoting breaking thew law.
"Bad laws be damned." That's the slogan of the gun-rights fanatic. And, of course, each lunatic gun owner is free to decide which laws are bad.
DeleteSteve,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure why you sent me your reply because I don't recall ever getting into defying the courts except in regards to comparing Sunnyvale's legislation with states that have passed laws barring enforcement of new federal gun laws. However, Texas isn't alone in not wanting to follow the new rules in regards to the rescinding of DOMA.
However there has been recent news also from the great state of California where Gov. Brown is also refusing to follow an order from the US Supreme Court. Both conflicts likely won't end well.
"The state has still not met that goal, but Brown has decided the state doesn’t have to. In January, with prisons still well over capacity and mental health treatment assessed at well below acceptable levels, Brown declared that the “prison emergency is over,” and that any further efforts toward complying with the court ruling would “gold plate” the state’s prisons. Since then, he has resisted calls from federal judges overseeing the case to implement recommendations."
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/14/2464141/californias-governor-is-still-intent-on-defying-the-supreme-court-on-prison-overcrowding/
I was making the point that the legal process won't work, if sworn officials refuse to follow court decisions, no matter who does it. We can pnly settle differences by following the law.
ReplyDeleteInstead, you counter by exampling an opposition Gov. who is doing the same thing. You want to play tit for tat, go ahead, I'll decline. This is not a Dem/Rep. issue.
You are correct, I misunderstood. So do you feel that this is a court fight worth starting considering that the law they passed seems to violate the state preemption law and according to TS, the state has enforced its prerogative at great monetary cost in the past?
DeleteAs expected, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, is support of a local retailer has filed suit to enjoin enforcement of the ordinance recently passed in Sunnyvale, CA because it violates the state's preemption law.
DeleteIn the complaint, NSSF and U.S. Firearms Company LLC, a local retailer, are challenging portions of the city’s newly enacted gun-control ordinance that violates and is preempted by state and federal law and that imposes an onerous regulatory burden on firearms retailers including requirements that they keep ammunition sales logs and personal information on their customers and that expands and duplicates an existing reporting requirement for lost or stolen guns.:
http://www.nssfblog.com/nssf-files-lawsuit-against-gun-control-ordinance/