Did my 15 minutes of fame start with the paper article, or is it after I see it on TV?
++++++++++++++++
Gun rights advocates argue ban in city buildings goes too far
Posted: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 4:00 pm | Updated: 2:14 pm, Wed Nov 16, 2011.
Some local gun rights advocates say a proposed city ordinance banning weapons from city properties goes too far.Wisconsin's newly enacted concealed carry laws, the critics argue, reaffirm every individuals' constitutional rights to bear arms, and those rights should not be interfered with by the proposed city ordinance.
"The right to bear arms is a personal right that should not be infringed," said Chuck Kuecker, a federally licensed firearms dealer whose business is located in the Town of Beloit. "We think the City of Beloit would be better off if they just accept the fact that the state of Wisconsin says individuals can carry if they're law-abiding citizens with a permit."
Kuecker, who identified himself as a Tea Party member, was among a small group of like-minded gentlemen at the Beloit City Council meeting Nov. 7, when the ordinance was read for the first time. The ordinance will face a second reading on Nov. 21, and the seven-member council will decide whether to vote on or table the measure at that time.
The ordinance's wording leaves councilors with four key decisions that will dictate the measure's impact and reach. Essentially, the council could adopt a full ban, partial ban or no ban at all.
Attempts to contact several councilors went unanswered, so there's no telling what adjustments, if any, might be made to the ordinance before a vote is taken.
Beloit is not alone in considering a weapon-barring ordinance for its public facilities, as other municipalities near and far have also recently weighed similar measures.
"Numerous communities across Wisconsin such as West Bend, Green Bay, Delafield, Kenosha, Sturtevant, Germantown, Hudson, Elkhorn and Chippewa have rejected bans such as that put forth by the Beloit City Council," reads a press release from the Rock County Voter Education Forum, an organization encouraging residents to oppose the Beloit ordinance.
But other governing bodies, those in Whitewater, West Baraboo and elsewhere have supported a firearms ban in public properties. Rock County recently decided to prohibit dangerous weapons from county property.
The state legislation, named the Wisconsin Personal Protection Act, was designed to give local governing bodies a certain level of control over their own properties, said City Manager Larry Arft. Permitting individuals to carry firearms inside City Hall, which was never allowed before Nov. 1 (the Act's implementation date), could create unnecessary dangers, as certain visitors - those paying tickets, those disputing fines and the like - are prone to become emotionally upset, he said.
City employees, Arft said, strongly support the weapon-barring ordinance. City Attorney Tom Casper, who has worked with Assistant City Attorney Elizabeth Krueger in crafting the ordinance, confirmed Arft's statement.
Arft said councilors are free to adjust the budget as they see fit, but he is issuing a "staff recommendation" that it passes in its full capacity.
The ordinance, Arft and Casper said, essentially restores the city's rules regarding firearms inside public buildings as they were before Nov. 1. The two men also point out that the new state law bars weapons from specific facilities, including police stations and courtrooms.
"The Act outlines certain areas where carrying a weapon is strictly prohibited, regardless of whether any local restrictions are implemented," a report to city council reads. "In Beloit, the prohibition applies to those portions of City Hall that include the Police Department and the Municipal Court when the court is in session."
As for other municipal buildings or facilities, the Act permits municipalities to make decisions locally regarding whether to permit or restrict the carrying of weapons."
However, "just because a government can pass a law doesn't mean they have to," Kuecker and others fighting the ordinance have said.
Second Amendment arguments aside, those opposing the ordinance say there are several practical reasons it should not pass.
Under the Act, municipalities cannot place restraints on concealed carriers in open-air public places like parks, parking lots or the city streets. So what happens when an individual visits the park, gun in tow, but needs to use an indoor restroom facility?
Arft and ordinance supporters say the individual should place his or her weapon inside his or her vehicle.
But this simply isn't practical, opponents say. What if someone doesn't have a car?
"Is the city going to buy you a car?" asked Mike Zoril, a former city council candidate who plans to seek office again come springtime. "No."
The proposed ordinance unfairly punishes Beloit's bus riders those without vehicles, who through state law have now been granted the ability to defend themselves, Zoril said.
Weapons were never allowed on city buses before Nov. 1, and the ordinance being considered would reinstate that rule.
And what about entering City Hall? Will there be a locker for individuals to store their weapons while inside? Will there be additional metal detectors to ensure people aren't violating the ordinance?
No, Casper and Arft said.
Weapons have never been permitted inside City Hall and there have never been metal detectors at the building's entrances. Therefore the security policies to not need broad changes, the two men said.
Again, Casper said, the assumption is that individuals can leave weapons inside their vehicles.
Capt. Vince Sciame, a veteran member of the Beloit Police Department, said there have been no serious incidents involving weapons inside City Hall or in other public facilities in recent memory.
The intricacies of Wisconsin's concealed carry laws have been hotly debated since Gov. Scott Walker passed the legislation in July. The Wisconsin Department of Justice's website has several resources for individuals seeking more information.
State Sen. Tim Cullen, D-Janesville, seeking clarification, last week asked Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen for a formal opinion on liability for property owners regarding the Act.
++++++++++++++++
www.facebook.com/VoteMikeZoril
ReplyDelete