RE: City of Moscow contimplating firearms ban

[MD_Willington]

I wrote the following and sent it to some of the local papers in Idaho;

This morning I read an article in a local paper titled “Moscow Mayors Memo Versus Armed Citizen”, and have a few talking points on the article. I don't mean to ramble & I am not ashamed to admit I am not the most eloquent speaker.

I believe, along with many others, that we, or any human for that matter, have a fundamental right to self-preservation & self-defense. Since we are higher than the common animal and we do have the ability to make and use tools, it would make sense that the best tool for such an endeavor would be a personal firearm.

I do own firearms, I am not a stereotypical "gun nut" and I deplore such labels, labeling each other is a sign of ignorance. I am a licensed concealed carrier, and I do legally carry my sidearm where I am allowed to do so. I am just your average law abiding family guy living on the Palouse with my wife and young children.

This may be my own interpretation of what is going on, but it seems the Mayor of Moscow wants to “paint” law abiding firearms owners with “a very broad brush”, and lawful firearms owners will understand what I mean by that statement.

The Mayors statement about “wondering if someone who has an opposing viewpoint is armed” seems to be grasping at heartstrings as a tool to spread fear among those who do not understand the relevance of the situation or to the general public who are overly emotional in their reactions.

Such statements only serve to elicit a quick and sometimes even irrational response, the over zealous but uninformed may decide to "jump on to the band wagon" regardless of the consequences.

Personally, I could not fathom such a barbaric act of using my legally carried personal sidearm to menace someone with an opposing viewpoint, doing so would be quite childish, irresponsible, immoral and illegal.

The mayor appears to be applying “projectionism”, whereby she projects her fear of an inanimate object onto those who may have similar fears of an inanimate object.

The Mayor said the shooting at the courthouse made her concerned about how vulnerable people and city employees were. Wouldn't this be all the more reason to allow residents and city employees the legal right to be armed rather than unarmed?

City residents and employees for that matter do have the right to legally carry their own sidearm for self-defense and the right to use it under certain situations.

We can also face the fact that the Mayor also has the privilege of having an entire Police force to defend her, because lets face the truth, the Mayor or any other city official's call will have precedence over any average citizens will, the Mayor even has an armed entourage at council meetings when the Chief of Police or the Sheriff or one of the employees of said law enforcement agencies attends her conferences.

Shouldn't the average resident or city employee be able to have the same privilege/right or is self-defense to be the explicit privilege of the “Elite Ruling Class”. That may sound harsh but it does somehow ring true if the City of Moscow is allowed to go ahead with passing of such a hollow law.

I remember reading the following regarding a hollow law; "At Virginia Tech the law did not protect the innocent, as to a criminal, a law is only writing on a piece of paper."

With that said, I therefore must oppose her view and inquiry as to the implementation of a law that would ban firearms on “City Property”; after all, criminals rarely live within the boundaries of such laws in the first place.

I can only hope that if the City of Moscow does indeed find a way to implement such hollow laws, that they will put the issue to a public ballot whereby the residents, all of the residents, of the City of Moscow can cast their vote, after all, that way all parties concerned will have a fair say about the outcome, as opposed to a forced outcome from the City of Moscow’s very own “Star Chamber”.

I do not know if any of the papers subscribers will get a chance to read it, so I plan on posting a copy of it on some of the public poster boards in downtown Moscow.

I just had to do this to get this off my chest, hollow laws vex me, regardless if they are for firearms or not.

 

[Mokothar]

Yeah, this kind of rubbish is everywhere.
It's commonplace for politicians to inflate an issue beyond proportion so they can pass a high-profile law over it, which won't even solve the initial problem.

More so, these kinds of laws are a waste of taxpayer money, and leaves law-abiding citizens at risk. So there's still two groups of people with guns who are taking "our" money, politicians and thugs.

Est plebibus referendum!

 

[Cooperdisciple]

Well done, I hope the editor of your paper is a bit fairer than her honor and prints your letter. It's rather ironic that a mayor with these views is in a city named Moscow (no offense intended). It's also very sad that she chooses to "paint" a certain segment of society with such a view. Does Idaho have a pre-emption law? If not, it might be worthwhile to write your elected representatives in support of one. Best of luck.

 

[MD_Willington]

No offense taken, I live outside of Moscow.

I had contemplated buying a house there, and we do spend our money and go to church there. From now on I plan on taking my money to Lewiston instead, same drive time, more level headed too. I hope those who spend their money in Moscow will do the same.

 

[Geno]

So, in effect, they are trying to take up as a city, that which Washington, DC stands to lose with their pending decision? Your difficulty may be soon resolved...well, depending on the decision, right? (pause) Or, all of our problems may soon be beginning.