City governments in southern Utah have been in the news quite a bit lately. The city of Virgin passed an ordinance requiring most heads of households to own a gun. La Verkin just passed an anti-United Nations ordinance.
Now, nearby Escalante is getting in on the act. Its city council is considering an ordinance requiring heads of households to own firearms to protect citizens' rights. The proposed ordinance says "special interest groups are misusing federal, state and various laws and regulations to further their own agendas and restrict the use of private and public rights."
Apparently there's been a dispute between local environmentalists and the city government. It has to do with restricting access to public lands. There isn't much detail in the story linked below, but I'd guess the environmentalists want humans out of public lands, and the city leaders want to maintain public access and enjoyment of these areas.
So Tori Woodard of the Escalante Wilderness Project called the proposed gun ordinance "unpatriotic and seditious." She says the ordinance suggests that city leaders may be contemplating violence against groups with which they disagree--namely, the environmentalists.
"Unpatriotic and seditious?" Since when has it been unpatriotic and seditious to uphold the rights of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms in defense of lives and property?
Just look at Kennesaw, Georgia. When this community passed its ordinance requiring guns in every home the left sneered and made jokes. While the liberals were making their jokes the crime rate plummeted in Kennesaw. Burglaries went from 54 in 1981 (the year before the gun ordinance) to 36 in 1999. This is even more remarkable when you consider that Kennesaw's population has exploded from 5,242 to more than 19,000 in that period of time. And violent crime is practically nonexistent in residential areas. The crime rate in Kennesaw is about four times LOWER than state and national averages!
To the best of my knowledge, since Kennesaw passed its gun ownership law in 1981 there has only been one homicide, and that was a shooting that occurred in a motel involving transients.
The bottom line is that criminals will avoid areas where citizens own and carry guns. They don't want to risk getting shot while committing their crimes. They'll choose areas that are safer for them--areas where few people own guns and are less likely to fight back.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,295011304,00.html?
Now, nearby Escalante is getting in on the act. Its city council is considering an ordinance requiring heads of households to own firearms to protect citizens' rights. The proposed ordinance says "special interest groups are misusing federal, state and various laws and regulations to further their own agendas and restrict the use of private and public rights."
Apparently there's been a dispute between local environmentalists and the city government. It has to do with restricting access to public lands. There isn't much detail in the story linked below, but I'd guess the environmentalists want humans out of public lands, and the city leaders want to maintain public access and enjoyment of these areas.
So Tori Woodard of the Escalante Wilderness Project called the proposed gun ordinance "unpatriotic and seditious." She says the ordinance suggests that city leaders may be contemplating violence against groups with which they disagree--namely, the environmentalists.
"Unpatriotic and seditious?" Since when has it been unpatriotic and seditious to uphold the rights of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms in defense of lives and property?
Just look at Kennesaw, Georgia. When this community passed its ordinance requiring guns in every home the left sneered and made jokes. While the liberals were making their jokes the crime rate plummeted in Kennesaw. Burglaries went from 54 in 1981 (the year before the gun ordinance) to 36 in 1999. This is even more remarkable when you consider that Kennesaw's population has exploded from 5,242 to more than 19,000 in that period of time. And violent crime is practically nonexistent in residential areas. The crime rate in Kennesaw is about four times LOWER than state and national averages!
To the best of my knowledge, since Kennesaw passed its gun ownership law in 1981 there has only been one homicide, and that was a shooting that occurred in a motel involving transients.
The bottom line is that criminals will avoid areas where citizens own and carry guns. They don't want to risk getting shot while committing their crimes. They'll choose areas that are safer for them--areas where few people own guns and are less likely to fight back.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,295011304,00.html?
