And when some disgruntled person goes on a shooting rampage in one of those city buildings they will know why people were allowed to have guns in the first place...defense.
Even though state law doesn't allow laws or ordinances prohibiting guns in public places, the city as PROPERTY OWNER has the power to restrict firearms, the attorney says. So the city is NOT "the people" OF the city but the city OFFICIALS, a corporate entity. Glad that's settled. It clarifies that "the people" of the Second Amendment ARE in fact the ordinary people. Therefore, no city officials should be allowed to own guns, because they are "a few public officials" defined as NOT the organized and unorganized militia. I think Rome fell when one out of five of its citizens had become lawyers.
And when some disgruntled person goes on a shooting rampage in one of those city buildings they will know why people were allowed to have guns in the first place...defense.
ReplyDeleteThey need to change their logo to a frontiersman who has been scalped because he wasn't carrying.
ReplyDeleteEven though state law doesn't allow laws or ordinances prohibiting guns in public places, the city as PROPERTY OWNER has the power to restrict firearms, the attorney says.
ReplyDeleteSo the city is NOT "the people" OF the city but the city OFFICIALS, a corporate entity.
Glad that's settled. It clarifies that "the people" of the Second Amendment ARE in fact the ordinary people. Therefore, no city officials should be allowed to own guns, because they are "a few public officials" defined as NOT the organized and unorganized militia.
I think Rome fell when one out of five of its citizens had become lawyers.