Open carry harrassment in Corrales, NM.....

[NM_Shooter]

Sorry to keep flooding this thread and hogging all the bandwidth...

This was the letter that I sent to my mayor and all the council members when this first was published in the paper, and before the resolution was drafted :

July 23, 2012

Mayor Philip Gasteyer
4324 Corrales Rd
Corrales, NM  87048

Dear Mayor Gasteyer,

My intent is to have the following published in the Corrales Comment.  Thank you in advance for your attention to my concerns.

I was disappointed to read in the July 7 edition of the Corrales Comment that our village council seems to be having a reactionary and somewhat emotionally driven response to a law abiding citizen exercising a constitutional right to bear arms.  The statement in the Comment reads "disallowing firearms in public places", which is significantly onerous in its scope. 

Furthermore, I am exceptionally alarmed as it appears that a decision by the council will be made without input from the public. 

Too often, our knee-jerk reaction is to enact a policy or law in response to a perceived problem.  In this instance, the new law being considered is in direct conflict with a constitutional right.  This was pointed out multiple times in the Comment article, attributing the word "right" as being used by both Vigil and Harper.  This law would be nothing more than whitewash as it would pacify the anti-gun crowd but would not provide tangible security.  Factual evidence shows that security is actually reduced. 

It is proven again and again (ask me for references) that laws restricting firearms results in a less secure and more dangerous society.  This is shown most recently by the rise in violent crime in Australia. Those who are unlawful, evil or demented just will not comply.  These laws only serve to strip law abiding citizens of their ability to protect themselves and others. 

In recent history, reflect on the one thing in common where shootings have occurred at Luby's, Columbine High, Virginia Tech, Hollywood Video, and many others.  No law abiding citizen was carrying a firearm, and no law enforcement official was there to assist.  Stripping law abiding citizens of their right to carry and protect themselves is not the answer. 

Consider the most recent violent attack on innocent lives in Aurora Colorado.  Aurora already has prohibitive gun laws.  Concealed carry is not allowed.  Additionally, Cinemark Theaters has a no-firearms policy.  The theater was packed with law abiding citizens, along with one demented person with intent to kill.  Reportedly, the police arrived within 90 seconds to find 70 victims. 

"When seconds count, police are minutes away", has never been more poignantly appropriate.  Even if firearms were completely removed from society, those who are intent on harming innocents would find a way to do so, be it with box cutters on airplanes, or with a truck full of fertilizer and diesel fuel. 

Laws that provide no benefit, and only serve to remove the rights of law abiding citizens have no place in society.  Please disregard the emotional response generated by an inappropriately alarmed person and instead allow evidence and common sense to prevail. 

I would appreciate your feedback on this subject.

[NM_Shooter]

Resolution defeated!!! 4 to 2

To hear our village attorney defend his writing as enforceable under trespass laws was revolting. 

The chambers was absolutely packed, with folks sitting on the floor, and standing in the foyer and the side rooms as well.  I was struck that it looked a bit like a Rockwell painting as people were jockeying for position at the windows. 

There were about 25 people voicing their objection, which helped me get over my case of mike-fright.  News crews were in attendance too.  I said my 3 minutes and sat down as quick as I could.  Only three people showed up to voice support for this resolution.

[hpinson]

Interesting. Last night the KOB TV news report was available as a video.  Today the video has been removed.

http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S2728450.shtml?cat=500

[peternap]

I'll be videoing this one today.
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/news/2012/aug/15/tdmet01-pro-gun-organization-plans-a-read-in-at-ri-ar-2131548/

There i a story about this that I'll tell later.

[NM_Shooter]

Here it is on our local KOAT chan 7 :

http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico/Heated-meeting-over-possible-gun-ban/-/9153762/16131752/-/bepxtcz/-/index.html

[NM_Shooter]

Here it is on chan 4.  The nervous looking grey headed guy with the striped shirt is Mick Harper, the councilor who initiated this resolution. 

The nervous looking grey headed guy in the black shirt at the podium speaking is me.  10 seconds of fame that I can't get back. 

http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S2728450.shtml?cat=500

[NM_Shooter]

Well, this looks like it might not be over.

My overly-liberal newspaper erroneously reported on events that night, saying the that NRA flood the chambers, and that the pledge of allegiance was shouted down.  I have written a response to the newspaper which I suspect may not get printed.  The newspaper is part of the oliagarchy of the village liberal politics.   The story from the Corrales Comment is not available online yet.

Here is my letter :


I feel compelled to provide both clarification and correction to the August 25 Comment story "Council Okays Guns".

First, out of respect to Mr. Vega, he told us that he received two "Battle Stars", which are decorations of meritorious conduct during battle.  Not "Battle scars" as reported by the Comment. 

Next, there were repeated reports of our Pledge of Allegiance being "shouted down" or being "interrupted".  This simply is not true.  Mayor Gasteyer asked that the pledge be recited first in Spanish, then English.  During the recitation in Spanish, many of the attendees opted to recite the pledge in English at the exact same time.  It is very important to note that no other verbal expressions were made during the recitation.  Mayor Gasteyer started the pledge three times in Spanish, and three times it was recited, with participants voicing their pledge in both Spanish and English simultaneously.  There were many more English participants than Spanish, and the English participants were proudly vocal.  Their contribution to the pledge was not an attempt to shut down or shout down.   Those of us who were waiting quietly to say the pledge in English were not offered an opportunity to do so by the mayor who did not invoke the pledge in English during the meeting. 

I find the practice of saying the pledge separately, in different languages at different times, insulting to the mixing-pot profile of America.  This does nothing but encourage divisiveness.  We should say the pledge ONE time, and we should be encouraged to recite it in whatever language allows us to be most enthusiastic.   

I am also unsure why the Comment reported that "the NRA flooded the Village Council chambers".  I arrived early to register to speak, so I was able to watch the chambers fill to overcapacity conditions.  I suspect that there were easily 125 to 150 people in attendance, and at no point was anyone asked to identify if they were NRA members or not.  A few  speakers identified themselves as such, but the vast majority did not reveal if they were or were not affiliated with the NRA.  Reporting that the NRA flooded the chambers is speculative at best and hopefully not deliberately misrepresentative.   

The title of the article is also misrepresentative.  Our council did not "Okay Guns in Parks and Playgrounds".  Our national and state constitutions "Okayed" guns in parks and playgrounds long ago.  The resolution proposed by Councilman Harper sought to violate that right, by restricting open carry.  The resolution which sought change to this existing status was rejected.   

Our Village legal council, Attorney Appel, wrongly cited District of Columbia vs. Heller.  Anyone researching this should also read McDonald V Chicago.  Keep in mind that Attorney Appel and the firm he works for would benefit from any lawsuits brought forth against the Village of Corrales....lawsuits which will absolutely, certainly arise.

It is difficult for me to listen with a straight face to those who believe that simply banning weapons from events will keep those who wish to do harm from bringing them anyway or from finding other ways to hurt others.  Resolutions or ordinances such as this only serve to disarm lawful people.  Those who wish to harm others, simply will not abide.  The law abiding, unarmed person rapidly has their status changed to "victim" by resolutions such as this.   

This resolution was dangerous in its scope, and should have been more soundly defeated than it was.  Kudos to Councilor Hart for his logically sound analysis of the situation and appropriate vote.

[Huge29]

Well done in getting involved.  Sounds like it must be an election year for some knuckleheads.  How else can one explain so much effort made on a clearly illegal effort.  The attorney makes a great point on the liability; think about all of the big shootings ended by someone with a gun like Trolley Square in UT a shooting before the well-publicized Aurora, CO shooting also in Aurora.  Now if someone normally carried, but didnt that day due to their regulation I could foresee a serious legal liability.

[rick91351]

Well written Shooter.  I think I would press the issue if your paper does not print your rebuttal.  Especially if it chooses to print the other sides view.  I so loved your point on the Pledge of Allegiance.  After all it is a meeting of all citizenry I hope.  Not Anglos on the right and Hispanics on the left and blacks to the rear and American Indians you all stay on your Reservation.  And the Orientals you all might as well go home as we don't spots for you and you speak funny.

Funny when the party and people that advertise the need for accepting diversity and reaching out to each other.  Then they desire to separate each other.     HUMM!! Orwellian New Speak in action!!   

         

[peternap]

Stay on them NM.
You've got them on the run!