[Vision2020] Pres mans-up, Crabtree doesn't

[Robert Dickow]

I would say that the noise abatement laws would prevail over the right to
keep and bear arms. But to complicate things, keep in mind that although the
Constitution protects the right to keep and bear arms, it says nothing about
our rights to discharge those arms. So, a town can pass laws about firing
guns within city limits, etc. Such laws would not be infringing on any
rights concerning gun ownership.

...well, time to go clean my US M-198 Howitzer. (I always keep it loaded in
case of prowlers).

Bob Dickow, troublemaker

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Garrett Clevenger
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 5:35 PM


"In what way is it an infringement of your rights for a law abiding adult to
exersize their right to hold and use weapons and which of your rights is it
that's being violated when they do?"


As I stated before, I own a gun and am not trying to keep law abiding adults
from using theirs.

Of course, the term law-abiding depends on what laws are on the books.  I
imagine, in Moscow at least, there is a chance that someone could be cited
under the noise ordinance if that person actually fires a shot.

Thus, that person's right to bear arms has been infringed.
<snip>