Mayor Wants To Authorize Police To "Disarm Individuals" During Crisis


Guntersville, Alabama Mayor Leigh Dollar is working with city officials to pass an ordinance that would give authority to police to "disarm individuals" during a disaster.

According to the new ordinance officers could disarm individuals, if necessary during disasters. Dollar says it grants authority to police officers to protect themselves.

"We are not trying to infringe upon anyone constitutional rights whatsoever. It's just to protect the workers working out there in a disaster," Dollar said.

This is a load of BS. They are not trying to infringe on people's constitutional rights, they are actually doing it! What about people protecting themselves? The mayor claims to be concerned for the police, but I see nothing in her statement indicating that she is concerned for the citizens of her town.

Demanding that this take place in the event of a disaster only makes the people more vulnerable, not safer. Just look at what took place during the disaster we named Hurricane Katrina here and here. This was a clear violation of the people and their property by the government and military. In fact, I can guarantee that if they attempted that around my neck of the woods, it would be the last time many gun grabbers would do so.

Guntersville Music Academy music teacher Paul Landry opposes the ordinance stating, "Well, it seems like an infringement on the 2nd Amendment and that's the biggest problem I have with it." He's right, only there is nothing "seeming" about it. It is most definitely that.

Dollar says that the town needs the new law and wants to model it after Tuscaloosa, which already has similar legislation on the books.

On March 4th this ordinance will be on the agenda at the next Guntersville City Council meeting. Citizens of Guntersville, if you find yourself in a disaster and the cops coming for your arms and you don't stand up at this meeting and be heard, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

UPDATE 2/27/2013: According to the Milla Sachs, Executive Assistant to the Mayor, she issued a statement a few days ago about this ordinance, which you can find here. The Mayor's office also presented a statement and the spokeswoman told me that the ordinance, which you can read its language here, was set to be pulled today and the wording was in line with the State law.

The obvious question I had, was if the State already includes this, why is it being included in the city ordinance? We can all agree that if a law enforcement officer is threatened that he can do what he needs to do to disarm the threat. The specific language reads, "As provided by Alabama State Code, any law enforcement officers acting in official duties may disarm and individual if deemed necessary. The officer must return the firearm to the individual before leaving or arrest the individual."

While the Mayor's office affirms that they stand by the Second Amendment and they are thankful many people are standing up for it. The real problem, as I see it, is the ordinance should not have been introduced, nor should the State have language like it does about disarming, simply because it is totally ambiguous. "If deemed necessary" could imply a lot of different things, depending on which officer is asked. The question I would have is, how many of those things are lawful?

UPDATE 2/28/13: Guntersville City Council dismisses proposed ordinance

The Guntersville City Council dismissed a proposed resolution that some thought would violate their 2nd Amendment rights. It would've allowed police officers to disarm harmful people, in emergency situations. The Mayor says the proposal was in no way meant to violate anyone's rights.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.






Comments

comments

  • FilmJames4

    People should also inquire of Miss Dollar, who else she works for. That proposal is fool-hardy. Officers have enough authority to protect themselves. It's the people that need more authority in emergency situations to protect themselves. Taking constitutional rights from away from citizens at their most vulnerable time, is not the definition of a balance/preservation of power. Citizens don't automatically become subjects of a jurisdiction, who are potential criminals in circumstances of catastrophic loss. If so, she should be the first person to surrender her weapons.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Rusin/542128614 Paul Rusin

    The Mayor should fire that CoP.

  • mike slaney

    Sounds like the citizens need to recall the mayor, oh that means I have to leave my TV and my cave and get involved.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Carl-Mayo/100001328287818 Carl Mayo

    every time a law-abiding citizen is the victim of a crime, a liberal has an orgasm.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Carl-Mayo/100001328287818 Carl Mayo

    Why do liberals love criminals and hate good citizens?

  • Ann Rand

    Hard to believe that the tentacles of comminism have reached into ALA... ...I have no doubt that the .citizens will put a stop to this ASAP...

  • Melia Sese

    I don't like the sound of this ... and in a place like Alabama, no less. Is there something they're telling us - or do female mayors make decisions with their glands? I sure hope not. I know I wouldn't. If I was mayor of Naples (ha ha) and a serious hurricane came along, I think I should want armed citizens helping to maintain order and keep things from getting out of hand. After all, our police force is large enough to be anywhere and everywhere in a town as spread out as ours is.

  • RangerInParadise

    ".....no intent to undermine....."

    I don't even know where to start tearing that load of Lib Dribble apart. In typical Lib fashion this Lying chunk of crap says she isn't doing just exactly what it is that she IS doing. She must have taken lessons in basic dissembling from the Obama Regime.

    How do such out of touch with reality people get elected to office? Has the American electorate become so dumbed-down that they buy ANY of this garbage from their elected servants?

    I wonder just what the local cops are thinking about this. If they're for it they are against every genuinely law-abiding citizen in the country. If they're against it they stand up for the law of the land. The Law of the Land is the Constitution. Oppose it and Joe Flatfoot makes a target of himself if he tries to disarm John Q Public.

    There ought to be a Constitution and Common Sense 101 Course for prospective politicians to pass before they are allowed to run for office.

  • karen nilsson

    after seeing what I already knew last night on news channel 8, I am against the ban on the AR-15 and the handgun with one military feature. We in CT., already have some of the greatest laws on the books. The rest of the country may not, but we do. There are loop holes that need to be filled, yes. But, that is how it is in everything. We can make our kids safer without further bans on weapons. Background checks fine, less mag. capacity fine. Maybe more than 10, though. Something more realistic. If 3 intruders come to a home, I do not want a woman man or child to not have enough in that one magazine. Bottom line when a person goes for a permit in our state, they should have to prove residency (which they probably already do), anyone that they live with should be listed and the background check should cover those residents as well. Also, only people who hold a permit to carry a weapon should be allowed in any gun range. Not o.k., to try and take guns from law abiding citizens in CT.. I speak for many when I say, I have always felt safe and still do. This boy was a ticking bomb that was not stopped. The basic handgun with no semi-auto. feature, can do almost as much damage as the guns Governor Malloy is trying to ban. We have plenty of problems with laws already on the books. Lets get the loop holes filled. Then let's work on the mental health problems. In the meantime, security for our schools is of the utmost importance. We need security, but it doesn't have to be an armed guard. Cameras, with a monitor, may be a cheaper option. panic buttons, and locked doors. Chances of this happening again, are small but, the fact that they exist tells us all we have to do something. Security is the only real solution. Even if Governor Malloy gets what he wants, the guns will still exist in the hands of those who didn't care to begin with. Even a basic handgun, means there is no definate resolve to be secure all the time.

  • VET

    In Mass. you would expect this BS but Alabama.

  • Average Joe

    All this is because the black crimmanal ellament was shootting at the very people that came to help them and get them out of New Orleans. Stupid is as stupid dose.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_O24NYT5HOQNDEJ3TUT5QOTLOF4 TM

    Well, they said blondes were idiots, need more proof? She is so wrong and they need to get rid of this POS.