This. The point of parking meters isn't the paltry money they bring in but to encourage turnover on parking spaces.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Natick mulls banning guns on town property
- Thread starter jefftk
- Start date
This. The point of parking meters isn't the paltry money they bring in but to encourage turnover on parking spaces.
I just sent an email to GOAL ([email protected]) and Comm2a ([email protected]) looking for some assistance on this matter. Just a heads up to whoever checks those emails.
Natick's warrant closes Friday Aug. 22 5pm we want this to go away before then.
Natick's warrant closes Friday Aug. 22 5pm we want this to go away before then.
The warrant closed yesterday. I haven't seen it and have no official word, but the Metrowest Daily News article indicates the gun ban is in there:
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20140823/NEWS/140828301
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20140823/NEWS/140828301
GlockJock
NES Member
Well, that IS the home of...
so if the residents are voting in this guy, I'm not surprised they would support this.
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!
This is the town meeting warrant - i.e. the public "warning" of articles that will be decided at town meeting. Town meeting starts Oct 21 and proceeds Tuesdays and Thursdays from there. Before town meeting the Finance Committee and probably the Selectmen will hold public hearings on the article.
MisterHappy
NES Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,451
- Likes
- 17,656
Are streets not an open space under the control of the Town?
![[puke]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/023.gif "Puke [puke]")
Are streets not an open space under the control of the Town?
IANAL, but my non-lawyer reading says, NO POSSESSION on any town streets/sidewalks, etc.
ETA: This would also mean no gun shops as they couldn't legally bring in or let you leave with any firearms.
This is precious.
Sic 'em!
Glad that I upped my monthly contribution level this month.
Considering the dirtbags behind this, a massive lawsuit couldn't happen in a nicer town!
Jason Flare
NES Member
Hasn't this chief already been sued and lost?
This is so bad it's almost laughable. Federal courts recently ruled that the post office could not ban firearms in their parking lots - so there's no way such an extensive ban on possession on public property would hold up. Why should I help make their bylaw "better" by fighting it? - if it can't be killed outright it might be better for this to pass as-is.
If town counsel looked at this first and allowed it to be worded like this they should be fired. Then again these are the same lawyers who wasted money defending the chief against the Commonwealth's laws at the same time the AG was essentially throwing in the towel.
If town counsel looked at this first and allowed it to be worded like this they should be fired. Then again these are the same lawyers who wasted money defending the chief against the Commonwealth's laws at the same time the AG was essentially throwing in the towel.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,556
- Likes
- 33,622
This means that those wishing to speak at town meeting won't have to wait hours for their chance to speak.
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Well, that IS the home of...
so if the residents are voting in this guy, I'm not surprised they would support this.
That look says it all
Defund the pd at town meeting[/QUOTE]
This will work better than anything else. Ask the former police chief of Lakeville.
This will work better than anything else. Ask the former police chief of Lakeville.
Artifact
NES Member
Why is that so complicated for you to understand? It's common sense, makes total sense.
Notice in the OP's article the town manager said it would make sense to ban weapons from where tempers could flare up. Then they come out with a warrant for town meeting that bans it from parks, streets, all town buildings, etc. So tempers could flare up at the town library? Late fees are a quarter I think. How about at the park, sitting on a bench might push someone over the edge.
Friday
NES Member
Ah, the ago-old time-tested libtard mantra to justify their next set of only-for-you-ad-not-for-me rules: The "what-if" scenario. What if he had a gun? What if he got angry and shot someone. We must enact measure to ensure this thing that has not happened will never not happen again....
So this looks like it's definitely going up for a vote at the Natick town meeting in October. I've contacted a few town officials and they really have no idea what time of day it is. I think the best position to take is to let it go to town meeting as is and show up in force and get it voted down. Anything prior to that, they might rewrite it narrower where it has a better chance to pass and be upheld in federal court. They really have no idea what they wrote, how broad it is and how badly unconstitutional it is. I was told the town administrator wrote it and I suspect had very little legal help. She really has no clue that she wrote a complete ban on possessing a gun in Natick off private property.
Article 1, the text of the article was posted here already but there it is in the warrant on page 3.
http://www.natickma.gov/sites/natickma/files/file/file/14ftm_posting.pdf
Can someone chime in on if towns and cities are legally allowed to write bans on carry in say town parks and buildings under MA state law? I doubt you could be arrested for it but could they fine you, etc? I have very little knowledge of this area of MA state law. Thanks.
Article 1, the text of the article was posted here already but there it is in the warrant on page 3.
http://www.natickma.gov/sites/natickma/files/file/file/14ftm_posting.pdf
Can someone chime in on if towns and cities are legally allowed to write bans on carry in say town parks and buildings under MA state law? I doubt you could be arrested for it but could they fine you, etc? I have very little knowledge of this area of MA state law. Thanks.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,556
- Likes
- 33,622
Another flaw I noticed (among many) - Natick has town operated senior housing, so this would, as written, be a direct violation of Heller.
People will be focusing on "town meeting" and "what if tempers flare", so it will be relevant to point out that guns are already banned at town meeting since it is generally held at a school.
People will be focusing on "town meeting" and "what if tempers flare", so it will be relevant to point out that guns are already banned at town meeting since it is generally held at a school.
Yes, there is senior housing and it is owned in most cases, might be leased in others, by the town of Natick. I believe all town meetings are at the High school. Most if not all other meetings for zoning, board of health, selectmen, etc. are at the town hall.
This was part of the response from one of the selectmen.
If you're referring to Natick Housing Authority, they are an independent entity that is not owned or controlled by the town. I think they do receive some discounted/free recycling and maybe trash services. Or is there something else owned by the town?
They are completely independent as far as I can tell. The assessors map lists the owner of their property as "Natick Housing Authority" versus town own land is usually "Inhabitants of the Town of Natick", or "Natick School Committee", or "Natick Conservation Commission". Yes their board is mostly elected in local election (except one member appointed by the Governor).
Web GIS tool: http://www.mapgeo.com/natickma/
Housing Authority website: http://www.natickha.org/
Interestingly, however, MGL 121B indicates that they are created by a vote of the town/city.
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXVII/Chapter121b
PUBLIC HEARINGS PRIOR TO TOWN MEETING
The Natick Board of Selectmen has on their agenda for Monday 9/8 @ 7pm
Discussion and Decision
I do not think this is intended to be a public hearing, rather it may be discussion of whether or not to hold a public hearing.
The Finance Committee will hold a public hearing. This article is scheduled for Thursday Oct. 2nd. However, they may also have a subcommittee hearing before that time.
It will be important to attempt to convince the Board of Selectmen and the Finance Committee to recommend "No Action" or "Indefinite Postponement". "Referral to sponsor" would also kill it but send a message that a revision in the future might get a better reception.
The Natick Board of Selectmen has on their agenda for Monday 9/8 @ 7pm
Discussion and Decision
I do not think this is intended to be a public hearing, rather it may be discussion of whether or not to hold a public hearing.
The Finance Committee will hold a public hearing. This article is scheduled for Thursday Oct. 2nd. However, they may also have a subcommittee hearing before that time.
It will be important to attempt to convince the Board of Selectmen and the Finance Committee to recommend "No Action" or "Indefinite Postponement". "Referral to sponsor" would also kill it but send a message that a revision in the future might get a better reception.
wheelgun
NES Member
I didn't read all nine pages of this thread... maybe someone already asked this.
Several cities/towns have tried and failed to enact gun laws that overrode (i.e. were more restrictive) than state law. San Fransico comes to mind. They tried to ban carry in city parks. The courts shot it down.
How is this Natick proposal any different?
Several cities/towns have tried and failed to enact gun laws that overrode (i.e. were more restrictive) than state law. San Fransico comes to mind. They tried to ban carry in city parks. The courts shot it down.
How is this Natick proposal any different?
Similar threads
