• 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.

Proposal to come before Lexington Town Meeting

Freddy B

NES Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2015
Messages
1,054
Likes
1,220
Location
Lexington
Feedback: 11 / 0 / 0
How ironic that in the community where the first shots of the revolutionary war were fired, this would be attempted. Those citizen soldiers who died trying to protect a cache of weapons acquired to resist an oppressive government must be rolling in their graves.

"Dear Fellow Town Meeting Members and other Concerned Citizens:

For all of the obvious reasons, and because Lexington has first mover advantage and responsibilities, I have submitted a Citizen’s Article to the Warrant to regulate the manufacture, sale, and possession of assault weapons and large-capacity gun magazines within the Town of Lexington. I hope that it will have your support now, and when the article comes before Town Meeting in March.

The proposed legislation will be modeled strictly on an ordinance enacted by Highland Park, IL (a suburb of Chicago) in 2013, approved in a Federal district court there, and by the 7[SUP]th[/SUP] Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. On Dec. 7, Pearl Harbor Day, the U. S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, implicitly suggesting that local town and city bans on large scale weaponry do not impinge on Second Amendment rights under the U. S. Constitution, and are permissible despite its ruling in Miller in 2014. The U.S. has a long tradition of regulating weapons at the local level – think Dodge City, Kansas, and Tombstone, Ariz., not to mention Boston, New York, and Philadelphia.

The New York Times reported that the Supreme Court’s welcome inaction in the Highland Park case was the seventieth time since 2008 that the Court has declined to consider a challenge to state or local gun regulation. “This creates a big opportunity,” it said, “for Americans to put pressure on their…local leaders.”

As Nancy Rotering, Mayor of Highland Park and candidate for Congress wrote recently, the Supreme Court’s decision encourages “other cities and villages across the nation to follow our lead and pursue assault weapons without the threat of legal action under the Second Amendment of the U. S. Constitution.” She also wrote: “One piece of legislation is not going to prevent every gun violence tragedy, but with courageous leadership, we can take steps to protect American lives.” I hope that the passage of the proposed amended by-law in Lexington will save Lexington lives and inspire other cities and towns within the Commonwealth to follow suit in this practical and sensible matter.

My proposed amendment to Chapter 97 of the Code of Lexington (Public Conduct) would in no way affect ordinary gun or hand-gun ownership in Lexington. It would, however, prohibit the possession within town limits of assault weapons – semiautomatic rifles that have the capacity to accept large capacity magazines. (The proposed article would specify in great detail exactly what kinds of weapons and magazines were covered.) The Highland Park legislation enumerates the brands outlawed. Large capacity magazines are defined as holding ten or more rounds.

Assault weapons do not include antique weapons. Citizens of the town would still be able to bear arms, just not weapons of mass murder.

I have consulted with the Selectmen, the Town Manager (and Town Counsel), the Moderator, and the Chief of Police. Everyone has been very helpful.

I will welcome your comments, criticisms, suggestions for improvement, and so on, but, please as few NRA rants as possible. This proposal will, I hope, attract widespread support from TM voters and from citizens of the Town. It is the least we can do to try to limit harm."

Robert I. Rotberg
[FONT=&amp]Pct. 3
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
How ironic that in the community where the first shots of the revolutionary war were fired, this would be attempted. Those citizen soldiers who died trying to protect a cache of weapons acquired to resist an oppressive government must be rolling in their graves.[FONT=&amp][/FONT]

The character of a town is not defined by its buildings or by lines on a map, but by the people who live in it.

The current population of Lexington bears little resemblance to its population in 1775.
 
Lexington: The rich liberal town which fought the extension of the Red Line in the 1980s because minorities from the city might come visit the town.

Funny how liberals tend to be the biggest bigots. The only diversity they want in their neighborhood is in restaurants and the illegal below minimum wage laborers tending the lawns, laundry, house cleaning, and childcare.

[puke]
 
Something like this might just be a slam dunk in Lexington and the moonbat towns around it.

Alright, let's say you live in Lexington. How would you go about opposing this proposal? What arguments would you use, what methods?
 
He'said a Rhodes scholar, but hasn't figured out MA already has an AWB

This would be the next step. A ban on all semi-automatic rifles on a list that is part of the proposed town ordinance.

This is the antis' gameplan btw. Repealing 2A is too difficult so they're going for death by a thousand statutes. You can still have your firearms as long as they're bolt action, single shot and basically no fun whatsoever.
 
Lexington: The rich liberal town which fought the extension of the Red Line in the 1980s because minorities from the city might come visit the town.

Funny how liberals tend to be the biggest bigots. The only diversity they want in their neighborhood is in restaurants and the illegal below minimum wage laborers tending the lawns, laundry, house cleaning, and childcare.

[puke]

not so much ethnic bigots, but certainly economic and educational bigots, to the nth degree! it's disgusting and I can't wait to move out as soon as my kids are out of LHS. bunch of hypocritical sheeple!
 
Somebody needs to submit a Citizens Article to the Warrant to ban all 6 and 8 cylinder engines. After all, nobody needs more than 4 cylinders, and it will save numerous lives because we all know the only purpose for larger engines is to exceed the speed limit. This will also cut the air pollution in Lexington in half and allow our children to breath clean air once again.
 
But the Lexington/Weston/Wellesley/Newton/Brookline bigots are the ones that insisted BPS start busing students around in the first place and keep pushing the politics to keep BPS broken to prop up their failed theories. Same way they are all for welfare and allowing the certifiably crazy homeless population to roam around, just NOT in their town. THOSE people get put on a bus (literally deported/banished) to Boston and dumped in a city shelter.

It's like their support of subsidized 'affordable' housing. 40B and section 8 for everyone else BUT NOT IN THEIR PEARL CLUTCHING TOWN.

Brookline at one point was blocking cross streets from Boston to wall themselves off from the city. But they have no problem illegally overnight parking their cars over the border in Boston because of Brookline's overnight on street parking ban. Fricken hypocrites.

Edit:

One street is still blocked.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.346...4!1sIzJ07-94sb3qy3nQBv6dGg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom