|
|
|
WELCOME! If this is your first visit to Your Lincoln Park.com Community Website & Forums, we invite you to become a registered forum member and share your ideas and comments in over 100 forum categories created to help make Our City of Lincoln Park one of the best downriver communities. Registration is FREE but required to post in many of the forums. Be sure to review our Privacy Policy and Forum Rules (TOS) prior to posting. Posts will be moderated for all members with 10 posts or less. |
|
|
#1
 09-13-05, 8:15 pm
  |
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
On the True Blue website, you are quoted as saying the following:
Quote:
In light of your strong concerns, would you be in favor of passing an ordinance which states:
Quote:
?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'll be casting the following votes:
City Council: • Thomas A. Murphy • Valerie Brady • Michael Lemuel • Thomas McPartlin • John R. Nelligan • James E. Rutherford City Treasurer: Craig Sochocki Proposal R: NO |
|
#2
09-13-05, 8:49 pm
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts/Thanks: 2,660/322 Thanked 213 Times in 161 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
I'm not trying to nitpick you or anything, RA...but are you serious about this question?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The views and opinions contained herein are my own. They may not reflect the views and opinions of yourlincolnpark.com, the moderators, or affiliates. I make no claims to the validity of my statements. This is for novelty purposes only. Contact your financial/tax/legal advisor for details. No purchase neccessary. Void where prohibited. Restrictions may apply. See official rules for details. Offer ends immediately. © 2004, 2005, Veritas Scriptor. Some rights reserved. Happy New Year.
|
|
#3
09-13-05, 8:50 pm
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts/Thanks: 760/54 Thanked 153 Times in 99 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
VS: You've never heard the man who sometimes goes to the council meetings with this same idea? He always talks about a particular town in some other state that requires its residents to carry guns. This topic has been raised before, but generally goes no where. |
|
#5
09-13-05, 11:27 pm
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts/Thanks: 760/54 Thanked 153 Times in 99 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Ya. He comes up a few times a year. I've heard his rant before. He's a real elderly man and wants everyone to be forced to own a gun. He says the crime in whatever town that does that is pretty much nonexistant. Everyone usually just lets him talk cuz they know what he is going to say, nod when he's done and then he sits back down. |
|
#6
09-13-05, 11:54 pm
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts/Thanks: 2,214/54 Thanked 217 Times in 151 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
I've heard it Wolverine. What a joke. I am all for gun owners rights, but to make it manditory makes about as much sense as forcing everyone to dring whiskey and smoke cigarettes. |
| The Following User Says Thank You to jeyhey For This Useful Post: | |
|
Robbie (09-15-05)
|
|
|
#7
09-14-05, 1:10 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts/Thanks: 428/171 Thanked 48 Times in 36 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
yeah I've heard him too, and whenever I see him go up to the podium I just think "here we go again." I'm glad they let him talk though I think he's just a harmless old gentleman that wants to be heard and no-one really puts much stock in what he says |
|
#8
09-14-05, 7:06 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
|
|
#9
09-14-05, 7:20 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
|
|
#10
09-14-05, 7:28 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't know about "nonexistant." But you can look it up for yourself. Here is one article on the subject:
Quote:
source: http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38a75857671c.htm
Quote:
|
| Shop Lincoln Park! Visit Our Advertisers |
|
|
|
#11
09-14-05, 7:30 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
|
|
#12
09-14-05, 7:31 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
|
|
#14
09-15-05, 10:00 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts/Thanks: 2,214/54 Thanked 217 Times in 151 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Maybe I am missing something. I read the ordinance as... "Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes." Yes, Rubberarm, I think this is pretty ridiculous. You are a big "Rights" guy, so I would think you oppose seat belt laws, motorcycle helmet laws, and manditory gun ownership laws. Perhaps I used a poor analogy with the booze and cigarettes. How about this one, would you support a local ordinance that required all homes to have caged bars over all windows and doors? |
|
#15
09-15-05, 10:11 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
|
|
#16
09-15-05, 10:48 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts/Thanks: 2,214/54 Thanked 217 Times in 151 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
Yes, I understand these... (b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability, which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. (c) Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony. But then what is the point? If all you have to say is "I conscientiously oppose", or "it is against my religion", then anyone can get out of it without much trouble at all. I am looking at it from my standpoint. I am a big supporter of gun owners rights, and have belonged to the NRA off and on through the years. I have a shotgun and a rifle in my house, so I do not conscientiously oppose firearms. But what is next, they will tell me it has to be a pistol, so then I have to go and purchase one. And here is a side note: I consider myself responsible enough to own a gun, but quite frankly, I know some people that are not responsible to own one or keep it in the house. I am not saying I am against their rights, but why should we encourage these people that might never think to go and get a gun. Personally I think the system is fine just how it is, if you want a gun to protect your family and your property or for sport, then go get one. If you don't want one, then forget it. |
|
#17
09-15-05, 10:58 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts/Thanks: 6,819/433 Thanked 174 Times in 139 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
I own several firearms, from pistols to rifles to shotguns to black powder. If someone wants to own a pistol so be it, I, in my opinion, don't feel it should be thrust upon them as being required.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Arctic Cat Thundercat Test Pilot  |
|
#18
09-15-05, 11:13 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts/Thanks: 3,248/204 Thanked 142 Times in 95 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Quote:
The point is that even though anyone and everyone can opt out of maintaining a firearm in their home, the criminals would know that firearm ownership is encouraged in this community. Then, perhaps, they would go elsewhere for easier pickings:
Quote:
|
|
#19
09-15-05, 11:32 am
|
|||||
|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts/Thanks: 2,214/54 Thanked 217 Times in 151 Posts
|
|||||
|
Re: A Question for Council Candidate Michael Lemuel:
Those stats are very persuasive. I can say this, if they ever adopted that ordinance in a neighboring city, LP would need to do the same immediately. I'd bet that crime increased in the neighboring cities. Could you imagine if Detroit ever did this? |
| Shop Lincoln Park! Visit Our Advertisers |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Advertise & Volunteers Business Yellow Pages In Honor of - Joseph "Smokey Joe" Lyson |
|
|
| Your City of Lincoln Park Community Website | Privacy Statement Review MMSi Copyright, Privacy, Disclaimers and Terms of Use Policies here. |
Linear Mode
