Murfreesboro and HCP in Parks Considered 9 July 2009

[falcon1]

This issue will be considered tomorrow at the City Council meeting:

http://www.murfreesborotn.gov/default.a ... =70&id=720

[tdfirearms]

Murfreesboro opted out tonight. No legal handguns in the city parks or greenways. I guess I will start going to state parks instead.

[David Lewis]

While we live in Franklin, Murfreesboro is but a few minutes away thanks to 840.

We've been planning to bike the M'boro greenways, and of course, would have spent the money to feed a family of five in town, as well.
Guess that won't be happening now. We'll go where we're welcome!

David

[bluecanary25]

Dang! I live just outside Murfeesboro limits.....
Was hoping to spend time on the Greenway.
My family would have been spending money there for food and non-alcoholic beverages.
Why are local governments against law abiding citizens?
The Opt Out is a denial of Rights aimed at only HCP holders. (For that matter, so is the posting in Restuarants)
We are aware that it fails miserably in keeping guns out of parks.
But there are a couple State Parks not too far away.

[redbarron06]

I heard about this on the news this morning. They also mentioned that Clarksville has opted out. I guess the number of parks I will be going to is getting reduced.

[falcon1]

Be certain to email the city council and let them know of your economic decision; their emails are heres:
http://www.murfreesborotn.gov/default.a ... =70&id=724

While you are at it, cc the Murfreesboro Chamber of Commerce too:
info@rutherfordchamber.org

[mathdude]

Since they chose to opt out, will they be required to post signs?

[netmindr]

I emailed the city Councilmen and received a reply from Shane McFarland about 35 minutes later. I explained how they are ruling against law abiding citizens and that I would be very unlikely to visit any parks in Murfreesboro and therefore not patronize the businesses at that time. I also urged them to step up police presence in the parks since now the criminals are well aware that no one will be armed to resist them.

Of course, there is nothing we can do to reverse their decision and Shane does not agree with our position, but at least he did have the b***s to respond and let me know he did what he thought was best for Murfreesboro.

I wonder though, how do they come to their decisions? Do they really listen to their constituency or just buckle under the pressure of the loudest lobbyists? Or even worse, simply base it upon their own personal opinions and assume we all agree? They are elected, right? That means they can be un-elected next go around.

[backwoodsman]

a mixture of their own fear and inadequacy,imposing that on all others to bolster their self importance and position of power as well as the loudest barking dogs

[johnharris]

[SomeGuy]

We just have to make sure NOT to allow grandfathering. Pre-emption needs to be fully restored.

[falcon1]

In addition, we in Murfreesboro also need to campaign to unseat the six persons on the city council who voted for the ban. Turnout in our local elections is usually low, and there are 4103 or so permit holders in Murfreesboro. If all 4103 voted for candidates who would restore our rights, it would overcome the margin of victory each of the incumbents had in the last election (which in itself is sad for a town of around 100,000, though of course that includes many under the age of eighteen as well). Toby Gilley is the only councilman who voted for us.