Special Resolution In Support of the 2nd amendment

[Councilor Ed Coleman]

Ladies and Gentleman,

I wanted you all to preview a copy of my Special Resolution being brought before the Indianapolis City-County Council Monday night. I hope you all can attend on Monday at 7pm. This is just another step I am taking to defend our rights as citizens.

Also, I work 3rd shift and am very busy with the council, family and work. I want to make sure that I can get back with everyone who wants to talk with me. You are welcome to send me an email. I would prefer you contact Pami though as I have asked her to help as my liason to INGO. I will still submit to the Forums personally though.

Thanks for all your support.

Ed Coleman,
Councilor, At-Large
Indianapolis City-County Council

________________________________________________________

CITY COUNTY COUNCIL PROPOSAL NO. 102, 2010
CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS-MARION COUNTY, INDIANA

INTRODUCED: 03/22/2010

REFERRED TO: Committee of the Whole

SPONSOR: Councillor Coleman

DIGEST: supports the Second Amendment to the United States Government, Article 1, Section 32 of the Indiana Constitution, and the position of Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller, recently argued before the United States Supreme Court, that the Second Amendment applies to states and local units of government


SOURCE:
Initiated by: Councillor Coleman
Drafted by: Councillor Coleman

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ADOPTION: PROPOSED EFFECTIVE DATE:
Subject to approval or veto by Mayor Adoption and approvals

GENERAL COUNSEL APPROVAL: _________________________________ Date: March 17, 2010


CITY-COUNTY SPECIAL RESOLUTION NO. , 2010

A SPECIAL RESOLUTION supporting the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Attorney General Greg Zoeller’s position that the Second Amendment of the United States applies to states and local units of government. This resolution further acknowledges that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution is redoubled and fortified by Article 1, Section 32 of the Indiana Constitution.

WHEREAS, the right to possess arms for the defense of oneself and one’s nation is a fundamental and natural right of all persons that preexists the formation of every nation and is acknowledged and protected by Article 1, Section 32 of the Indiana Constitution and the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution; and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday, March 2, 2010 heard the case McDonald v. Chicago which deals with the legal issue of whether the Second Amendment applies to states and local units of government; and

WHEREAS, the Plaintiff in that case, Otis McDonald, is a 76 year old man who lives in Chicago and seeks to own a handgun to protect himself from violence in his neighborhood. However, a Chicago ordinance prevents Mr. McDonald from having a handgun for self-protection or for any other purpose guaranteed by the Second Amendment; and

WHEREAS, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller along with 31 other state attorneys general have filed a “friend of the court” brief that primarily argues: 1) that the Second Amendment protects Mr. McDonald’s right to possess a handgun, and 2) that Chicago’s handgun ban violates the Second Amendment; and

WHEREAS, the members of this Council support the position advocated by Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller that the Second Amendment applies to states and local governments such as the City of Indianapolis; and

WHEREAS, The Council realizes that a citizen, himself, has the inalienable right and the greatest ability to insure his own safety; and

WHEREAS, the members of this Council support the Second Amendment and the right of Indianapolis residents to keep and bear firearms for self-protection and for all other fundamental purposes; now, therefore:

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY-COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS AND OF MARION COUNTY, INDIANA:

SECTION 1. The Indianapolis City-County Council supports the fundamental and inherent right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by Article 1, Section 32 of the Indiana Constitution and the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

SECTION 2. The Council supports a person’s inherent right to self-defense protected by the Constitutions of Indiana and the United States.

SECTION 3. The Council supports Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller in his position taken before the Supreme Court that the Second Amendment applies to states and local units of government such as the City of Indianapolis.

SECTION 4. The Council agrees that all laws and policies adopted by the City of Indianapolis should conform with the fundamental and inherent right to possess arms, which right is guaranteed by the Constitutions of Indiana and the United States.

SECTION 5. The Council agrees that the City of Indianapolis should not frustrate, impede, delay or otherwise harass the fundamental and inherent right to keep and bear arms.

SECTION 6: The Mayor is invited to join this resolution by affixing his signature hereto.

SECTION 7. This resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and compliance with IC 36-3-4-14.

The foregoing was passed by the City-County Council this _____ day of __________, 2010, at _____ p.m.

ATTEST:

_____________________________________
Ryan Vaughn
President, City-County Council
____________________________________
Melissa Thompson
Clerk, City-County Council

Presented by me to the Mayor this _____ day of ____________, 2010, at 10:00 a.m.

_____________________________________
Melissa Thompson
Clerk, City-County Council

Approved and signed by me this _____ day of ____________, 2010.

____________________________________
Gregory A. Ballard, Mayor

 

[DocBoCook]

so now, how do you get that dyed in the wool anti-gun Ballard to sign it?

 

[Scutter01]

What effect is this resolution expected to have on future Council decisions with regards to, for example, your recent attempt to repeal the Parks ban? Does it carry any legal weight or would the Council be free to ignore it the next time the issue comes up?

 

[E5RANGER375]

whos Pami?

 

[Scutter01]

whos Pami?

Our Pami. The moderator.

 

[Pami]

whos Pami?

Our Pami. The moderator.

That'd be me.

 

[E5RANGER375]

oh ok, thanks, sorry it didnt hit me.

 

[indykid]

This country needs more Ed Colemans!!!!!!

Thank you sir for your continued attempt to keep this land as we the people were promised by those who fought, and gave their lives in some instances, so that we may be free!

 

[GregD]

Thanks for standing up for our rights.

 

[SSGSAD]

Way to go, Ed !!! Pami, tell Ed I said Way to go.....

 

[johntheplinker]

Excellent job, Mr. Councilor! Makes me very happy to see there are at least a few officials that have read both Constitutions.

whos Pami?

Check the FAQ, if there's one.

 

[Pami]

What effect is this resolution expected to have on future Council decisions with regards to, for example, your recent attempt to repeal the Parks ban? Does it carry any legal weight or would the Council be free to ignore it the next time the issue comes up?

Basically a special resolution does nothing but make a statement. Since special resolutions rarely go to committee, they will very likely vote on it, so it will put them all in a position where they will have to go on record and vote on this issue.

As a side note, Ed has every intention of rewriting and resubmitting the Parks proposal again.

 

[Scutter01]

Basically a special resolution does nothing but make a statement. Since special resolutions rarely go to committee, they will very likely vote on it, so it will put them all in a position where they will have to go on record and vote on this issue.

As a side note, Ed has every intention of rewriting and resubmitting the Parks proposal again.

I've seen State legislatures frequently violate their own rules of order because "everyone does it". There have been stories posted right here on INGO of senators voting for as many of their colleagues as they can. Any unattended voting button (even if the owner just turned away for a moment) is fair game. That, in particular, I find abhorrent and should be punished at least as severely as voter fraud. I understand that the city council is not the legislature, but I don't expect a resolution to stop them from doing anything more than pay lip service. They can vote in favor of this resolution and then claim to be "pro-gun" or "pro-Constitution", and then turn around and vote the opposite way when it's for something that actually matters, like the Parks issue.

Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate the work that Councilor Coleman is doing for us. I support him 100%, but I'm just having trouble seeing where this resolution (or any, for that matter) will have any bearing on future city ordinances.

 

[public servant]

...sorry it didnt hit me.

Allow me...

 

[jblomenberg16]

I'm not an Indianapolis resident, but do appreciate the steps you are taking to go on public record to acknowledge and support our gun rights!

 

[rambone]

Thanks for joining INGO and for keeping us up to date. I look forward to future updates and posts.

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

Save the fact that I don't live in Indianapolis (PSST, HEY GUYS, THERE EXIST PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF INDY! NOW YOU KNOW!), I do appreciate the fact that SOMEONE is pushing for acknowledgment of more rights, particularly as they concern self-defense... but I'd rather see State-wide change.

 

[Councilor Ed Coleman]

********* UPDATE ************

The Special Resolution was sent to committee last night by most of the Dems and a handful of Repub's. It will be heard at the next Rules and Public Policy meeting on March, 31st at 5:30pm. This will be a great opportunity for all of you to come speak in favor of the 2nd amendment.

********************************************************

Ed Coleman
Councilor, At-Large

 

[Roadie]

Bravo!

 

[Hammer]

Ed, thanks for your commitment.