35 residents gathered in the council chamber Tuesday for the Chattanooga City Council's deliberation to uphold an existing ban on guns in city parks. The new resolution was drafted in compliance with H.B. 716, a General Assembly bill that lifts the statewide ban on guns in parks. The state bill includes an 'opt-out' clause for municipal governments wishing to make their own determination on the issue.
The council's new resolution concludes a month-long debate about the role of firearms in public spaces. The council, having voiced support for the ban on June 16, upheld its existing position by a 9-0 vote in favor of the new law.
Prior to the vote, two military veterans voiced concerns about the ban, as well as a stigma of concealed carry permit holders characterized as "wild west gunmen."
"There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about the people who carry permits. A lot of people think that we're wild west gunmen and many things like that." said William Catoe, an East Brainerd resident.
"Many of us are actually, very well trained," he said. "And many of the permit holders that I know, or likewise trained, they're hunters. They're former law enforcement. They're former military. They have extensive skills to where—God forbid the need arise—force be used to stop a situation."
Councilman Peter Murphy responded by saying that one of his brothers has a concealed carry permit. "I'd like to say that I've heard some things bandied about—both in the record and my committee, that I felt were disparaging—of people with concealed carry permits...inappropriately so. By all accounts and statistics, they are very fine citizens: upstanding and law abiding."
Will Sturtevant, a veteran living in Red Bank, argued that the ban would make parks less safe for law-abiding citizens. He said, "One of the main or the basic aspect of physical security is the presence of a deterrent. And by not allowing guns in parks, in a way, you're letting the bad guys know that there's no one out there to meet up with them."
"Carrying a gun is not something I take lightly. It weighs heavy on me. I have mixed feelings about it myself. But what I would like is the choice. That's all I ask for." he said.
Mr. Murphy cited conversations with law enforcement officials, as well as his experiences as an attorney, for his position on the resolution. He also said that interpreting the Second Amendment is sometimes "a question of where the line is drawn."
"I think everybody in here would agree that those who go to visit a jail should not be allowed to carry a firearm in. Police officers are not allowed to. And so if you agree that you should not be allowed to go into a jail with a firearm, then we are all not truly Second Amendment absolutists. It's merely a question of where the line is drawn," he said.
"In this case, I don't believe that most of the municipal parks, certainly in my district, are appropriate places for a firearm being carried by anyone." he said.
Councilwoman Carol Berz pointed out that the safety record in city parks—alluded to earlier by Mr. Catoe—was accomplished under the auspices of the existing law. "If we vote for this, then we're in effect not changing the law as it exists now. Correct?" Ms. Berz questioned Mr. Catoe, "And I have to assume that you haven't been carrying arms—"
"No ma'am, I'm a law-abiding citizen," Mr. Catoe replied, "I guess you would be changing the law in that the state has come through and said that it is allowed, subject to the proceedings here from the individual cities. So I guess in effect, you would be changing the law."
Council Chair Jack Benson recalled one instance in the 1980's when Harry Wilcox, a park policeman, was killed by his own gun in a city park.
"He went in to clean out the restrooms one evening, and they took his gun away from him, and blew his brains out. But that was a policeman carrying a gun. But we've had no instances that I know of other than that," Mr. Benson said, "and we've had a law, like you said, for ages, prohibiting guns. But we did let the policemen carry one in."
Councilman Manny Rico said that he has heard from several residents on this issue. Some citizens assert that a gun is needed to protect they're families when in public. "I'm not taking my family anywhere I think I might need a gun to protect them," Mr. Rico said.
"We're not trying to take anybody's Second Amendment right," he continued, "this is a public safety thing for our people and our parks. And I think we're doing the right thing."
With the resolution passed, Parks and Recreation Director Larry Zehnder said that his department will begin posting new signs that emphasize the law in city parks.
David Morton
not surprised on July 15, 2009
"With the resolution passed, Parks and Recreation Director Larry Zehnder said that his department will begin posting new signs that emphasize the law in city parks."
The signs will say "DESIGNATED UNARMED VICTIM ZONE"
On a related note, Thugs Local 411 voted 14-0 in favor of continuing to ignore all firearms laws.
fred on July 16, 2009
I think the city council needs to ban guns in public housing.
skippydog on July 16, 2009
And this is why states should not allow localities to make their own gun laws. Local Control ALWAYS leads to more control. If a person who otherwise might have had a chance to defend themselves is hurt, the blood will be on the council's hands and that of the state legislature which allowed this in the first place.