Comments on: Petaluma City Council backs gun-control bill

By: Phil Maher

Phil Maher — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 14:08:15 +0000

All personal thoughts on grandstanding and worthless gestures aside: This bill will never pass the House, it’s apparently common knowledge to most people that clearly understand the politics behind it. But for some reason, just not the Petaluma, Santa Rosa, or any of the other local City Councils that are sure to follow suit. What’s alarming (and quite similar to Petaluma’s recent ban on e-cigarettes prior to the research being far from conclusive)is that they voiced support prior to even having a bill to review or anything at all to actually read(kind of like Obamacare). Everyone knows that no House or Senate bills are ever “clean”. So really, there’s a huge potential that they might have just signed on to supporting the nasty requisite trailers that might not be exactly what they would have wanted. Goldman Sachs, Exxon and the 1% now wish to thank you for not looking before you leaped. It’s how they get what they need out of government. Although, it’s not as though what you have to say about anything means spit. But hey, as long as it makes you feel good and valuable, right?

10 1

By: Graeme Wellington

Graeme Wellington — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 21:36:27 +0000

Gun Laws and the Fools of Chelm:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/01/28/gun-laws-and-the-fools-of-chelm-by-david-mamet.html

This is an essay by David Mamet. Best thing I’ve read on the subject.

4 1

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 20:49:59 +0000

Hey, it gives the ILLUSION that the city council is doing something.
Seen your roads lately?
Seen those public employee pensions lately?

19 2

By: John Hess

John Hess — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 01:52:14 +0000

And I’ll bet they think they really accomplished something. Hey, besides potholes, try catching (and NOT releasing) graffittists who are ruining Petaluma’s “visible environment.”

26 3

By: Taxpayer

Taxpayer — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:19:48 +0000

WHO CARES?

28 4

By: sheryl

sheryl — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 15:08:27 +0000

City councils need to deal with city issues. Are the potholes fixed? Are the parks clean? Are they allowing enough new business to keep people working? Anything else is not their concern. Besides who really cares how they feel on the gun debate?

37 2

By: Snarky

Snarky — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:50:34 +0000

Forget the “local” issues that “local” government is supposed to work on such as potholes.

Uh, last I knew, Petaluma was known as the “pothole capital” of California, was it not?

I believe the City of San Francisco once tried to pretend it had authority over guns within the city limit…. and found themselves grandstanding for nothing… as local government cannot dictate who can own what type of guns. :) That was only a few years back.

34 2

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:06:48 +0000

This is the new city counsel, the without Tiffany Renae? I’m so glad the counsel protected us from the WWII boat that would have brought terrorists to Petaluma. Now they support a bill that did nothing when passed in 1994, but hey, who cares about whether new laws actually address problems?

What are these figures that Feinstein is quoting and all these counsel jokers are regurgitating? Hey Ms. Feinstein, how many deaths occurred as a result of drunk drivers? 5,000? 10,000? Why not force a ban on drinks with high alcohol content? Why not force all car manufacturers to install breathalyzers in every car? That lunatic in New York, fellow Democrat Bloomberg, banned SODAS over 16 ounces. I think you could easily quote some figures related to alcohol and push something through. Oh wait, she owns a winery…can’t do that.

@ Mr. Pendergast…How dare you suggest the Petaluma counsel address the horrific roads in Petaluma when there are children to think about! Think of the CHILDREN!!! Our Constitutional rights are no match when there are children! It is of no consequence that these gun restrictions only effect law abiding citizens. Criminals don’t wait 10 days for their firearms.

32 2

By: BigDogatPlay

BigDogatPlay — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:53:42 +0000

Once again the council spends time on something they have no need or purpose to spend time on, while the city’s real problems get deeper and deeper. Six members of the council have signed on to a proposal that, if carried through, would amount to the greatest violation of civil rights since Jim Crow.

When is the next election again?

45 10

By: John Pendergast

John Pendergast — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:35:41 +0000

The Petaluma city council isn’t into boring things like fixing roads and maybe even putting another bridge over the river. Yawn. They love those hot button issues. The more meaningless and grandstanding the better.

It’s not a traditional city council but more of an experimental college class that you get no credit for, yet everyone gets vegan cookies afterwards.

48 7

By: Over Easy

Over Easy — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:21:13 +0000

It seems Petaluma is as whacky as Sebastopol.

The city council could NOT have read the bill as it has NOT been introduced, but blindly supports it based on a hunch?

Why is this important to Petaluma business? How about fixing the roads, straightening out the new Police Chief, doing something to stimulate jobs, feed the elderly, and stop the eastside gangs, or other important business.

Nope instead lets pontificate about a anti-gun bill we know nothing about or have no bearing on. STUPID WASTE OF TIME

46 9