09jisaac
Regular Member
The ordinance summitted to the fiscal court was, to say the least, a bit lacking. It included two mentions of "concealed or otherwise" and still included the same enforcement section of the previous ordinance. Basically the same exact ordinance. Naturally I pointed this out. My proposal to just repeal to ordinance fell mostly on deaf ears (The Judge/Exectutive and his staff admitted that they at least wanted it).
So it was passed (1st reading) under the agreement that "or otherwise" was struck twice and the Sheriff was informed (in the meeting) that his only "anything in their power to enforce this ordinance" was to ask the person to leave or to show his/her weapon.
I don't really think my county government are all playing on the same team anymore. The tension is noticeable.
So it was passed (1st reading) under the agreement that "or otherwise" was struck twice and the Sheriff was informed (in the meeting) that his only "anything in their power to enforce this ordinance" was to ask the person to leave or to show his/her weapon.
I don't really think my county government are all playing on the same team anymore. The tension is noticeable.