Hammond is looking for trouble

[jedi]

Our briefs were filed with the CoA last week...

The world ends in 21 days. Any chance ya will get the results before then.

 

[XDLover]

I love the mayors quote. So he admits he is violating the law.
I think he should be listed first in the lawsuits.
Conscience or foolishness not sure which he placed higher.
I can almost bet what party he ran under too.

 

[jedi]

I love the mayors quote. So he admits he is violating the law.
I think he should be listed first in the lawsuits.
Conscience or foolishness not sure which he placed higher.
I can almost bet what party he ran under too.

Bite your tounge you non-LAKE county resident. That is our CD* king in this part of the state.

He is above the law and he also happens to be the chairperson for the Lake County Democrat Committee.
Lake County Democratic Central Committee : Thomas McDermott - Chairman

What he says goes around here. Who he wants elected ends up getting elected.

More about him here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_McDermott,_Jr.


* Corrupt Democrat

ps.
Bill B and him are real good buddies.

 

[rp8]

Really late on the bandwagon here, though I have been following this for sometime. Just re-read the article. Just god aweful logic by Mcdermott. " I think a problem in Hammond is gun violence, and we're saying let's carry more guns," McDermott said.

Jeez, it's unreal how dumb people can be. In particular lake county politicians

 

[digitalmonster]

Some quick questions:

Is codified by the state that local null and void ordinances should be repealed?

Do they have council rules that they have to repeal ordinances when they are trumped by IC? I suppose not since it was not done.

Has any council up there put it in the work to have it repealed?

The ruling was an interesting read, no harm no foul. From what I read here the alleged harm is from not repealing the local ordinance and having it published on a website.

 

[jedi]

Really late on the bandwagon here, though I have been following this for sometime. Just re-read the article. Just god aweful logic by Mcdermott. " I think a problem in Hammond is gun violence, and we're saying let's carry more guns," McDermott said.

Jeez, it's unreal how dumb people can be. In particular lake county politicians

The mayor of Hammond is not dumb. He just does not like guns plus I am sure he recall the incident where a husband of a hammond city hall employee went into city hall and killed his wife.

Some quick questions:

Is codified by the state that local null and void ordinances should be repealed?

Do they have council rules that they have to repeal ordinances when they are trumped by IC? I suppose not since it was not done.

Has any council up there put it in the work to have it repealed?

The ruling was an interesting read, no harm no foul. From what I read here the alleged harm is from not repealing the local ordinance and having it published on a website.

The sole Republic councilwomen on the board brought the topic up to the board saying they coukd get sued over it. Even the city atty and board atty agreed with her. But the mayor said he would veto it if the board attempted to change it. The board failed to pass it by majoriy vote.

 

[Hammerhead]

Some quick questions:

Is codified by the state that local null and void ordinances should be repealed?

Do they have council rules that they have to repeal ordinances when they are trumped by IC? I suppose not since it was not done.

Has any council up there put it in the work to have it repealed?

The ruling was an interesting read, no harm no foul. From what I read here the alleged harm is from not repealing the local ordinance and having it published on a website.

IANAL, but I'll try to answer.

No, it is not codified that the voided ordinances be repealed.

I don't know about the council rules.

As explained, yes they were notified that it should be repealed, but they bowed under pressure and didn't do it.

The alleged harm is in not repealing the ordinance. The ruling was that the website wasn't the valid source and couldn't be used as the only reason to sue. Apparently the fact that it's still an ordinance on the books (who cares if it's also on a website that can't be trusted) isn't enough of a reason to move past the website aspect of the suit.

The problem with the whole deal is that the council should repeal it to move it in line with the state law. If an ordinance is on the books, it can be enforced; if it's enforced that's a liability to the city. They should repeal it to remove the liability.

But nobody on the council, in the court room, or in the mayor's office asked my opinion.

 

[digitalmonster]

The mayor of Hammond is not dumb. He just does not like guns plus I am sure he recall the incident where a husband of a hammond city hall employee went into city hall and killed his wife.



The sole Republic councilwomen on the board brought the topic up to the board saying they coukd get sued over it. Even the city atty and board atty agreed with her. But the mayor said he would veto it if the board attempted to change it. The board failed to pass it by majoriy vote.

Wow is all I can say about that.

Some how they need to pass it so he does veto it seems to be a required step to show he is a rogue.

 

[jedi]

The mayor 'owns' the council. They do what he says. The sole R that was on the council was lost her re-election bid last year. Suspect that the mayor got pissed at her and she had to go. That council will NOT go agent what the mayor wants. If they do then as county democrat chairperson the mayor will not help the councilperson get re-elected and will also fund another canidate to have current member removed. This has been done time and time again.

 

[Mark 1911]

I have not read this thread from front to back but so far have not found what precipitated the law suit. Was someone removed from a Hammond city building for carrying a handgun?

 

[jedi]

I have not read this thread from front to back but so far have not found what precipitated the law suit. Was someone removed from a Hammond city building for carrying a handgun?

Clif Notes

City of Hammond has an ordinance that said No handguns allowed in city parks.

State of Indiana changed the law to say only the state can pass firearm laws so all local ordinances are invalid and if a local government attempts to interfere a citizen can sue the local government and get triple court damages along with the local government having to undo the invalid ordinance.

City Council women advises city council that they are in violation of state law with the ban on handguns in park and city property. City council atty advises council that the council lady is correct. City atty (works for the mayor) also agrees with his counter-part.

The mayor says he will veto any attempt to remove the ban from the books! He says he has issued an executive order that cops will not obey the ordinance and that should be enough.

City council takes a vote to invalid the ordinance and it fails. Only one vote to change all others vote no change.

Bill B's wife via Tactical Firearm Training Guy R. (atty) file a lawsuit against the city claiming they are in violation of state law as the ordinance is still on the books and on the website.

Judge rules in favor of City saying you can not fault the city for errors in the website since the website has a disclaimer saying not all the text on the website is correct.

Guy R files an appeal because technically the law is still on the books and that is where we are at now.

 

[Mark 1911]

Clif Notes

City of Hammond has an ordinance that said No handguns allowed in city parks.

State of Indiana changed the law to say only the state can pass firearm laws so all local ordinances are invalid and if a local government attempts to interfere a citizen can sue the local government and get triple court damages along with the local government having to undo the invalid ordinance.

City Council women advises city council that they are in violation of state law with the ban on handguns in park and city property. City council atty advises council that the council lady is correct. City atty (works for the mayor) also agrees with his counter-part.

The mayor says he will veto any attempt to remove the ban from the books! He says he has issued an executive order that cops will not obey the ordinance and that should be enough.

City council takes a vote to invalid the ordinance and it fails. Only one vote to change all others vote no change.

Bill B's wife via Tactical Firearm Training Guy R. (atty) file a lawsuit against the city claiming they are in violation of state law as the ordinance is still on the books and on the website.

Judge rules in favor of City saying you can not fault the city for errors in the website since the website has a disclaimer saying not all the text on the website is correct.

Guy R files an appeal because technically the law is still on the books and that is where we are at now.

Thanks for the quick update. The time has come to purge these senseless old laws. Great to have a man like Guy on our side!

 

[newguy]

there to close to chi-town and the Ill state line

i 2nd that

 

[CathyInBlue]

IC 35-47-11.1-6
Civil actions; adversely affected persons
Sec. 6. A person is "adversely affected" for purposes of section 5 of this chapter if
(1) The person is an individual who meets all of the following requirements:
[...]
(C) The individual is or was subject to the ordinance, measure, enactment, rule, or policy of the political subdivision that is the subject of an action filed under section 5 of this chapter. An individual is or was subject to the ordinance, measure, enactment, rule, or policy of the political subdivision if the individual is or was physically present within the boundaries of the political subdivision for any reason.

I read this as the rule was on the books and the person was physicly located within the jurisdiction of the books on which that rule was, it's a done deal. There's no room for Hammond to weasel.

 

[jedi]

@CiB this is Da Region which is just as corrupt as Chicago and it does not matter what the law you southerns in Indy (yes I know you are in TH) saw. They do as they like and buy off whomever. In this case the judge was too chicken to deal with the Mayor of Hammond and instead avoided the issue oh and guess what has retired.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

@CiB this is Da Region which is just as corrupt as Chicago and it does not matter what the law you southerns in Indy (yes I know you are in TH) saw. They do as they like and buy off whomever. In this case the judge was too chicken to deal with the Mayor of Hammond and instead avoided the issue oh and guess what has retired.

My judge is retiring too but requested to stay on as our judge while we wait for Hammond ot go through appeals.

Good luck guys and Guy!

 

[jedi]

If the appeal is up here in NWI we have lost. See you when it gets to the in supreme c.
But I think the appeal is down in indy

 

[Titanium_Frost]

If the appeal is up here in NWI we have lost. See you when it gets to the in supreme c.
But I think the appeal is down in indy

According to Guy there is only one CoA and it is Indy.

 

[maxmayhem]

well i guess you have never been to grabill or fortwayne or hobart

is it just me or is there a big difference between norther and southern indiana? it seems like the farther north you go the more liberal they get.

 

[IN_Sheepdog]

@CiB this is Da Region which is just as corrupt as Chicago and it does not matter what the law you southerns in Indy (yes I know you are in TH) saw. They do as they like and buy off whomever. In this case the judge was too chicken to deal with the Mayor of Hammond and instead avoided the issue oh and guess what has retired.

Darn... one of the few cases where I have to agree with Jedi... but that is Lake County.. Porter County not so much, but it is headed that way over time.