Newly elected city councilman of FW suburb riles up some

[n5wd]

It seems a newly elected city councilman in Watauga, TX (A suburb on the northeast side of Fort Worth) has some very interesting ideas about guns, citizens having guns, and the government's role in training citizens to protect themselves. Needless to say, a lot of folks aren't liking what they're hearing, for a number of reasons.

The full story by the Fort Worth Star-Telegram at: http://tinyurl.com/watauga-councilman

[AEA]

I like his idea about guns, but he is really out there on the other issues.

[Heartland Patriot]

Now, if this guy really believes all the stuff he says, he is still going about it the wrong way. He shows a lack of good sense and judgement, despite whatever his ideas may be. He is naive to think he can just dump all those ideas in at once with little to no backlash. He would have been a lot better off applying a bit here and a bit there...as one city councilman, he isn't going to change things overnight; only dictators do that and the whole thing usually doesn't end that great. I like to think of myself as being pretty darned conservative, but I guess there is always someone who's just got to push things that much harder. It sure won't leave a good impression at all...and that is exactly why that paper printed that story. Like I said, naive...

[LabRat]

Maybe I'm the one being naive here, but I took his comments to mean that folks shouldn't depend so heavily on the government for everything.

I took the comments to mean that people can have the nice things in their communities (libraries, parks, playgrounds) by actually putting in some sweat-equity rather than paying taxes (and giving more and more control to the government).

When the "government" takes over or completely dictates a service, then it has the power to hold citizens hostage to that service to force compliance to "whatever" they choose.

The Federal Government does it routinely. They withhold tax dollars from states who won't implement policies the Feds think are required....remember the "55 MPH" speed limit mandate from the 70s? If it was a "legal" issue, then they would go to court, but it wasn't so a type of financial extortion was used.

If people band together for the good of the community, it creates a sense of togetherness and relationships that bind folks to one another without the oversight and intrusion of government.

For people who've looked to the government to protect them, provide all the services they deem needed, tell them what's good for them and where their next meal is coming from, then this councilman's ideas may seem radical.

For someone like me who thinks of government more as my servant than my master; as an entity that should facilitate and encourage life's better offerings, jobs and services; then this councilman's ideas become more revealing than radical.

To get this back to a gun issue, a "well regulated militia" means 'well trained militia' in the original meaning, so having the government train folks in proper gun use means they understand the power structure correctly and put that power "reserved for the people" directly into the hands of the people.

It makes the master/servant relationship of the people to government more like the founders intended than what it has become.

edited: typo

[sjfcontrol]

Clements has "the mentality that we can do without local government to take care of us," Ivey said. "That's what we have elected officials for -- to take care of our business.

Oh, yuck!

I don't understand the comments about city hall. Is it posted? It shouldn't be. And all he has to do to allow carrying in city meetings is take down the 30.06 sign.

[Heartland Patriot]

Maybe I'm the one being naive here, but I took his comments to mean that folks shouldn't depend so heavily on the government for everything.

I took the comments to mean that people can have the nice things in their communities (libraries, parks, playgrounds) by actually putting in some sweat-equity rather than paying taxes (and giving more and more control to the government).

When the "government" takes over or completely dictates a service, then it has the power to hold citizens hostage to that service to force compliance to "whatever" they choose.

The Federal Government does it routinely. They withhold tax dollars from states who won't implement policies the Feds think are required....remember the "55 MPH" speed limit mandate from the 70s? If it was a "legal" issue, then they would go to court, but it wasn't so a type of financial extortion was used.

If people band together for the good of the community, it creates a sense of togetherness and relationships that bind folks to one another without the oversight and intrusion of government.

For people who've looked to the government to protect them, provide all the services they deem needed, tell them what's good for them and where their next meal is coming from, then this councilman's ideas may seem radical.

For someone like me who thinks of government more as my servant than my master; as an entity that should facilitate and encourage life's better offerings, jobs and services; then this councilman's ideas become more revealing than radical.

To get this back to a gun issue, a "well regulated militia" means 'well trained militia' in the original meaning, so having the government train folks in proper gun use means they understand the power structure correctly and put that power "reserved for the people" directly into the hands of the people.

It makes the master/servant relationship of the people to government more like the founders intended than what it has become.

edited: typo

Don't get me wrong...I am an advocate of smaller gov't. I just think that throwing folks in a swimming pool isn't the best way to get folks to drink more water. Maybe it would be best have introduced one thing at a time as each item of business came around. Or have picked one item to focus on...especially if there are liberal types on that city council, as well. Getting their dander up right off the bat and having them run to their media pals to create propaganda (and MOST newspapers these days are propaganda) sure doesn't help your cause...unless all your ducks are lined up in a row and ready to go down...and somehow I just ain't feeling it with this guy's situation.

[RoyGBiv]

"This nation desperately needs some controversy," he said in an interview. "The present model isn't working; the nation is broken. We need to look at alternatives even on the local level."

Read more: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/09/09 ... -northeast" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;#ixzz1Xf3AjSc3

Like.!

[LabRat]

Don't get me wrong...I am an advocate of smaller gov't. I just think that throwing folks in a swimming pool isn't the best way to get folks to drink more water. Maybe it would be best have introduced one thing at a time as each item of business came around. Or have picked one item to focus on...especially if there are liberal types on that city council, as well. Getting their dander up right off the bat and having them run to their media pals to create propaganda (and MOST newspapers these days are propaganda) sure doesn't help your cause...unless all your ducks are lined up in a row and ready to go down...and somehow I just ain't feeling it with this guy's situation.

I tend to agree with the councilman's concept, however I purposefully refrained from commenting on his method of implementation.

And I do agree with you; Smaller government is better; less waste, more efficient.

There is a "way" to go about change...some accept that plodding along slowly, but surely, is the way to go. Eventually you get there, maybe. Lot's of things can happen to derail even a good idea.

However, most people who are change agents understand that there is a certain amount of momentum that must be counteracted before you can get change to really begin. A certain amount of head-scratching can accomplish that, if you give people something to think about.
Sort of generating an "ah-ha" moment.

Based on the comments, some of those folks sounding the bell for a recall are the frog and they don't mind being boiled in the current pot. They either haven't a clue as to where they really are or they like the current situation.

Sometimes a little pressure is necessary to disturb the status quo and get people to build a foundation on which to base change. Some people prefer to build on a pre-existing or pre-developed general idea, rather than develop one of their own - that's OK with me.

Maybe this guy is just getting a "head scratcher" idea out there to see if folks are paying attention or if they're asleep at the wheel. Seems to have worked.

Change will not occur unless the pain of staying where you are becomes more than the pain of the change. Many changes in this country have occured once people realized that they were being boiled alive in the status quo.

LabRat