Ares Armor vs. Local Government
- Thread starter 5cary
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
And the billboard the local government is complaining about:
Streetgang
OP4
Worthy of support. National city is a festering wound in the San Diego area. It has a local nickname of Nasty City
FrankOceanXray
Ultimate Member
- Oct 29, 2008
- 12,036
Take 'em to court! Fight the good fight.
Same state that just had the atheist's billboards?
Same state that just had the atheist's billboards?
elwojo
File not found: M:/Liberty.exe
So they didn't file a permit for the sign and are being charged as such? This isn't solely a violation of the first amendment - even though I imagine they were targeted by complaints because the sign is gun-related.
Regardless, the solution looks like: take the sign down, pay a fine, get a permit, put the sign up. Until then...I would just keep the sign on the side of a big SUV in front of the building (under surveillance, of course).
Regardless, the solution looks like: take the sign down, pay a fine, get a permit, put the sign up. Until then...I would just keep the sign on the side of a big SUV in front of the building (under surveillance, of course).
Fox123
Ultimate Member
Read their appeal. No permit required.
elwojo
File not found: M:/Liberty.exe
Albeit - I like the idea of going to court on this. If they can prove other people placed signs up without permits and didn't receive a fine, this could very easily be seen as unjust - not even considering the radical difference they received in their time to appeal (from a nominal 30 days to 3 days!).
elwojo
File not found: M:/Liberty.exe
Pretty sure 18.74.020 A says "signs...may not be installed until a site plan review and/or sign permit is conducted and approved". The referring section (18.12.100 C) describing exemptions from needing a sign permit does not list an exemption for business signs.
Once again though - if other signs are installed without permits and not receiving fines and threats as according to the strict letter of the law, this should be enough to hold an appeal in court.
/Probably should have been a lawyer
Was the sign post installed before the ordinance was created?
elwojo
File not found: M:/Liberty.exe
I think you are asking: was the post that they put their sign on installed before the ordinance was adopted?
I don't think it would be relevant. Businesses built following old city code statutes need to be brought up to code whenever a nearby function is modified by permit - so I think this would follow the same procedure.
New sign -> permit required.
I really wish he had filed a permit. Then whatever this shit-storm is would be completely without merit! [As opposed to a randomly enforced law due to disliking their message]
hacktracker
Active Member
Kudos to these guys for having the stones to do what's right.
It's not always easy to do the right thing.
It's not always easy to do the right thing.
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PG County getting some Liberty Doll love over a bill that would ban computers for minors- Started by jc1240
- Replies: 6