Ordinance could ban guns on all South Bend city property
Ordinance could ban guns on all South Bend city property Save Email Print
Posted: 6:41 PM Jun 9, 2008
 Last Updated: 6:41 PM Jun 9, 2008
116 comments
A | A | A

An ordinance banning guns on South Bend city property could be passed by the Common Council.

The ordinance would extend a firearms ban to all city property, regardless of state-issued gun permits.

The ordinance received a favorable recommendation in a committee meeting early Monday.

Under the proposed ordinance signs would be posted at buildings as well as at parks.

City leaders say the ban is needed for the protection of all city employees.

“This is really a safety issue for our employees who work in a variety of facilities where people might come in under duress or be angry about something. If they're carrying a firearm we feel that’s not safe for our employees,” said South Bend Mayor Steve Luecke.

As it's written now, violators would be fined 50 dollars for a first offense, and 250 for a second. However, Committee members talked about making those fines even steeper before giving it the okay.
More Stories
Elkhart doctor pleads guilty on weapons charges

Get a taste of Marshall County this weekend

16 Curb Appeal finalists: The Magers family of Mishawaka

Police search for suspects wanted in 7-11 armed robbery

 Summer Fun Afternoon in Elkhart Thursday

New Carlisle couple arrested for attempting to hire a hit man

Skylar Diggins, Notre Dame team up for "Camp Soldiers" kids clinic

Police search for suspect in South Bend bank robbery
Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
By posting this comment I have read and agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy:
You must agree to the Terms of Service to continue.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 25, 2008 at 10:40 PM
So where is the record of the vote they was supposed to take, eh?? Not one word have I seen yet....
Posted by: Brian on Jun 23, 2008 at 12:09 PM
They are going to vote on this tonight, Monday June 23 @ 7:00 PM. Please come out to voice your opposition
Posted by: Willie Location: Niles on Jun 18, 2008 at 01:11 PM
Apparently Government Employees have more rights than the rest of us. Isn't that true of totalitarian and communist countries as well?
Posted by: mark effinger Location: Evansville IN on Jun 18, 2008 at 09:06 AM
This is absolutely against the U.S. Constitution to ban U.S. Citizens from carrying firearms. This is exactly why the forefounders wanted ALL Americans to Own and carry guns. TO go Against governments who want to do wrong and NOT allow the people to govern. Please repeal this silly Ordanance.
Posted by: George Location: Evansville on Jun 18, 2008 at 08:50 AM
This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of. People of South Bend, your mayor is destroying you rights. Oust him.
Posted by: Steve Location: Evansville on Jun 17, 2008 at 10:55 PM
Because of the draconian, totalitarian anti gun laws in effect in Illinois, I refuse to travel to that police state to enjoy the many enjoyable things the state has to offer. I can't imagine growing up without seeing Chicago's museums, but my kids won't see them because I won't set foot there. I grew up in South Bend and return occasionally. If this city goes any more anti gun by passing this into law, I will never return to spend a dime in this city again. Wake up voters! Liberals want to control every aspect of your life, to tell you what is best for you. They will stop at nothing. Forget about party loyalty and vote only for those who respect the entire constitution! Hint: there are few Republicans and virtually NO Democrats who do!
Posted by: Jesse Location: Henderson, KY on Jun 17, 2008 at 10:38 PM
More idiotic "gun control". Why bother law abiding citizens? A criminal will carry a firearm where ever he choses, regardless of "laws", "ordinances" or "signs". Oh, by the way...I suppose this would exclude "law enforcement". No law enforcement officer has ever "went off the deep end". NOT!!! Pass a law that everyone has to pack a weapon. You would then see a very polite society.
Posted by: Mary Location: SB on Jun 17, 2008 at 11:08 AM
I do not appreciate this city attempting to take away my constitutional rights. Perhaps if city employees were taught to be civil and handle problems appropriately, they would feel better. That or just give them a pacifier and a blankey. I have no problem shooting someone I believe that will harm myself or my family. I'm a dern good shot too.
Posted by: Joshua Location: Southbend / Elkhart on Jun 16, 2008 at 02:08 AM
This is ridiculous! It does nothing but PUNISH law abiding citizens who try and exercise their rights. The worst thing iv EVER done was get a speeding ticket. I have a CCW permit, and as such have been cleared by the state police, but yet the City of South Bend thinks it can take that away? I am NOT happy. This is a stupid law.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 14, 2008 at 08:47 AM
I agree with you Matthew. The only people that will obey the law are the people that are licensed CCW holders. It sets up the reality in the mind of the criminal, "hey, I'm the only one out here with a gun now! Let's go ROB and RAPE somebody!". This IS one of the most ridiculous laws that SB has ever tried to enact. It'g going to be IMPOSSIBLE for the law officers to enforce also. One officer even stated on here he doesn't worry about the law abiding citizens (legally licensed gun holders). Its the thugs that could care LESS about any law. They make their OWN LAWS and not carrying a gun is one of them.
Posted by: Matthew Location: Granger, IN on Jun 12, 2008 at 11:49 PM
I don't understand why politicians, and people in power cannot see that making laws such as this, will not stop anything. People who are criminals do not care what the laws are, and they will continue to do whatever they want. All this would do, is hinder the area that I can legally, and rightfully protect myself. ( South Bend, being the area that would probably need it more than any other. ) If all the effort that was spent on wasteful laws like this, was focused on enforcing and bringing current criminals to justice, than maybe we could get something positive.
Posted by: Ned on Jun 12, 2008 at 10:36 PM
JF your words are so true. UNDER DURESS! That's right, if there is a shooting it will be by a MIND CONTROL ZOMBIE probably a CIA plant that THEY programmed. THEY will get more control and FEAR from the SHEEPLE who will do what THEY tell them to because they're afraid! The constitution is dead, THEY killed it with their "patriot" act and mind control. Think about it: Kids are getting expelled from schools for even DRAWING PICTURES of guns! THINKING about guns is a CRIME! Now THEY want to make it a CRIME to be armed in a PUBLIC PARK because people sometimes go into government buildings ANGRY. Well MAYBE if OUR government didnt treat us like SHEEPLE we wouldn't be so ANGRY! It's all to train the populace to like being DEPENDENT on THEIR protection and under THEIR control!
Posted by: JF Location: Niles on Jun 12, 2008 at 04:46 PM
I'm sure an ordinance and a sign stuck in the ground will stop a angry person under duress from carrying a gun. People who carry a legal gun might be the one who saves one of you committee members life if someone starts shooting. Shooters and criminals do not follow the law. If they know no one in the building is armed they might think faster about coming back and shooting up the place!!!!!!!1
Posted by: Indiana Constitution Location: South Bend on Jun 12, 2008 at 04:19 PM
Indiana Constitution Article I, Section 32: The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.
Posted by: Anonymous Location: South Bend on Jun 12, 2008 at 11:13 AM
The preemption local has an exemption for property owned by local government. No they couldn't ban guns within the city but they can on city property. This preemption law would need to be changed at the state to fix this issue as the Mayor and the city council have no logic when it comes to gun laws.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 12, 2008 at 09:24 AM
Please post the law so everyone can see it. It will be interesting to read. Thank you.
Posted by: James Location: Evansville on Jun 11, 2008 at 10:32 PM
There is a state preemtion law that says localaties can,t pass thier own gun laws.
Posted by: Svengali Location: Elkhart on Jun 11, 2008 at 09:37 PM
So the cops are gonna do what then? chuck them out the window upon arriving at the station? ROFLMAO!
Posted by: worker Location: indiana on Jun 11, 2008 at 06:00 PM
I have a couple dozen guns and not one of them has ever shot anyone or any animals since I have owned them. No one could break in my house and find them and I don't carry any even though I have a carry permit. No one will take away my right to keep them. Obama wants to remove our guns. He must be defeated.
Posted by: lucy Location: south bend on Jun 11, 2008 at 02:07 PM
Ok, criminals never obey the law. So, this new ordinance they want to put in place is for the law-abiding citizens? Why? So we can get shot by the criminals? WOW!!
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 11, 2008 at 01:51 PM
For those that are REALLY interested: Case in point. News from Elkhart Truth today - Two neighbor ladies was talking in their YARDS and 3 men approached them (broad daylight I believe)brandishing a weapon. Both women got out really lucky. They was only robbed. You say nothing like this happens in this area? HA! What about the waitress last fall going to her auto at Hooters? She was robbed and her back window shot out. Or what about the 2 woman last fall also was at Barnes and Nobles. Another person tried to rob them but they drove off. They also got their back window shot out. Lets talk about the couple at Macri's Deli northside of Mishawaka. They was also robbed at gunpoint while eating their food! So don't even TRY telling me this area is safe. Things HAVE changed and not for the good. If Mayor Luecke really WANTS to protect his employees, I suggest he offer FREE CCW classes for any employee that wants it (IF they can pass a security check that is). Any offers Luecke?
Posted by: Willie Location: Niles on Jun 11, 2008 at 01:31 PM
Rb: Yes I have, but I won't be going back if they won't let me bring my GUNS! =)
Posted by: Ian Location: Granger on Jun 11, 2008 at 12:43 PM
What?!? No guns. How my gonna be out pistol poppin on Friday and Saturday nights now? Stupid idea. People will still carry and use them to kill one another.
Posted by: Rb Location: SB on Jun 11, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Says "Willie"....HA! Telling me to do research, eh? You ever been in a library?
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 11, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Mayor Luecke: Are you paying attention Sir???
Posted by: Willie Location: Niles on Jun 11, 2008 at 09:05 AM
John Wayne would have been beside himself had he lived during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina (a true time of crisis), when the government illegally took citizens' firearms away "in the interest of public safety". Guess who was left with guns? The looters and criminals, that's who. So before you get on your high horse, Rb from SB, do a little research, or keep your fantasy world to yourself.
Posted by: Rb Location: SB on Jun 11, 2008 at 08:53 AM
..."in time of crisis"....whatever you say, John Wayne.
Posted by: Brian Location: SB on Jun 11, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Of course, people carrying illegally in the first place are going to follow this ordinance. What a bunch of fools. Fix the people, fix the problem. Banning guns just doesn't work. They're banned from schools too, right? Gun Free Zones don't work. RKBA
Posted by: Gary Location: Mishawaka on Jun 10, 2008 at 10:01 PM
People are safer when law abiding citizens cary firearms, wherever you are. The number of people with CCW permits that commit crimes related to firearms is a much lower percentage than people who dont carry. When you restrict areas you can carry, you only stop the legal carry person. Those who would shoot or threaten someone with a gun, (those without a CCW permit) will continue to carry in those restricted areas because they don't obey the laws anyway and there will be less of a chance for a legal permit holder to help in a time of crisis.
Posted by: love me gun Location: here on Jun 10, 2008 at 09:24 PM
wow so the cops will take a way are guns they cant even stop people that speed in a school zone. they make us where seat belts tell us that we can't smoke.and for all this they make us pay a fine.wow where is the freedom. whats next you cant fart out side? or you get find. maybe all us gun folks should take are guns and sit in front of that bad old mayor front step.
Posted by: Heather Location: SB on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:30 PM
The city employees don't need to worry about me, the law abiding citizen. I obtained my gun legally, unlike the criminals. And to Tom who thinks I am just into guns. That is totally off base with me. I couldn't tell you about different calibers or makers. I value my rights! But I guess my view on things is slightly different than most. Tom, until you have been in a armed robbery and had a loaded weapon pointed at your head at a 7-11, you will never appreciate your 2nd amendment rights....and I truly hope you never have that happen.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:17 PM
I will "bow down to alla" alright. Rather I will bend over first though. No towel head is ever going to take my guns away from me. There are MANY ex-military people that have fought to keep OUR COUNTRY FREE. It will remain that way until every free American dies - period. Our forefathers knew that government can be corrupted and that is WHY our 2nd Amendment is about the "right to carry and bear arms". Its to protect ourselves from our government and any other foreign government that THINKS they are going to take over. It will NEVER HAPPEN...not at least without an all out civil war. I hope and pray we as a nation is smart enough to see it happening before it does. If not, I will join a local militia group and take care of my family. To quote one other person's quote on here - "Lock -N- Load".
Posted by: American Citizen Location: South Bend, Indiana on Jun 10, 2008 at 07:57 PM
City employees safety???? What about MY safety???? Steve Luecke, because of your ignorance and poor decisions, I have to be ARMED when I go in the WEST side of town, FOCUS on that first, before you start taking peoples CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!!! I feel UNSAFE because YOU are our MAYOR!!!
Posted by: Brian Location: People's Republic of Luecke on Jun 10, 2008 at 06:06 PM
FREE GUNS TO CRIMINALS!! How? They see law-abiding citizens have to disarm themselves when they get out of the car to go take a stroll in the park. Once they're out of sight, smash the window and grab the gun. Now they can then wait for them to come back to their car and rob them and it's a double-jackpot! They got the cash and can now go sell the gun on the street for more cash. Now maybe they can afford their property taxes....
Posted by: Another city employee Location: To SB Council on Jun 10, 2008 at 05:31 PM
Do you people really think that restricting law abiding citizens will fix the problem? How many times do you hear about an individual who has a gun permit committing a crime? Once again you take guns away from citizens and do nothing about criminals. I would expect more common sense out of a SBPD Officer like Dieter. If you want to reduce crime in SB, how about torching the west side?
Posted by: Nick on Jun 10, 2008 at 04:07 PM
Guns laws are moronic because criminals are goign to break the law anyways. You disarm the law abiding citizen so that can be robber in our safe city of South Bend
Posted by: mark on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:56 PM
laws like this are for honest people, not criminals. go to arizona, no gun crime because EVERYONE can carry if it is displayed. take a hint?????
Posted by: Willie Location: Niles on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:50 PM
OK, down to the logistics: Those folks with concealed-carry permits CONCEAL their guns. How can this possibly be enforced in, for instance, city parks? I won't even mention how much good posting signs will do...
Posted by: Maxwell Smart on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:49 PM
The old illegal gun in the hand on City property trick. That's the second time I've fallen for that this week. So, we meet again, Enrique, or is it "the Craw".
Posted by: hmmm Location: sb on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:43 PM
First they ban smoking - now guns - what next? How about taxes! If a city employee has to go somewhere they feel that threatened they should have police escort or not go there. This will all come back to bite this mayor. Does anyone have the mayor's email address so we can address him directly? Or any of his chiefs or deputies? Why hasn't the other stations taken off on this matter - afraid of a little controversy. People are just plain tired of being told what to do because it is good for them - we're aren't idiots - just those who voted for Luecke.
Posted by: Willie Location: Niles on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:40 PM
Actually Tom from SB, I will freely admit that I'm "into GUNS", as you put it. But I'm also into enjoying the protections our Constitution guarantees to our God-given rights. So if you choose not to carry a gun, by all means, enjoy that freedom of choice; but don't begin to believe that I should give up my rights based on your hypothetical rantings. It would seem that YOU are, in fact, the "stooge" for spouting invectives with no facts to back up your theories.
Posted by: me again Location: goshen on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:38 PM
take out guns away. vote in obama and we can all bow down to alla.
Posted by: bob Location: goshen on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:27 PM
Do you realy believe that a man that is mad and crazy enough to go into a public place and blow someone away is going to worry about this law. the only person it hurts is the honest and legal person
Posted by: bob Location: goshen on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:17 PM
I am sorry but I would not feel safe on most of the city owned land without a gun this is just another nibble on our rights.
Posted by: roleki Location: mishawaka on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:03 PM
People are right to be angry about this, but most of you are angry for the wrong reasons. No ordinance like this will ever pass, and even if it does, it won't last. No, the only real effect an ordinance like this has is to polarize and distract the constituents while the council perpetrates some REAL heinous acts in the shadows. You just have to wonder what it is...
Posted by: PavePusher Location: Tucson, AZ on Jun 10, 2008 at 02:44 PM
“This is really a safety issue for our employees who work in a variety of facilities where people might come in under duress or be angry about something. If they're carrying a firearm we feel that’s not safe for our employees,” said South Bend Mayor Steve Luecke. Huh. What are the city workers doing wrong that would make the average person on the street a threat to them? The government is SUPPOSED to be afraid of the people. That's the purpose of the Second Amendment. The Mayor is a power-hungry dolt.
Posted by: CityEmployee Location: South Bend on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:45 PM
Mr. Sarcasm - love the idea of the golden statue of luecke. Though I don't think it would be golden very long, as more than pigeons would be relieving themselves on it. The more dems get their policies passed, the more the bad guys win. luecke, you are a complete fool.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:45 PM
if you have a registered gun but leave it at home when you go to the park, and you get assaulted at the park, could you take legal action against the city since they will not let you carry in a public park?
Posted by: Michael Location: Warsaw on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:28 PM
So, if passed, and an angry person does attack a city employee with a firearm, those who legally carry a firearm can do nothing to prevent it. The proposal seems based on short-sighted fear, rather than rational thinking.
Posted by: american tax payer on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:26 PM
Here is the south bend common council members e-mail... Derek Dieter = dddieter@southbendin.gov Henry Davis Jr. = hdavis@southbendin.gov Tom LaFountain = tlafount@southbendin.gov Ann Puzzello = apuzzell@southbendin.gov David Varner = dvarner@southbendin.gov Oliver Davis = adavis@southbendin.gov Timothy Rouse = trouse@southbendin.gov Al Kirsits = akirsits@southbendin.gov Karen White = kwhite@southbendin.gov Feel free to e-mail them as much as you need!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Harry Location: South Bend on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:25 PM
Restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens is not the way to solve crime. Try getting these judges to stop the wrist-slapping with the violent criminals. I have a right to protect my family and myself. These political morons can take a flying leap at rolling donut. Read: Deadly Road to Power
Posted by: Willie Location: Niles on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:11 PM
Another asinine attempt by a draft-dodging pacifist coward of a mayor to ban the big bad guns. He's part of Bloomberg's gun-ban group, if any of you didn't already know. Luckily, most rational thinkers are coming to the realization that "Gun-free Zones" (e.g. Virginia Tech) are nothing more than shooting galleries for those who care not what the law says. This latest farce makes me wonder about the real reason the Luecke administration has been buying up worthless parcels of land around the city. Maybe mayor moustache is looking to relive his Haight-Ashbury days, complete with flowers in his hair...
Posted by: BigRedEvil Location: Death Valley on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:10 PM
Pssst. Here is a little known secret.... Guns don't kill people - people kill people. "They can have my gun when they pry it from my dead, cold fingers."
Posted by: Me on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:04 PM
Have I missed something here? Are there shootouts going on all the time in South Bend? What exactly do you people feel the need to protect yourself from? The barrage of bullets that are being fired as you walk in to the courthouse to pay your traffic fine? I'll tell you what people told me about the smoking ban: Get over it already. Oh, I see, it was fine when they took that right away, but now that it's something YOU enjoy, now there's a problem. Maybe if you had stood by us then, I'd stand by YOU now.
Posted by: I wonder.... Location: South Bend on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Are the streets in South Bend....city property??????
Posted by: Preemption Continued Location: Indiana on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:36 PM
Here is the Brady Campaign's take on preemption in Indiana. It looks like the City Council is getting ready to violate the law and get sued: http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/state/viewstate.php?st=in PREEMPTION - LOCAL GUN LAWS State law greatly restricts city governments from enacting local gun laws, even though the state has failed to pass responsible state-wide laws. This preemption of local government authority makes it impossible for cities to enact sensible gun laws to make their citizens safer. Cities do have the authority to regulate guns on city property - such as restrictions on carrying concealed handguns into city hall. And local laws enacted prior to 1994 remain in force. Local laws enacted before 1994 remain in effect - including restrictions on assault weapons, requirements that guns be stored safely away from minors and requiring gun dealers to obtain a local license.
Posted by: Good Luck Location: Indiana on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Indiana has preemption. The only entity that is going to end up paying is the city to defend the lawsuit and then pay off the lawyer who brought it.
Posted by: Uzziel Location: Anywhere, USA on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:27 PM
"City leaders say the ban is needed for the protection of all city employees." "'If they're carrying a firearm we feel that’s not safe for our employees,' said South Bend Mayor Steve Luecke." And that's *all* that matters; a classic thug mentality, case in point: "Yay, for me and screw the rest of you!" -Uzziel-
Posted by: Anonymous Location: Mishawaka on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:23 PM
I have to agree with you that there have been no shootings in the courthouse, however, this is only due to the fact that everyone is searched and all of their items are searched. In a city park I have failed to find a metal detector or a deputy nearby that can search the adults as well as the children before entering. A gun a day keeps the badguy away.
Posted by: G Location: Mishawaka on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Notice "CITY PROPERtY".. Why don't they banned them from the entrie city. South Bend is a gutter to the county. Take away Notre Dame is a nasty sight for sore eyes. CRIME> CRIME....
Posted by: Sam Location: Michigan on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Another thing, the SBPD officer also has it right that your government is giving away HIS and MY 2ND Amendment rights to carry and bear arms. Remember this next time you go into any one of the parks in your town. The only person in those parks that are going to have guns is the bad guys (and the police officers AFTER you call them for help). I for one will NOT abide by your law of no guns in your parks. I will NEVER go to them again but if I do, you can be guaranteed, I WILL be carrying my weapon and it WILL be loaded. I would rather have a fine for carrying legally concealed than for my family or I to be accosted by a thug (and you have TONS of them in SB by the way!). If I am armed I stand half a chance of surviving the attack. Without a weapon, we are ALL defenseless. Think about that for awhile.....defenseless. When guns are outlawed - only outlaws will have guns. Those words still ring true to this very day. You will have to PRY my gun out of my cold, dead hand to get it
Posted by: Sam Location: Michigan on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:57 AM
I recently attained my CCW. In order for me to get my license to carry, I had to pass a Homeland Security check, an FBI check and a Michigan State Police check. I was fingerprinted and my prints was checked against all outstanding wants and warrants. I had to show I could hand my weapon safely (was taught by a Sheriff's Deputy by the way) and I had to PROVE I could hit my target (6 shots) at 9, 15 and 21 feet. Now let me ask you this: who would you rather be with that you KNOW has a gun? Me or the bad guy that is out to look for tons of trouble?? SBPD has it exactly right. I am NOT the person you should be afraid of. I would be you anything, if SBPD had a public voice in this, he would be DAMNED GLAD that I was there to help him if he should fall into a harms way and needed my help, correct SBPD? I would gladly help him if he was down or under fire. I WOULD give my life to help protect ANY innocent person, as any law officer would do. Am I a cop? No-just a concerned citizen.
Posted by: Don on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:49 AM
Real intelligent! Ban guns for law obiding people.Now the thugs will know all the people on city property are unarmed. Why are the city workers afraid? Do they run there mouth's looking for trouble? Real smart South Bend! I have a carry permit and I will still carry,I don't give a S*** about this STUPID law,my life is more important. Because I know that the cops can't be everywhere when you need them like some people think!
Posted by: CommonSense Location: Reality on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:33 AM
The old cliché is true (People kill people not guns), and no I do not own a gun, and not a member of the NRA so you can’t call me a gun nut. It just doesn’t make sense to say no guns past this line and expect the people with guns that want to shoot someone to respect that line.
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:25 AM
want to know who you council members are? find them here http://www.southbendin.gov/city/common_council/
Posted by: TheTruth Location: Ivory Towers on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:22 AM
BETTER TO BE TRIED BY 12, THAN CARRIED BY SIX.......LOCK-N-LOAD.....

Please do not post in all caps. Thank you. -WNDU.com

Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:20 AM
great job south bend!!!! hey, we should make ALL of south bend gun free. crime will go way down. and since there will be a ban on guns, our cops will not need guns, because nobody will have gun, right? OR...instead of banning guns, we could ban crime, if there is a ban on crime, then you cannot commit a crime....so crime will go down! the only people that will not take their guns to the parks will be people that do not break the law...the criminals on the other hand will still bringgun in. why did they just ban guns? why not knives...or bricks, or baseball bats, or large sticks? why dont they also ban making a fist....better yet, why not just make everyone walk around with their hands in their pocket.
Posted by: Jack Burton Location: Crown Point on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:15 AM
If you would like to read how a law abiding citizen can use a handgun in a situation that calls for self defense read here: http://hubpages.com/hub/Concealed-Handguns-What-is-it-all-about
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2008 at 11:01 AM
I will no longer feel safe at a public park, anyone can commit a crime knowing there is nobody to stop them.
Posted by: SB City captive # 1179235 Location: future Mishawake resident on Jun 10, 2008 at 10:46 AM
He said it's for protection of city workers. what about our protection? Will they have a police officer available to escort every person in city parks to protect them? What I want to know is what nefarious things are they planning on implementing that would result in concern for the city workers' safety?
Posted by: Enrique Location: south bend on Jun 10, 2008 at 10:12 AM
And the loyal citizens of South Bend get to be (op) KAOS ? I cant decide if I would rather be "The Craw" or Siegfried.
Posted by: JASON Location: SOUTH BEND on Jun 10, 2008 at 09:47 AM
AMAZING TO THINK THAT SOMEONE THINKS THAT AN ORDINANCE WOULD KEEP SOMEONE WITH CRIMINAL INTENT FROM TAKING A GUN AND USING IT ON CITY PROPERTY... THE ONLY PEOPLE THIS WILL TRULY EFFECT IS SAFE FIREARM OWNERS WITH PERMIT TO CARRY. IF WE HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT CRIMINALS DON'T CARE ABOUT LAWS OR ORDINANCES. WE SHOULD SPEND MORE TIME TO MAKE SURE POLICIES ARE EASY TO FOLLOW, NOT COMPLICATED AND MORE FAIR, THIS WOULD MORE THAN LIKELEY PREVENT THE FRUSTRATIONS AND ANGER IN PEOPLE THAT CAUSE THESE SITUATIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE, JUST MAKING A NEW LAW DOESN'T FIX ANYTHING.... DON'T OWN A GUN, WISH OTHERS DIDN'T EITHER.

Please do not post in all caps. Thank you. -WNDU.com

Posted by: Ann Location: Elkhart on Jun 10, 2008 at 09:40 AM
Let's just take a moment to think rationally. We know that those with illegal guns will still be carrying them. We also know that pregnant women,those with small children, or the elderly cannot defend themselves if attacked except with a gun. If the criminals know that no one is carrying a gun on city property, it seems to me that it will be open season on the crime. Do we plan to send body guards out with each pedestrian? Will the guards be carrying guns? How then do we plan to secure our city parks and properties? The courthouse has armed guards and metal detectors at each entrance to ensure the safety of each individual that enters. We know they will not be able to do this for all the city properties and parks. So, how do they plan to keep us safe since the unlawful will still be carrying a gun? I am a woman and I have a right to carry permit. If the city council does not feel safe, maybe they should consider learning how to safely carry a gun and how to correctly use it.
Posted by: Mom on Jun 10, 2008 at 09:40 AM
Oh, Thomas. It's time for your 10:00 dose of Ritalin. Come out from under the bed.
Posted by: Tyler Location: South Bend on Jun 10, 2008 at 09:02 AM
Gun free zone laws do not work or protect law abiding citizens. Example: Virginia Tech. If this passes, it would be a terrible irony to see Luecke at a prayer site vigil after a homicide on city property.
Posted by: Mr. Sarcasm on Jun 10, 2008 at 09:01 AM
Announcing the new Get Smart movie, starring Steve Luecke as Maxwell Smart, secret agent 86. Also starring Virginia Calvin as Agent 99, Joe Kernan as the Chief, Joe Donnelly as Larrabee and James Kapsa as Agent 13. Watch the humor as Control attempts to collect higher property taxes from county homeowners.
Posted by: Tom Location: SB on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:47 AM
You people are all lame. "My rights blah blah blah my rights." People who carry guns don't give a crap about rights. You're into GUNS! You just won't say that, because it doesn't sound intelligent. Bunch of dorks with small.....egos. How many people do you know had to use a gun to save their lives???? NONE! Like criminals actually care if people MIGHT have guns and THATS why they avoid crime. What a joke! Any person who thinks that is a moron. I guess I forgot how safe gangs were and thats why people still join them. It's because they carry guns and they think they are safe right? I mean, no one in a gang ever dies do they? You are all a bunch of stooges. Get over yourself and quit acting like you give a crap about "rights." You're just into guns....
Posted by: ms Location: sb on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:46 AM
Tell that idiot mayor there are enough laws out there for the cops to enforce already. Tell that idiot mayor to get the druggies and thugs off the streets then we wouldn't need his stupid bans. People not "GUNS" injure or kill others. But what the heck - our mayor says crime is down - so why the new bans. Tell you what mayor - you put this ban into place and I expect you to personally be out there protected all the innocent people. Put your life out there since you feel this will fix it. Afraid your turkey neck may be mistaken for something else - oh don't worry - we have a sign ready too. No shooting of idiots allowed.
Posted by: Michael Location: South Bend on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:41 AM
I agree with Frank. The whole idea of the Second Amendment and State Issue carry permits, is that "we the people" have a right to protect ourselves. So the only folks in the parks with guns will be the bad people. If this goes through, it is open season on the good people of South Bend. Let's ban together and stop this.
Posted by: HJF Location: South Bend: a crime free city! on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:30 AM
This is really funny on a few levels. 1) The city is buying up so much property that pretty soon the majority of property in the city will be owned by the city. 2) The judges in this county, being the two-faced wimps they are, would never give a meaningful sentence to a lawbreaker. Courts in this county are a joke. How about enforcing the laws already on the books instead of coming up with new ones that make us "feel good"? Can't do that though, we need judges with backbones for that!
Posted by: John Location: da' Bend on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:28 AM
South Bend just got more dangerous.
Posted by: Mr. Sarcasm on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:28 AM
What we need now is to outlaw crime. Ok, everybody, it's now illegal to steal. Next, when you enter the South Bend city limits, turn in all your money to the local officials. Finally, we will build a golden statue of Steve Luecke and everyone must bow down to it morning and evening.
Posted by: BruceMcAleer Location: Elkhart on Jun 10, 2008 at 08:26 AM
This would only prohibit law abiding citizens who have legally obtained a gun permit from carring concealed weopons in the park. It would not not stop criminals who obtain guns illegally from carrying them into the parks. If a criminal gets a weopon illegally and is intent on committing a crime he is going to go to places like the parks where law abiding citizens can't carry weopons to commit a crime because he would not have to worry about someone carring a legally concealled weopon to protect themselfs when the cops are not there to do it.
Posted by: Jim on Jun 10, 2008 at 07:02 AM
If a person has a state issued gun permit, it means they have a reason to carry it, and are legal. The folks you or any worker needs to fear are those who don't have a permit. They are lawbreakers and there isn't an ordinance that will make a difference to them anyway. It's not the people who go by the rules you have to worry about.
Posted by: Mike Location: Elkhart on Jun 10, 2008 at 04:27 AM
Todd and "get over it" are 2 of the stupidest people I have ever heard. Of course nothing has happened at the court house. You have to pass through a metal detector that is manned by the police. Mayor Luecke isn't very bright either. I would venture to say that 100% of the gang bangers do not have a permit to carry a gun but that doesn't stop them. Does he really think an ordinance will.
Posted by: Ken Location: Mishawaka on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:41 AM
SO MUCH FOR OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AGAIN
Posted by: LCB on Jun 10, 2008 at 03:18 AM
Guys! I got an idea! Let's make using a gun in a hostile fashion illegal! Then there will be no more gun crimes! Oh wait... we already have that now...
Posted by: SBPD on Jun 10, 2008 at 01:44 AM
I am a SBPD officer and this ordinance will be ridiculous and not able to be enforced. It is a waste of manpower. What scares me is how some on here have no problems giving away MY Second Amendment rights because they don't like guns. More honest people carry firearms legally with no one ever knowing. This is a total waste of time by the administration. Maybe Leucke needs to pressure judges to do their jobs and lock thugs up instead of be a revolving door!
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:52 AM
Here is an article for the people who support this ordinance..... www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55288.
Posted by: m4 on Jun 10, 2008 at 12:13 AM
join or form a militia unit. prepare to resist nonsense like this. if you dont like this wait till president hussein does away with conceal carry all together and we get another assault weapon ban. im pretty sure our forefathers knew that one day the government would turn on us and thats why they wanted us armed to the teeth. this government on all levels has been hijacked. and with hijackers you either give them exactly what they want or you take them out. btw july 4th is national open carry day. everyone do your part to scare some liberal democrats.
Posted by: Buford Location: The Hollow on Jun 9, 2008 at 11:39 PM
The article states that guns are banned on city-owned property. I guess most people think they don't own their own property. They must be the same people who support the Democrat/Republican party.
Posted by: Michael on Jun 9, 2008 at 11:32 PM
Typical posturing and complaining. I doubt very much the parks department needs to deal with many people coming in under duress. At the same time, have those of you whining about your rights bothered to contact your council representative? It's up to the citizens of this country to dictate to our representatives what we want. If we don't do that, we lose. Contact your councilman. Vote your conscience in November. The political power of the American people is absolute. It's the most powerful weapon we can brandish. Demand your liberty, or hand it over and quit complaining.
Posted by: Aaron Location: Michiana on Jun 9, 2008 at 10:59 PM
Good Job all South Bend Citizens keep electing this man into office and the same dirty liberals and this what you will get!! You all can complain all you want but if you think this is bad wait and see what happens when the most liberal senator in the country gets elected Obama!! Keep electing this stupid idoitic liberals into office and this is what you will get!!
Posted by: Anonymous on Jun 9, 2008 at 10:52 PM
yay I'll be protected on city property because if someone wants to shoot other people they wouldn't DARE break the law to do it.
Posted by: eric Location: south bend on Jun 9, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Since we will all be defenseless will SBPD be patrolling the parks?
Posted by: Anonymous Location: SB on Jun 9, 2008 at 10:07 PM
Ordinance banning guns ha ha...Next will be Matches....
Posted by: Dwayne Location: Leesburg on Jun 9, 2008 at 09:55 PM
1 More reason I refuse to go to South Bend!
Posted by: John Location: Indiana on Jun 9, 2008 at 09:45 PM
Marshall Dillion will collect all guns at the city limits. I thought the old west was gone, but seems So. Bend is trying to renew the old days. Gun permits are given to honest citzens, it is the ones without permits you have to watch. Oh! They are ones that are shooting everybody on your streets. Maybe we should ban them on city streets too?
Posted by: Frank Location: Niles on Jun 9, 2008 at 09:22 PM
I'm pretty sure this is illegal. A city ordinance CANNOT overide a state issued permit. This very issue is currently being decided by the Supreme Court on D.C.'s 30 year FAILED gun ban. If the city was really concerned about the safety of their employees, they would encourage them to carry firearms. Criminals are much more hesitant when they don't know who's armed! Take a look at gun density vs. crime rates in any part of our country. Where the gun to person ratio is the highest, crime is the lowest and vice vera. Keep in mind that the first successful nation wide gun control measures were enacted in the mid 1930's..... in Germany. Think about that for a minute. I've already notified the NRA's legislative branch of this issue and I encourage all of South Bend's residents to call the mayor's office to voice your concern.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen Location: South Bend on Jun 9, 2008 at 09:21 PM
I cannot understand what logic is behind these anti-gun laws. Why do people think they can control the possession and use of guns? Has banning handguns helped Chicago reduce gun violence at all? If someone wants to shoot a city employee they won't care if the gun is banned, it is already illegal to shoot someone....
Posted by: Michael on Jun 9, 2008 at 09:12 PM
You whiners want your cake and to eat it too. First you whine "Oh, government, save me from da criminals and da terrierists" then you act surprised when it costs you some basic freedoms and rights. Well, you can't have it both ways. The constitution is just a piece of paper, you know, it doesn't deal with arabs flying airplanes into buildings or shooting up city hall. Real people have to deal with that, and if they know the good guys don't have guns it makes it a lot easier to control them. This is a long time coming, and it's for your own good. You can't even be trusted to decide who's president without sueing somebody, what makes you think you're qualified to carry firearms? Go to walmart and hand some more of our money over to china, it'll make you feel better as the whole thing crumbles down. In case I need to remind you, it's YOUR government. You own it. "We the People," remember? Take some responsibility, then, would you? Pathetic.
Posted by: Jared Location: Mishawaka on Jun 9, 2008 at 09:11 PM
This is absurd. Not only is a gun ban on city property a violation of our Bill of Rights, it is blatantly ineffective in reducing gun crime. If violent criminals with a gun are not worried about life in prison, what makes you think the threat of a $50 fine is going to stop them. To think this will reduce crime is preposterous. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. Nearly 1 in 15 Hoosier adults have gun permits, over 300,000 in total (source Indystar.com). Studies in Florida show adults with a permit are 300x less likely to commit crime than those who do not have a permit. In fact, gun crime among licensed gun permit holders is so low that in some studies it has been shown to be even lower than off duty police officers! The truth is the more law abiding citizens we have carrying guns for personal protection the safer our communities become. There is nothing a criminal fears more than the risk that a potential victim will use deadly force defending their life.
Posted by: Tony Location: michigan on Jun 9, 2008 at 08:57 PM
just a sign of things to come when we see a Democrat in the White House. Once again lets make the law abiding citizens become more vunerable to the criminal element. Oh wait I'm sure the criminals will abide by those signs.
Posted by: Anonymous Location: Osceola on Jun 9, 2008 at 08:27 PM
This would be a bad move! The criminals do not care about gun ordinances or any ordinance! This would be taking away rights of citizens to protect themselves from criminals or those wanting to cause harm just because they get their jollies from it! This just sounds like another ploy for the city of South Bend to rob more undeserving people of money in an unjustified manner!
Posted by: Get Over It on Jun 9, 2008 at 08:05 PM
Get over it people ... Seriously, how many government buildings allow weapons anymore? This is long over due. This isn't about taking away anyone's rights - it is about protecting all citizens! I'm sure there are many places you enter that you have no choice but to leave your weapon outside!
Posted by: Ferd on Jun 9, 2008 at 08:00 PM
This is the first step in disarming the law abiding citizens and turning the city over to the criminals. Luecke is nothing more than a stooge for Bloomberg of New York. The criminals are hearing about this ordinance and saying hooray, it's about time.. Open Season!
Posted by: Todd Location: South Bend on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:57 PM
Whats the big deal. Guns have been banned from the court houses for a long time now...that is one of the most volatile places in the county with criminals. Nothing has happened. Check your paranoia at the door with your gun.
Posted by: Glenn Location: Left SB - please turn the lights off when u leave on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:52 PM
JC Watts speech to the NRA: "If we lose our ability to teach our children individual self-restraint, public order can only be maintained by outside forces. In Washington last Sunday, we saw scores of thousands of Americans cry out for more laws. What they were really asking is for the government to protect us from ourselves." Is this an erosion of constitutional rights? Or a sad substitute for a raise for public employees?
Posted by: T Location: SB on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:46 PM
Mayor Luecke must be getting death threats constantly to have to try and resort to this. How silly and stupid.
Posted by: Ed Location: Goshen on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:28 PM
The Nazis are coming, the Nazis are coming. This is definitely a big step towards Communism. It has been proven time and time again that this only makes the citizens more vulnerable as criminals will still have their guns. They will not abide by this law either as the brake laws all the time; henceforth the name CRIMINALS, HELLO. Criminals are the problem here not the guns. I have never seen a gun jump up on a counter and rob the clerk without a CRIMINAL at the other end of it. South Bend is becoming East Berlin, first no smoking, now no guns even if you have the proper permit (which give you the RIGHT to carry it on public property except government buildings). By the way the streets are city property also so the next wave will be you can't have on in your car if it is on the street. So that will mean you can't transport it to go to hunting, target practice, or get it home from the store for your protection. Go ahead laugh but that day is just around the corner.
Posted by: Worried in SB Location: Crime city...SB on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:28 PM
Luecke,you boob. Now the only ones with guns will be your voters...you know the thugs. Welcome to Gary East....
Posted by: ARMED AND PROTECTED Location: anywhere but south bend from now on on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:21 PM
CRIMINALS DO NOT OBEY LAWS - LAW ABIDING CITIZENS BECOME VICTIMS OR CRIMINALS BECAUSE THEY REFUSE TO BE VICTIMS. They can use this for their sign: NO GUNS! ATTENTION CRIMINALS - This is a Defense Free Crime Zone. All citizens have been disarmed for your convenience.
Posted by: John Location: Elkhart on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:18 PM
I don't know what to say that has not beem said already. Why don't you just make it illegal to defend yourself any and every way possible. Someone really needs to rethink this one.
Posted by: lance Location: south bend on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:02 PM
Oh....this is not okay!!! Are you kidding me? The law abiding citizens that have gone through the screening process and have their CCW are not the people we read about in any horrific story where a gun is involved. Taking my right away to defend myself and my family from some nutjob is not something I'm comfortable with. Looks like South Bend is going down the path Chicago is and that is frightening to say the least. Lets let all the criminal element (who do not follow the law anyway, no matter how stiff the penalty or how many signs you put up) get their hands of guns and not let me defend myself if ever a situation demands it. An absolute shame. Shame on you elected officials for making the public less safe if you pass this.
Posted by: Norm Ferguson Location: SAt. Joseph, MI on Jun 9, 2008 at 07:01 PM
Someone in South Bend has a problem with reality. To think a criminal won't carry a gun on city property because there is an ordinance against it is ludicrous.
Posted by: American Patriot Location: Nazi Germany???? on Jun 9, 2008 at 06:51 PM
First of all if a person that is "under duress" isnt going to give two cents what a sign on a building says! Look back through the history of the firarm and you will see that EVERY society that has placed a ban on firearms have either been followed by GENOCIDE or a horrible increase in crime!

WNDU News Poll
There are currently no active polls at this time.
Click here to view other polls on our site and past poll results.
Most Popular Headlines