Originally Posted by
Dythbringer
M_P,
I was at the meeting as well. I agree with your first two points. There was a lot of interruptions and shouting down of both the councilors and the bylaw officer which was at minimum rude. Trying to get your point across in this manner is counter-productive as people have a tendency to tune out what you are saying.
One thing which really concerns me is the ambiguity of this meeting. I was speaking to a few people who attended the Binbrook meeting. They said they were told which incident sparked this and they were allowed an open discourse with the city. They said the councilor who attended was well informed about this (Pasuta and Ferguson claimed they found out about this meeting that day which I find hard to believe as I had found out about it two weeks ago). It was also stated this meeting was piggy backed on Ferguson's other meeting so who booked the room first the bylaw officer for the information meeting or Councilor Ferguson and if it was the city (as indicated to me two weeks ago both in an email format from the city and this thread), why did we have to clear to room so quickly (the information meeting lasted an hour or so) so Ferguson could have his meeting?
I have to say the bylaw officer was not really well spoken. He fumbled through his presentation and I can attribute that to not speaking well in public but fumbling through talking points and mixing up who he has spoken to (there is no MNR anymore or the Ontario Federal Hunting Association) speaks of being unprepared. Coupled with the fact he admitted neither he nor anyone else from city staff had gone out to the areas they are proposing change is nothing short of irresponsible.
Lastly, the change from firearm and bow discharge distinction to weapon discharge. Total ambiguity. Right now the bylaw has a bow only in an area in Stoney Creek with rough boundaries of Ridge Road, First Road East, Regional Road #20/Rymal Road & East Town Line Road. Under the proposed changes from firearm and bow discharge to weapon discharge, that entire area disappears for bow hunters/archery practicitioners. Actually anything which can be deemed a weapon (a weapon is any device used with intent to inflict damage or harm to living beings, structures, or systems) so a paintball marker or air rifle would be classed under this distinction.
I have much apprehension about these changes as the City of Hamilton has not been a friend to hunters in the past. The City has been approached twice about sunday gun hunting and refused, the mayor has publically stated he wants to ban guns in Hamilton and has stated he can't think of any reason anyone in the city would need a gun, we have areas in "city" (Flamborough) which allows gun hunting but not target shooting and believe it or not, a police over-reaction to a man with a paintball gun at the Limeridge Mall, the city has tried to do similar things in the past (I was talking to 3blackdogs at the meeting and about 10 years ago they tried to do something similar and "told" the public about the meetings by putting a very small notice in a local newspaper with very limited readership) and from what I have been told they had enacted a hunting ban about 20 years ago and had to about face because of the massive backlash from hunters. History has shown the city doesn't treat hunters/shooters well and I think a lot of people are tired of it.
Dyth
