PROHIBITING THE DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS.
Sec. 9. Whoever shall, within this city, discharge any firearms, except by the permission of the mayor or when mustered for drill or review, or otherwise acting under the command or by permission of some commissioned officer, or except when done in self defense, or for the protection of gardens from destructive animals, or by an officer of the law in discharge of his duty, shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars.
[Anadarko Daily Democrat, Anadarko, Oklahoma, November 8, 1901. Volume 1. Number 52. Pg. 1]
Section 22, of City Ordinance No. 2, as amended, reads as follows:
That it shall be unlawful for any person or persons in the City of Prescott, to explode any blast or use powder or other explosive for the purpose of blasting without a permit from the mayor, in writing, under a penalty of not more than fifty dollars for each and every offense. And it shall not be lawful for any person or persons within the City of Prescott, to discharge any firearms of any kind or description, or any fire works of any kind, character or description, without first obtaining written permit from the mayor, specifying the time and place during which and where such firing may take place, under a penalty of not more than twenty-five dollars for each and every such offense.
Nothing in this section shall be construed so as to prohibit any person or persons from shooting destructive animals within or upon his, her or their enclosure, or from giving a fire alarm by the disharge of firearms.
The above is published for the information and guidance of the public generally.
Dennis A. Burke,
[Weekly Arizona Journal-Miner, Prescott, Arizona, June 29, 1904. Forty-First Year Pg. 1]
Sec. 6.–If any person be guilty of discharging any fire-arms within the town of Hazel Green, Ky., at random, or in the direction of any person or property, or across the streets or at a target, unless it be in defense of one’s self, family or property, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and be fined in any sum not less than $1.00, nor more than $20.00 for each offense.
[The Hazel Green Herald, Hazel Green, Wolfe County, Kentucky, Thursday, September 29, 1904. Twentieth Year. Number 9. Pg. 2]
FIREARMS FOR MINORS.
S. 139–Preventing sale of firearms to minors under 15.
An amendment proposed by the general committee allowing parents or guardians to provide such arms to minors under 15 was opposed by Mr. Blanchard of Newport Mr. Hilliard of Cabot. Mr. Pish of Ira opposed the amendment, as virtually nullifying the bill, and endangering others than those under control of parents who furnish the arms.
Mr. Taft of Waltham, Mr. Miles of Barton and Mr. Patten of Wet Rutland favored the amendment, believing it proper for parents to exercise discretion in the matter, and that boys should become accustomed to the use of firearms.
The amendment was agreed to and the bill ordered to third reading.
[Burlington Weekly Free Press, Burlington, Vt., Thursday, December 8, 1904. Vol. LXXIX. New Series Vol. LI. Number 23 Pg. 8]
Sec 32. “What shall be specified on tax list . . . Farming utensils, tools of mechanics, household and kitchen furniture, provisions, fire-arms, libraries and scientific instruments.
[Public Laws and Resolutions of the State of North Carolina, 1905.]
. . . The bill provides that the right to carry arms or exercise police power shall not be granted to persons without six months residence in the state.
[The betrayal by California Assemblyman Delvin, of Vallejo, [Ca.] Jan. 23, 1907.]
Cheap Guns for the People.
The army appropriation bill was being considered. The clerk of the House of Representatives read in his silver drone; “Sales of ordnance store are authorized to civilian employees under such regulations,” &c.
What kind of stores asked Mr. DRIBCOLL of New York. Mr HULL, the Iowa martialist, explained that revolvers, rifles, any ordnance stores could be sold to “teamsters and to those who may have to defend themselves.” Civilians all to whom the Government doesn’t issue arms. Originally, Mr. HULL said, the provision included members of Congress but it was decided that they “had better buy from private individuals than the Government.” [Laughter] Doubtless there was much to laugh at, though the reader’s risibles be unwrung.
Now our soon to be parted with friend Dr. JOHN WESLEY GAINES came forward as usual. He wanted to amend so that the Secretary of War shall furnish members of Congress thirty days before the sale with a list of the stuff to be sold. This so-called “junk,” he was informed, was often valuable for private use and ornament. He wanted to give the people a chance to buy guns pistols and so on. JOHN WESLEYS people are either very warlike or very fond of adornment or both:
“I want a list of things to be sold sent to members, delegates and Senators so that they can give the list to the newspapers in their neighborhood. They will publish it, and the people in every part of the United States, in every district, can send and buy cannon or guns or pistols or the things to be sold; and the gentleman knows that all of these implements of war are very much sought after, both for the use of private and for ornamenting the corners of our streets and as relics.
“Mr. DRISCOLL–They get the cannon for nothing now, for ornamental purposes.
“Mr. GAINES of Tennessee–I had a great deal of trouble in getting two, and the gentleman helped me to get both of them, but the law has been recently changed, and it is easier to get them now.”
We trust Dr. GAINES implicitly. May he have as many cannon in front of his house, as many condemned horses in his stables and as many guns and pistols on his walls or his person as they can carry. But aren’t the people tolerably stocked with firearms at present? Isn’t the crop of winter killings ample enough? “Does the gentleman,” asked Mr. MANN of Illinois, “think it more important to make it easy for the people to buy firearms than it is to buy blankets, boots and shoes?” Of course not. Mr. MANN wasn’t going to give people a chance to buy condemned guns or anything of that kind to carry around for the purpose of raising Cain.”
Dr. GAINES subsided But why does he want guns and pistols? Can they add anything to his noises? And why do his people want them? Is he not a ample blockhouse, palisade and set of patereros?
[The Sun, New York, Friday, February 5, 1909. Vol. LXXVI.–No. 158. Pg. 6]
RIFLE CLUB OF THE PHOENIX HIGH SCHOOL
Organization Encouraged By National Guard
Students Will Meet Thursday Evening With
Company B to Take Definite Action.
Plans for the organization of a rifle club to be composed of students of the Phoenix high school may be consummated Thursday evening. All the high school boys who are interested in the proposed club have been invited to meet on that evening with company B, N.G.A., in its armory at the city hall.
Captain Earl W. Hill of Company B started the movement for a rifle club at the high school. He has talked over the matter with a number of the students and is certain that there will be no trouble in obtaining enough members to take advantage of the government’s offer to supply high school rifle clubs with guns, ammunition and other equipment. The senior students seem to be particularly enthusiastic.
One of the laws recently passed by congress provides that any high school may organize a rifle team of not less than twenty members and be equipped at government expense. Such clubs are supplied with Krag Jorgenson rifles of the type used by the regular army and the national guard before the new Springfields were issued. It is also provided that the school boys shall have the privilege of using any national guard rifle range in their vicinity.
This law was passed in conformity with the general sentiment prevailing throughout the country that the boys and young men of America should be taught the use of firearms, that they may be better equipped to fight for their country in time of need. During the last few years rifle practice has been taken up by the regular army, national guard, navy and private citizens with a zest and ardor never before approached. Rifle and gun clubs have been formed all over the country.
Army and’ national guard officers were mainly responsible for the passage of the bill to promote rifle practice among high school students. Schools all over the country are taking advantage of it. The Tucson high school is now organizing a club and Captain Hill believes that it is time the Phoenix students did so. The guns and other equipment can be had for the asking and there is no reason why they should not be secured and used. Captain Hill and other national guard officers will coach and assist the club in every way.
The club will work in harmony with the national guardsmen, using their range east of the city. It is hoped that later on the club will supply some valuable material for the national guard companies. Those who have had rifle practice are worth much more in the national guard than one who knows nothing about a gun.
Company B will turn out in force Thursday evening, which is its regular drill night, and give the high school boys a good time and encourage them in their ambition to learn how to shoot a rifle.
[The Arizona Republican, Thursday Morning, December 01, 1910. SECTION TWO, Vol. XXI. No. 193. Pg. 6]
LOST IN HOUSE
Measure Requiring Permit
to Buy Revolvers, Etc.
Defeated 104 to 76
License Fee of $1 and Leaving
of Homes Unprotected
By a Staff Correspondent
Harrisburg, Feb. 25.–Country members of the House defeated decisively the Neary bill to require purchasers of and persons having in their possession small firearms to obtain a permit from the sheriff of the county in which they reside.
The rural members took violent exception to the clause in the bill which requires an annual license fee of one dollar. A similar fate is predicted for the Daix Senate bill which would require a permit fro the police authorities.
Philadelphia’s present crimes were given as ample reasons why the bill should be passed when the measure was called up for final action by Representative Daniel J. Neary, last night. Representative Baldridge, of Allegheny opened the attack on the bill.
Mr. Baldridge declared the bill was “put in under the guise of depriving crooks and criminals from having weapons, but would make every decent citizen who failed to get a license a criminal.” Baldridge spoke feelingly of the people who would have to part with heirlooms in the way of old weapons.
[Evening Public Ledger, Philadelphia, Tuesday, February 25, 1919. Vol. V.–No. 140 Pg. 2]