SUPPORT THIS INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM
The article you’re about to read is from our reporters doing their important work — investigating, researching, and writing their stories. We want to provide informative and inspirational stories that connect you to the people, issues and opportunities within our community. Journalism requires lots of resources. Today, our business model has been interrupted by the pandemic; the vast majority of our advertisers’ businesses have been impacted. That’s why the SC Times is now turning to you for financial support. Learn more about our new Insider’s program here. Thank you.
FIONA CARROLL, San Clemente
There is an agenda item that has been added, removed, and added again to be considered by the city council at the May 18 meeting.
It is a purely symbolic and political statement that two councilmembers, Gene James and Steven Knoblock, are proposing to send a message to Sacramento regarding gun ownership rights.
They want to declare San Clemente a Second Amendment sanctuary city. This is a highly controversial and divisive issue that will meet opposition with residents. The city has already received overwhelming mail against it.
It is extremely inappropriate that this is being added as an agenda item. The residents of San Clemente should decide through the voting process whether they want to be labeled as a city that opposes California’s current gun laws.
If these two councilmembers want to express their opposition, they should not use their position of power in city government to create controversy and get publicity. This is not the kind of publicity San Clemente needs.
We don’t want to have protesters in the streets of San Clemente showing support for and against California’s gun laws. If they don’t like the laws, they can try to change them instead of asking the city to ignore them.
Their focus should be on solving the city’s problems, not creating more. If they continue to push this agenda item, they should be voted out of office.