< Return to MilitaryGear.com

Oak Harbor City Councilman Afraid of Vet’s Concealed Handgun

Gun Rights  January 22 2013
 — By CJ Grisham
Oak Harbor City Councilman Afraid of Vet’s Concealed Handgun

I have to share this. The city of Oak Harbor in Washington State recently held a city council meeting. During that meeting, an Afghanistan veteran, Lucas Yonkman, approached the podium to deliver some thoughts to the council about adhering to the 2A.

After the Army veteran was finished delivering his comments in which he made a statement of always being armed, city councilman Richard D. Almberg asked if the man was armed in the chambers. Answering in the affirmative, Almberg then attempted to pass a motion that anyone with a firearm be required to check their weapon with the Chief of Police or leave the chambers. The motion failed with only two members voting in favor of it. Almberg then dismissed himself and left the meeting.

Almberg is a proponent of strict gun control measures. Instead of taking an opportunity to make his position known and respect others’ rights to self defense, Almberg took the cowards way out. By leaving, he gave the impression as an elected official that people are to fear those legally able to carry firearms. Regardless of what Almberg thinks about guns, he has a duty to ensure and protect citizens’ rights.

I commend Oak Harbor Mayor Scott Dudley for the way he handled the meeting after Almberg and a handful of his zombies left the chambers. Dudley was absolutely right about taking that oath to support and defend the Constitution. Too often, we see city councils (and presidents) taking this oath but not living up to it. If I could shake his hand in person, I would. He is a great American.

Please watch this entire video. If you’d like to contact either Council Member Almberg or Mayor Dudley, they’re contact information is below the video.

You can contact the City of Oak Harbor Council at (360) 279-4500. You can email Councilman Rick Almberg at ralmberg@oakharbor.org and Mayor Scott Dudley at 360-279-4502 (office) or email mayor@oakharbor.org.

(8) Readers Comments

  1. I just want to say that I am very pleased with Major Scott Dudly’s handling of that situation. He acted very professionally, even to the point of showing and reading his oath as a major and/or council member. This man is the perfect example of what EVERY elected official all over the country should do, and the professional manner in which they should act. They take an oath to UPHOLD the law…not to re-write it. If every elected official…especially the president…would actually do their job and uphold their oath of office as this major did, this country would not be in the condition of dis-repair that it is in today.

    • I agree that Councilman Almberg’s handling of the situation was unprofessional and careless. He abandoned his job and ignored the decision of the majority which is how this country is suppose to be governed. You are correct he has a duty to ensure and protect citizens’ rights.
      On that note the last statistics I read stated that more than 55% of US citizens want tougher gun control restrictions implemented. Is government suppose to ignore that majority and align with the minority who desires less?
      We can’t select the times we want to adhere to the basic principles that governs our country. It isn’t optional what rights are protected. I contend that both the rights of gun owners and those in favor of stricter laws should be respected. And certainly the 1st Amendment should be protected.
      I am a military member who owns a personal fire arm and there are places I don’t take my side arm nor do I desire that others run around armed. I know for sure I can’t go downtown to the court house with a weapon in my possession. The Councilman didn’t desire to have an armed person in the meeting as I have personally seen those gatherings become hostile, the majority disagreed, and the rule remained unchanged. That Congressman is wrong for departing the meeting but as an Americans he is entitles to have and state his opinions.
      I don’t believe base on your article he had anything against the military vet. There have been stories in the news of service members who shot and killed innocent people too both domestically and in the AOR. This Councilman is not fond of guns in this gathering and I think it is simply that. There are law abiding citizens who owns guns that are in favor of stricter gun controls policies/laws or statues. Does a private citizen need an AK47 for self defense or a 20 round magazine? Should guns be sold without and limitation on who can purchase them and should they have to be registered? Guns in the wrong hands are dangerous, why at not at minimum attempt to better govern their distribution. One needs a license to fish in most states but not to own a gun. I find that interesting. Again the 1st Amendment at work and as citizens we should respect that right too.
      You mentioned Zombies; I always thought those weren’t real. Dude if there were Zombies in that meeting I guess gun control wasn’t the biggest issue. Name calling is juvenile.

      • “Is government suppose to ignore that majority and align with the minority who desires less?” Yes, if the majority opinion is contrary to the Constitution. If the majority wants to change the Constitution, then that’s another issue.

        “There are law abiding citizens who owns guns that are in favor of stricter gun controls policies/laws or statues.” Good. Let those gun owners restrict their own purchases if they don’t want to buy certain types of firearms.

        “Does a private citizen need an AK47 for self defense or a 20 round magazine?” Does a private citizen need a car that is capable of driving 160 mph if the fastest anyone can drive in this country is 85 mph? The Constitution doesn’t defer to needs-based rights. If we go down that road, the government call also decide if citizens NEED the ability to question government. What exactly is the standard for defending my home? Who is to say how I defend it? The purpose of self-defense weapons is to eliminate the threat to person or property. Am I only allowed to use a .22? A .380 round? I mean, who is the arbiter of what I’m supposed to defend my home with? My simple answer to your question would be, “YES!” Our military is well-armed and subordinate to civilian populace. The private citizen should have the means to defend against that if at some point in the future they are used against the people.

        “Should guns be sold without and[sic] limitation on who can purchase them and should they have to be registered?” Yes. No weapon should have to be registered. Hitler used his forced registrations to disarm people. Likewise, the Louisiana government did the same during Katrina.

        “Guns in the wrong hands are dangerous.” Knives in the wrong hands are dangerous. Cars in the wrong hands are dangerous. Rope in the wrong hands is dangerous. Alcohol in the wrong hands is dangerous. Baseball bats in the wrong hands is dangerous. There were no guns around when Cain killed Abel.

        “why at not at minimum attempt to better govern their distribution.” Because this won’t prevent criminals from getting their hands on them. It will only prevent law-abiding citizens from having access to defend against those criminals.

        “One needs a license to fish in most states but not to own a gun.” That’s a state issue, not a federal one. There is no mention of fish in the Constitution.

  2. Rick Almberg is BOUGHT, that is clear, as are the bought cowards that walked out with him…..each one of them should be fired! It is people like this that are wrong with America, they are CLERLY non-American, and have NO business serving the AMERICAN PEOPLE, yes Almberg, “SERVING”, as in serving the people, that is all we require from you and nothing more, we pay you, we own you, not the other way around! If you have chosen to be a bought coward by the psychotic elite, that is your problem, but think about this, IF these psycho’s were able to pull off what many of us know these terrorist’s are trying to do, do you really believe that they will need another FAT, OLD, LYING, IMMORAL, UNETHICAL politician…..lol…….NO, so guess what, if we go down, you my BOUGHTt cowardly freak, will also go down! You are at the bottom of the food chain and haven’t a clue, you are a bottom feeder, and when they are done with you, you will be belly up floating on the waters surface with a hook in your mouth….lol, and this goes for ALL of you BOUGHT cowardly politicians who OBVIOULSY SOLD THEIR SOUL! I just wish each of you could see how transparent you are when you STOMP on the constitution…….WE THE PEOPE CAN SEE right through you because you no longer have a soul you pathetic pieces of satan’s feces!

  3. Almberg SUCKS. Dudley sets an example for all to ascribe to when serving the public.

  4. Pingback: Citizens bear arms at Oak Harbor City Council

  5. Pingback: ASP Welcomes New Writer, Lucas Yonkman | A Soldier's Perspective

  6. The bad news? Dudley is gone and Almberg is still in office……. It should have been the other way around…..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>