We're getting hit from so many sides at the same time it's difficult to fend off the blows Alameda County, California enacted an ordinance that stated a "gun store must be located at least 500 feet away from any residentially-zoned district, elementary, middle or high school, pre-school, day care center, another firearms retailer or an establishment where liquor is sold or served." When challenged in the courts, The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the plaintiffs (Teixeira, et al. v. County of Alameda) who had been barred from opening their establishment. The plaintiffs proved, through the use of Geographic Information System (GIS) that no parcel of land in the county could meet the ordinance's mandates. (http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/16/ninth-circuit-rules-in-favor-of-california-gun-store/) In addition to the obvious, my reason for bring this up is the need for our constant attention to proposed legislation, even within our communities. Zoning regulations that prevent porn shops and liquor stores from locating within a short walking distance from schools may be reasonable so the next step is to add a gun store to the list although in my opinion, the gun store offers the least danger of the three. Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure this ordinance was discussed at the council meeting and passes without any effort, after all, it doesn't sound unreasonably restrictive. Until....someone really looks into what the end result will be. In this case, it effectively restricted ANY gun store from locating within Alameda County. In writing the majority opinion, Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain equated the ordinance to our right to vote. If we have the right to vote but there are no voting machines, paper ballots, or other means of casting a vote, the right to vote itself beomes moot. There are endless demands on our time making it a near impossibility to monitor everything, and that is exactly what the gun control advocates are relying on.