Sign up for Express
New from the Almanac, Express is an e-edition delivered via email each weekday.
Sign up to receive Express!
Login | Register
Sign up for eBulletins
Click for Menlo Park, California Forecast
Almanac News
Increase font Increase font
Decrease font Decrease font
Adjust text size

Portola Valley may restrict pellet gun use  

Bookmark and Share
Pellet gun restrictions may be coming to Portola Valley in the aftermath of the Aug. 30 shooting death of a pet cat.

The Town Council, at its 8 p.m. Wednesday, Oct. 22, meeting, is scheduled to discuss an amendment to the firearms ordinance proposed by Mayor Maryann Moise Derwin.

The amendment could add language classifying pellet guns in the same category as more lethal firearms and limiting them to uses such as self defense, authorized hunting, and target practice at "properly constructed" firing ranges.

The amendment is Ms. Derwin's response to the death of Singh Singh, a male Bengal cat wearing a "bright blue collar" that had been a pet in the household of Maryann Raab of Cresta Vista Lane.

The cat died of respiratory failure due to complications associated with the trauma of a single pellet shot, Dr. Bill St. Lawrence of Portola Valley Veterinary Clinic said at the time. The pellet punctured the cat's intestine, its diaphragm and its colon.

Deputies from the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office assigned a case number to the incident, but have not reported progress in solving it.


Other topics
The council meets in the Historic Schoolhouse at 765 Portola Road. The pellet gun discussion follows a presentation by AT&T spokesman Randy Okamura about the first phase of new telecommunication services in town.

The council is also set to discuss and may act on a policy regulating the use of the new community hall for class reunions.

Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.


Comments

Posted by Jesse, a resident of the Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2008 at 1:24 pm

So some heartless idiot shoots a pet and the response is to punish everyone for the crime? Would such an ordinance deter a miscreant from harming animals? I think that greatly increasing the penalty for cruelty to animals would be a much more effective response than banning pellet guns. That would cover harming or killing innocent pets by any means, not only pellet guns.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.
Add a Comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration! Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff
 
We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *
Select your Neighborhood or School Community: * Not sure?
Comment: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box. *
Verification Code:   
 

AlmanacNews.com   ©2013 Embarcadero Media.
All rights reserved.