Washington Post Editorial: Reduce the Noise
The Washington Post today called on the District of Columbia City Council to protect citizens from amplified noise and fix the city's broken noise law.
The editorial said "a proposal to shield D.C. residents from noxious noise is a sensible measure that, contrary to specious reasoning by opponents, has nothing to do with freedom of speech or assembly."
The Post editorial said some groups consider "cacophony to be a favorite weapon," but said D.C. city council members should be responding to "the thousands of residents who are disturbed in their homes."
"Not only is it more liberal than noise ordinances in other cities, it strikes a careful balance between the rights of residents to quiet and the rights of others to make noise in public," wrote the Post.
Read the complete Washington Post editorial here.
The editorial said "a proposal to shield D.C. residents from noxious noise is a sensible measure that, contrary to specious reasoning by opponents, has nothing to do with freedom of speech or assembly."
The Post editorial said some groups consider "cacophony to be a favorite weapon," but said D.C. city council members should be responding to "the thousands of residents who are disturbed in their homes."
"Not only is it more liberal than noise ordinances in other cities, it strikes a careful balance between the rights of residents to quiet and the rights of others to make noise in public," wrote the Post.
Read the complete Washington Post editorial here.
posted by Klav at 9:08 AM
2 Comments:
Great Blog! I support your efforts.
Ben
www.dcrowhouse.blogspot.com
On Sunday, I sent a letter to members of the D.C. Council urging them to reconsider and enact the noise protection bill.
Residents across this city deserve the opportunity to have reasonable peace and quiet in their own homes. This is a basic quality of life issue, where common sense and constitutionality can both be accommodated by an appropriate, overdue change in DC law.
My opponent, Council Member Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), moved to table this legislation of substantial importance to residents, and led a close vote that effectively killed the bill.
As a Council Member, I'll put neighborhoods first. Evans' vote on the noise bill is yet another example of putting special interests before the needs of District resident.
While Evans has cited constitutional concerns as the reason for his vote, a primary sponsor of the bill, Mary Cheh, a constitutional law professor, as well as the DC Attorney General's Office, has found that the proposal reasonably balances the rights of residents to the peace and enjoyment of their homes with First Amendment rights.
With your support, we'll get the noise bill enacted. And you will have an opportunity to send their own loud message in the September primary.
You can read my letter here: http://caryforcouncil.org/campaign/media/blogs/leadership/NoiseControlLetter.pdf.
I have also discussed the noise bill on my blog: http://caryforcouncil.org/campaign/index.php?blog=9
Post a Comment
<< Home