This Ass. Press account buries the lead/lede, and in fact leaves it out altogether, so here’s the real story:

Last spring, Frisco strongman mayor Gavin Newsom claimed his city was exempt from Sections 300, 301 and 308.5 of the California Family Code, which mandate the traditional definition of marriage througout the state. In December, his junta City Council proposed a handgun ban, in blatant violation of California’s preemption law, Section 53071 of the California Government Code, not to mention that embarassing Second Amendment.

This spring, they toyed with the idea of exempting themselves from the First Amendment, as well as Article 1, Section 2 of the California Cosntitution, by regulating blogs, though on this rare occasion, they ultimately backed down. Now, less than a month later, they’re moving on to yet another target: pit bulls.

“We have to be realistic,” Newsom said. “You’ve got dogs that literally can kill. We’ve seen it demonstrated. If we can’t change people’s behavior and make them think what’s in their best interest, then that’s when government comes along and becomes a bit paternalistic.”
[Emphasis added.]

Translation: sit down and shut up. We know what’s best for you. If our paternalistic policies don’t work, then gee, we may have to start acting paternalistic.

He said “having a pit bull … and three kids is not acceptable because we’re not going to deal with the consequences of losing a life.” Nicholas Faibish was one of three children.

Newsom should know, family man that he is. Seeing as his city has already declared itself exempted from state government, maybe he should try exempting himself from FCC regulations as well and have Our Gang taken off the air. It’s one thing to make a horror movie or two about pit bulls, and quite another to pump everyone up with propaganda about how cute and friendly they are. If allowing a few kids to be around a pit bull in a private home is “unacceptable,” then surely allowing even more kids to play with one on a TV show designed for kids is far worse. How many Frisco kids have to say “Mommy, Mommy, can we get a doggy like Petey?” before Mayor Abovethelaw will take much-needed action?

Newsom said he has no specific proposal as of yet, but that a decision on legislative action would likely be made within a week.

Translation: Either Newsom is so legally in the dark that he does not know Section 31683 of the Food and Agricultural Code prohibits local governments from regulating potentially dangerous dogs ” in a manner that is specific as to breed,” or more likely, he simply doesn’t care. The Frisco Chronicle version of the story makes it clear that he does indeed know about the law, which he conveniently interprets merely to prohibit breed bans. Apparently, if you’re Frisco, “regulate” doesn’t mean “regulate” it has to mean something else.

It’s high time to cut this pathetic little city loose. Let them exist either as a sovereign nation, North America’s answer to Liechtenstein if you will, or as a territory of the United States governed directly by Congress. California can’t afford these jerks anymore. I’ll even throw the Friscan order a bone here: once the deal is finalized and Frisco is no longer part of the same state as Orange County, San Diego County, the Central Valley or the Inland Empire, I promise to stop calling it “Frisco.” Deal?