Jump to content

‘You must own a gun’: Georgia town passes mandatory firearms law


Casper
 Share

Recommended Posts

How do you folks feel about Obama's requirement for mandatory health insurance compared to this? Both are wrong, for the same reasons.

I agree I think it should be the peoples choice,but I like the statement they are making to protect our rights to bear arms.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you folks feel about Obama's requirement for mandatory health insurance compared to this? Both are wrong, for the same reasons.

The article did say that there were plenty of loopholes for those who don't want to own a gun. My only thing is the timing of this gun prices are way too high and several guns are hard to find new. I've quit asking about certain guns at gun shops because its always the same answer "we have no clue when we will get any of those in. Our waiting list is soo long for that gun that we quit taking names."

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the government telling me i HAVE to do anything, whether its something I like or don't like pisses me off

This/\.... Obama's health care kinda forces insurance companies to keep their pricing in check. Small business or companies passing on the majority of healthcare expenses to employees will have the biggest issues but they can shop around and get better pricing.

This gun thing is pr stunt. I don't like it either, kinda like homeowners associations saying u can't have a fridgerator on your porch.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you folks feel about Obama's requirement for mandatory health insurance compared to this? Both are wrong, for the same reasons.
Jarrett emphasized that the law grants liberal loopholes for those who do not wish to follow the new legal code.
In addition to people who are mentally or physically handicapped, an exception to the law is given to “paupers or [those] who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine,” he noted.
Admitting that the legislation is largely symbolic, Councilman Duane Cronic, who introduced the measure last month, said the law will serve as an effective deterrent to crime, comparing it to homes that warn of a security system on the premise, even when there may be none.

“This is like a big security sign for our city,” Cronic said.

Just throwing that out there.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you folks feel about Obama's requirement for mandatory health insurance compared to this? Both are wrong, for the same reasons.

In addition to people who are mentally or physically handicapped, an exception to the law is given to “paupers or [those] who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine,” he noted.

If Obamacare had the same loophole, I and many others would not oppose it.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jarrett emphasized that the law grants liberal loopholes for those who do not wish to follow the new legal code.

then what's the point of even having the law, other than just being symbolic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better get used to it. The Man has much more "Change" in store for us, whether we want it or not.

All too afraid your'e right.

That said, not a fan of being forced to own a gun, for the same reason I don't like Obamacare. I like the support, but was against this when I read it a month or so ago when it was "in the works".

This space intentionally left blank to avoid offending anyone

2012

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just throwing that out there.

So you're OK with a city ordinance that compels you to do something, even though the language of the ordinance has loopholes you can fit small planets through, thereby making it completely irrelevant? How do you enforce something like this? Or was this just a bunch of people wasting time in passing completely worthless and probably unconstitutional legislation?

The stated rationale was to "put a security sign on the front of the village". This was because they don't have enough people to have an incorporated police force. Instead of getting a incorporated police force, or at least spending a little coin and equipping some competent and properly vetted volunteers, they go the easy/free route and just mandate that everyone carry a gun. Liability is off the city, they don't have to spend any money, and think they got something done.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia

In 2007, the city was selected by Family Circle magazine as one of the nation's "10 best towns for families".[3] The city is perhaps best known nationally for its mandatory gun-possession ordinance.[4]

As to tonik's comment, there is a big difference between a city passing an ordinance like this and obama care. If you don't like the city ordinance, you can escape it by moving to another city.

I'm not supporting it or opposing it as it doesn't affect me. Unconstitutional? I've never read Georgia's constitution, so I can't answer that one. Kennesaw has had the law.

en.m.wikipedia.org

www.kennesaw-ga.gov/component/fsf/?view=faq&catid=12&faqid=109&Itemid=282

Frequently Asked Question

Does Kennesaw have a law requiring every household to own a firearm?

Yes, an ordinance was passed in 1982 requiring every head of household to maintain a firearm and ammunition. It was passed as a response to a law in Morton Grove, Illinois which banned guns within their city limits. In 1982, Kennesaw was a rural community, population 5,000, who were passionate supporters of safeguarding the Constitutional rights of citizens. Although the ordinance required owning a firearm, it essentially exempted anyone didn't want to because of their beliefs. The Kennesaw of today is a progressive community of 30,000. The law is still on the books, but it has never been enforced and many current residents are probably unaware of it.

Although the crime rate in Kennesaw was said to have dropped after the ordinance passed, there are no records maintained from that time and there is is no statistical proof to attribute the law as the cause. However, the city's crime rate continues to be among the lowest in the state and is the lowest in Cobb County.

Edited by crb
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The newspaper should run an article with a map showing the homeowners that "opted out" of the law, just like they did showing carry permit holders addresses...

I mean, fair is fair, right?

:popcorn:

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...