imported post
Hopefully, one day Georgia will join the other 31 States in this country that allow for the unconcealed carry of a Pistol without any type of License.
Additionally, Georgia should do away with the antiquated 140 year old public gathering law that still haunts Georgians to this day.
No other State in country, with the exception of North Dakota, regulates carrying Firearms in any manner similiar to Georgia. If you do not believe me then look at the Laws on the books in North Dakota thourgh their State Legislature website. Oddly, North Dakota is the only other State with a public gatherings law, it is unbelieveable!
Ask the Georgia General Assembly when they reconviene next year to repeal Georgia State Laws 16-11-127, 16-11-127.1, 16-11-127.2, and 16-11-128. Also, ask them to further repeal 38-3-51(d)(8), 27-4-11.1(a)(1), 27-4-11.1(a)(2), and 21-2-413(i). It is a Federal defense already, under 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2)(B)(ii), to have a State permit for school zones in the State where you have the permit, BUT GEORGIA IN ALL OF ITS INFINITE WISDOM... does not incoporate thatas a defense. However, I never expected it to. Since when is having a permit good for anything else in any criminal action on any of the above code sections other than 16-11-128? Now I am not advocating getting rid of our Georgia Firearms Licenses, but some things need to change here too. NAMELY... 16-11-129,er, the whole thing. In my opinion most of thatEXTREMELY RACISITLAW stinks... and it needs to go. ANYONE UP FOR A LITTLE ALASKA OR VERMONT STYLE CARRY WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS!!!!! IN GEORGIA I BELIEVE THAT WE ONLY NEED A PERMIT FOR INTERSTATE RECIPROCITY ONLY, NOTHING ELSE. PLEASE DO NOT GET ME STRATED ON 18 U.S.C. 922 AT ALL. SOMEONE NEEDS TO REMIND CONGRESS, AS TENNESSE AND MONTANA HAVE, ABOUT STATES RIGHTS AND STATE PREEMPTION ON MATTERS THAT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOES NOT GRANT TO CONGRESS. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER AMENDMENTS 9 AND 10, OR IS IT JUST ME?
Also, of further interest, it would be nessecary to repeal 16-11-34.1(b)and the insurance code 33-24-30.1 should be amended to provide that an insuror should not even ask to Firearms, or Weapons ownership, and coverage can not be denied, in any event, for carrying or possesing Firearms or Weapons under any circumstances. The insurance code is sound in this aspect already, but it could bestrengthed to prohibit insurance companies from even contemplateing this and they should be fined if they do.
Also, while weare at it, the Firearms range protection ordinance, 41-1-9(b) could be strengthed to disallow any contemplation of any nuisnace abatement by altering the term '... in operation for one year' to '... in operation...'. In essence delete the term 'for one year' so there is no look back time at all. Currently, if a sport shooting range violates this '... one year' rule then the Courts can shut it down should it find the range to be a nuisnace during some point in the first year. This is uncalled for, and any range that opens in this State should be immune from any nuisance or noise abatement claim from day one!
Finally, the guard lines created under 42-5-14, prohibit anyone, other than the warden(s), superintendant(s), and other persons they authorize to come across any guard line with any kind of Firearm or Weapon. This a crime per 42-5-15, a Felony. This needs to be changed too, so as to exclude law abiding citizens, rather they have permission or not, so as long as they do not carry Firearms or Weapons to where the inmates are being kept. Local Jails in your community have these guard lines, and normally they are well marked, but in some cases they cover the parking lot. In this instance a pock knife in your truck in the wrong parking lot means a Felony! This needs to be changed.
Ooh, I almost forgot, a few more things. I respect Private Property Rights, and on occasion I have been asked to leave some Private Properties for openly carrying a Pistol or openly carrying a Rifle ontothese properties becausethey said that it scares other people, namely their customers. Fine, but the General Assembly should amend the Law16-11-135 to read that a Private Property owner may prohibit Firearms and Weapons from their Property, BUT if anything should happen while someone who is legallyeligible to have a Firearm or Weapon, but could not because of those rules, gets hurt or is the victim of a crime while there... THEN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR BOTH CIVIL COMPENSATORY, AND POSSIBLE PUNATIVE DAMAGES IN COURT LATER. I understand that that action would result in a significant rewrite of this law, but I believe it is in the best ends of justice to do so.If my Pistol has to be left in my truck because of myEMPLOYERS RULES,then,I THINK THAT THE EMPLOYER IS RESPONSIBLE SHOULD MY PISTOL TURN UP STOLEN. I GUARNTEE THAT WOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED IN THE FIRST PLACE IF MY PISTOL WAS ON MY HIP... WHICH IS WHERE IT BELONGS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!
One last thought, we need to repeal 16-11-173(c), 16-11-173(d), and 16-11-173(e). These three last holdouts in State Preemption have somehow slipped through the cracks, so to speak, and fly in the face of the meaning of PREEMPTION.They are not called for nor are they need at all... they need to go too!
Hopefully, one day Georgia will join the other 31 States in this country that allow for the unconcealed carry of a Pistol without any type of License.
Additionally, Georgia should do away with the antiquated 140 year old public gathering law that still haunts Georgians to this day.
No other State in country, with the exception of North Dakota, regulates carrying Firearms in any manner similiar to Georgia. If you do not believe me then look at the Laws on the books in North Dakota thourgh their State Legislature website. Oddly, North Dakota is the only other State with a public gatherings law, it is unbelieveable!
Ask the Georgia General Assembly when they reconviene next year to repeal Georgia State Laws 16-11-127, 16-11-127.1, 16-11-127.2, and 16-11-128. Also, ask them to further repeal 38-3-51(d)(8), 27-4-11.1(a)(1), 27-4-11.1(a)(2), and 21-2-413(i). It is a Federal defense already, under 18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2)(B)(ii), to have a State permit for school zones in the State where you have the permit, BUT GEORGIA IN ALL OF ITS INFINITE WISDOM... does not incoporate thatas a defense. However, I never expected it to. Since when is having a permit good for anything else in any criminal action on any of the above code sections other than 16-11-128? Now I am not advocating getting rid of our Georgia Firearms Licenses, but some things need to change here too. NAMELY... 16-11-129,er, the whole thing. In my opinion most of thatEXTREMELY RACISITLAW stinks... and it needs to go. ANYONE UP FOR A LITTLE ALASKA OR VERMONT STYLE CARRY WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS!!!!! IN GEORGIA I BELIEVE THAT WE ONLY NEED A PERMIT FOR INTERSTATE RECIPROCITY ONLY, NOTHING ELSE. PLEASE DO NOT GET ME STRATED ON 18 U.S.C. 922 AT ALL. SOMEONE NEEDS TO REMIND CONGRESS, AS TENNESSE AND MONTANA HAVE, ABOUT STATES RIGHTS AND STATE PREEMPTION ON MATTERS THAT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DOES NOT GRANT TO CONGRESS. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER AMENDMENTS 9 AND 10, OR IS IT JUST ME?
Also, of further interest, it would be nessecary to repeal 16-11-34.1(b)and the insurance code 33-24-30.1 should be amended to provide that an insuror should not even ask to Firearms, or Weapons ownership, and coverage can not be denied, in any event, for carrying or possesing Firearms or Weapons under any circumstances. The insurance code is sound in this aspect already, but it could bestrengthed to prohibit insurance companies from even contemplateing this and they should be fined if they do.
Also, while weare at it, the Firearms range protection ordinance, 41-1-9(b) could be strengthed to disallow any contemplation of any nuisnace abatement by altering the term '... in operation for one year' to '... in operation...'. In essence delete the term 'for one year' so there is no look back time at all. Currently, if a sport shooting range violates this '... one year' rule then the Courts can shut it down should it find the range to be a nuisnace during some point in the first year. This is uncalled for, and any range that opens in this State should be immune from any nuisance or noise abatement claim from day one!
Finally, the guard lines created under 42-5-14, prohibit anyone, other than the warden(s), superintendant(s), and other persons they authorize to come across any guard line with any kind of Firearm or Weapon. This a crime per 42-5-15, a Felony. This needs to be changed too, so as to exclude law abiding citizens, rather they have permission or not, so as long as they do not carry Firearms or Weapons to where the inmates are being kept. Local Jails in your community have these guard lines, and normally they are well marked, but in some cases they cover the parking lot. In this instance a pock knife in your truck in the wrong parking lot means a Felony! This needs to be changed.
Ooh, I almost forgot, a few more things. I respect Private Property Rights, and on occasion I have been asked to leave some Private Properties for openly carrying a Pistol or openly carrying a Rifle ontothese properties becausethey said that it scares other people, namely their customers. Fine, but the General Assembly should amend the Law16-11-135 to read that a Private Property owner may prohibit Firearms and Weapons from their Property, BUT if anything should happen while someone who is legallyeligible to have a Firearm or Weapon, but could not because of those rules, gets hurt or is the victim of a crime while there... THEN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR BOTH CIVIL COMPENSATORY, AND POSSIBLE PUNATIVE DAMAGES IN COURT LATER. I understand that that action would result in a significant rewrite of this law, but I believe it is in the best ends of justice to do so.If my Pistol has to be left in my truck because of myEMPLOYERS RULES,then,I THINK THAT THE EMPLOYER IS RESPONSIBLE SHOULD MY PISTOL TURN UP STOLEN. I GUARNTEE THAT WOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED IN THE FIRST PLACE IF MY PISTOL WAS ON MY HIP... WHICH IS WHERE IT BELONGS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!
One last thought, we need to repeal 16-11-173(c), 16-11-173(d), and 16-11-173(e). These three last holdouts in State Preemption have somehow slipped through the cracks, so to speak, and fly in the face of the meaning of PREEMPTION.They are not called for nor are they need at all... they need to go too!
