Eliminating Georgia's weapons "license" - For God's sake people, do it!

[testdepth]

I received this from Senator Ligon's staff today:


Senator Ligon said to tell you that his answer on that is yes, he supports Constitutional Carry in Georgia.


Thanks for the follow-up.

 

[GeauxLSU]

Yeah, I will. Problem is the language is a little confusing to me honestly, and to be sure he is a lawyer.
He used to be the attorney for Henry County. However if he supports it, it does not matter.

Well if he's a lawyer, enlist his help in making in clearer.
It eliminates the need for a GWL for anyone and simply says that a person must be a "Lawful weapons carrier'.
From the bill: 'Lawful weapons carrier' means those persons provided for under subsection (b) of Code Section 16-11-126
Here is that subsection.
(b) Any person who is not prohibited by law from possessing a handgun or long gun ....

So basically, if you're not a felon with unrestored rights, you are gtg.

 

[Derrial Book]

I have emailed Representative Jan Tankersley (District 160) and Senator Jack Hill (District 4).

I will provide update, after I get their responses.


01/27 Update: With a follow up contact this past Monday, have yet to even get a response from Jan Tankersley. I take that as a sign of "Not supporting" the bill. If I hear back, I will provide further update.

I have not heard back, nor expected to hear back, from Jack Hill.

 

[Comanche]

Damn shame
That any American should have to call An elected Rep to tell them to do their fugging job and protect the constitution.
Something that should be a no brainer but I understand the formal BS.
I'd prefer other methods but sad that we have to even have this discussion.

 

[dondon48]

What i have come to understand in recent years...most people have become accustomed to having their constitutional rights infringed...to the point that most of them not only aren't bothered by it but actually agree with having their rights infringed as if it will prevent law-breakers from breaking the law...

 

[Comanche]

Yeah I can remember how giddy so many republicans were with Bush's patriot act.

 

[freud198]

wow. you guys would really be mad if you knew the law.

knowing just a little abou the law, mainly case law, you would see that these people you say "represent you" really dont have a say in it. They just want you to think they do. Most of them dont even know what the laws of this country and state are.

Do you eve
r wonder why some (not all) of the lawyers on here never chime in on this topic? Because most of them are too busy laughing, and the ones that arent, dont know the laws well enough to speak on this topic....

This goes for every kind of law, not just gun laws. read case law. Mainly what the Supreme Court of the United States says. Read the higher court's decisions. They are all black and white, down there at your local law library. You would leave there with that deer in the headlights look.

 

[Comanche]

wow. you guys would really be mad if you knew the law.

knowing just a little abou the law, mainly case law, you would see that these people you say "represent you" really dont have a say in it. They just want you to think they do. Most of them dont even know what the laws of this country and state are.

Do you eve
r wonder why some (not all) of the lawyers on here never chime in on this topic? Because most of them are too busy laughing, and the ones that arent, dont know the laws well enough to speak on this topic....

This goes for every kind of law, not just gun laws. read case law. Mainly what the Supreme Court of the United States says. Read the higher court's decisions. They are all black and white, down there at your local law library. You would leave there with that deer in the headlights look.

Kinda like Mechanics that visit car forums in the tech section.
Amazes me every time someone knows exactly how to fix someone's ESP light on a Mercedes because the same thing happened to their Cadillac once.

 

[freud198]

The supreme court says "no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it"
The supreme court also says if the states do try to issue a license and a fee "That I May ignore the law and engage in the right with impunity"
IF you have relied on supreme court decisions and constitutional protections, you cannot be prosecuted for WILLFULNESS!

Willfulness is defined as, An evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under the law with a moral certainty.

NOW, some will say " that's your interpretation "......Your right, SCOUS says, the laws of the U.S., mainly the Constutition, SHALL, not MAY, "Be interpreted in MY favor, " The clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary, the citizen, for the protection of rights and property.

 

[dondon48]

The supreme court says "no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it"
The supreme court also says if the states do try to issue a license and a fee "That I May ignore the law and engage in the right with impunity"
IF you have relied on supreme court decisions and constitutional protections, you cannot be prosecuted for WILLFULNESS!

Willfulness is defined as, An evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under the law with a moral certainty.

NOW, some will say " that's your interpretation "......Your right, SCOUS says, the laws of the U.S., mainly the Constutition, SHALL, not MAY, "Be interpreted in MY favor, " The clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary, the citizen, for the protection of rights and property.

the problem comes in defending yourself from the gov't over-reach...while you are probably correct, you will still go broke paying for attorneys to prove it in court...the state always has plenty of money to fight things like this...