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

[dondon48]

Things just got very interesting. Looks like the Speaker's opponent came out in favor of Constitutional Carry. Will the Speaker wilt and ultimately allow a vote?

"My name is Sam Snider and I am running for the seventh district House of Representatives seat. My opponent is the Speaker of the House, David Ralston. While the speaker is blocking the constitutional carry bill I am in support of this bill. There will be some kind of a bill or a press release that shows some support for the second amendment. The speaker will make a speech and a big show. But will he allow Rep. Heath Clark's bill to come for a vote? Clear and simple. We should not have to pay a tax to carry a gun. Below are my thoughts on this bill. You may correspond with me through Facebook or my e-mail at snider@ellijay.com.

The Second Amendment right to own and carry a firearm. I am in full support of a our second amendment rights. I will support a Georgia Constitutional Carry bill. I do not wish to see a watered down version. Why should law abiding citizens have to pay a tax to their county for the right to carry a firearm? Why should the government profit from my right to own and carry a firearm? When a citizen purchases a gun they are subjected to a back ground check. This helps to insure that criminals are not purchasing weapons from a gun store. Criminals get guns through robbery and the black market. Since we have in place a way to limit the sale of guns to criminals why do we require law abiding citizens to pay a fee to carry their legal guns? Please join me in support of the Georgia Constitutional Carry Bill presented by Representative Heath Clark."

 

[GeauxLSU]

Things just got very interesting. Looks like the Speaker's opponent came out in favor of Constitutional Carry. Will the Speaker wilt and ultimately allow a vote?

"My name is Sam Snider and I am running for the seventh district House of Representatives seat. My opponent is the Speaker of the House, David Ralston. While the speaker is blocking the constitutional carry bill I am in support of this bill. There will be some kind of a bill or a press release that shows some support for the second amendment. The speaker will make a speech and a big show. But will he allow Rep. Heath Clark's bill to come for a vote? Clear and simple. We should not have to pay a tax to carry a gun. Below are my thoughts on this bill. You may correspond with me through Facebook or my e-mail at snider@ellijay.com.

The Second Amendment right to own and carry a firearm. I am in full support of a our second amendment rights. I will support a Georgia Constitutional Carry bill. I do not wish to see a watered down version. Why should law abiding citizens have to pay a tax to their county for the right to carry a firearm? Why should the government profit from my right to own and carry a firearm? When a citizen purchases a gun they are subjected to a back ground check. This helps to insure that criminals are not purchasing weapons from a gun store. Criminals get guns through robbery and the black market. Since we have in place a way to limit the sale of guns to criminals why do we require law abiding citizens to pay a fee to carry their legal guns? Please join me in support of the Georgia Constitutional Carry Bill presented by Representative Heath Clark."

Outstanding! Ralston apparently likes to play chess. Your move Mr. Speaker.

 

[TheJ]

This just in from GCO:



"A quick word about HB543, Constitutional Carry Bill:

This bill is being pushed by a group who want what they call Constitutional carry. This bill does not give us Constitutional carry but instead makes the GWL optional for anyone who needs it for reciprocity purposes. Doing away with the GWL is in itself is a good thing. However, this bill is poorly written and in fact, would criminalize the carrying of a long gun by anyone under 21 unless they have completed basic training in the armed forces of the United States; and is actively serving in the armed forces of the United States or has been honorably discharged from such service.

Unfortunately, this bill does more harm than good, as there is currently no age limit on carrying of long guns in GA. Doing away with such rights would prohibit parent/child hunting, target practice, etc. Some of the sponsors who signed on to this bill may not realize they have signed on to a bill that would restrict gun rights.

Constitutional carry should mean that the laws of the state reflect the Second Amendment and as such one should be able to carry wherever they please, such as the Vermont gun laws.

Since the Civil War, our right to carry here in GA has been under attack and that attack continues today. GCO has worked diligently in the last 8 years to restore those Constitutional rights and continue to work today. We expect more success this year in the continuation of those goals. As our members know, our goal is to make the Second Amendment mean what is says.

We urge all GCO Members to read this and every bill thoroughly and ask if this is really what you want before you contact any legislator. Make sure you know what you are talking about when you contact them, otherwise, it is just babble that does more harm than good. "

 

[GeauxLSU]

Unfortunately, this bill does more harm than good, as there is currently no age limit on carrying of long guns in GA. Doing away with such rights would prohibit parent/child hunting, target practice, etc. Some of the sponsors who signed on to this bill may not realize they have signed on to a bill that would restrict gun rights.

Wow. And I mean wow! Where was this tripe published? How disgusting. I will stop short of calling this a lie and let the reader decide what GCO's motivation is for opposing this bill. They seem to be REALLY bent that this bill is called 'Constitutional Carry' and doesn't meet their definition of 'carry anywhere anytime' which NO state has and we will never have (unless you think letting people carry into court proceedings for example is a viable option).

This is current law which this bill does nothing to change.

§ 16-11-126 (f) Any person with a valid hunting or fishing license on his or her person, or any person not required by law to have a hunting or fishing license (that means CHILDREN!), who is engaged in legal hunting, fishing, or sport shooting when the person has the permission of the owner of the land on which the activities are being conducted may have or carry on his or her person a handgun or long gun without a valid weapons carry license while hunting, fishing, or engaging in sport shooting.

Draw your own conclusions but for anyone to make that statement is absurd. They are making it EXTREMELY difficult to renew my membership.
Unbelievable (not really, lots of egos in 2A groups. )

 

[TheJ]

Wow. And I mean wow! Where was this tripe published? How disgusting. I will stop short of calling this a lie and let the reader decide what GCO's motivation is for opposing this bill. They seem to be REALLY bent that this bill is called 'Constitutional Carry' and doesn't meet their definition of 'carry anywhere anytime' which NO state has and we will never have (unless you think letting people carry into court proceedings for example is a viable option).

This is current law which this bill does nothing to change.

§ 16-11-126 (f) Any person with a valid hunting or fishing license on his or her person, or any person not required by law to have a hunting or fishing license (that means CHILDREN!), who is engaged in legal hunting, fishing, or sport shooting when the person has the permission of the owner of the land on which the activities are being conducted may have or carry on his or her person a handgun or long gun without a valid weapons carry license while hunting, fishing, or engaging in sport shooting.

Draw your own conclusions but for anyone to make that statement is absurd. They are making it EXTREMELY difficult to renew my membership.
Unbelievable (not really, lots of egos in 2A groups. )

It came out in an email this morning from GCO.

 

[TheJ]

It is also on their website:

http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/current-bills/

 

[GeauxLSU]

It is also on their website:

http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/current-bills/

That's been there since the beginning which was mentioned in this thread. I meant the absurd claim that it makes "father - son hunting" illegal.

 

[TheJ]

That's been there since the beginning which was mentioned in this thread. I meant the absurd claim that it makes "father - son hunting" illegal.

Understood. That came in the email this morning from them.

 

[boxer90]

That's been there since the beginning which was mentioned in this thread. I meant the absurd claim that it makes "father - son hunting" illegal.

For anyone who didn't see it. Well, text came out small:

A quick word about HB543, Constitutional Carry Bill:

This bill is being pushed by a group who want what they call Constitutional carry. This bill does not give us Constitutional carry but instead makes the GWL optional for anyone who needs it for reciprocity purposes. Doing away with the GWL is in itself is a good thing. However, this bill is poorly written and in fact, would criminalize the carrying of a long gun by anyone under 21 unless they have completed basic training in the armed forces of the United States; and is actively serving in the armed forces of the United States or has been honorably discharged from such service.

Unfortunately, this bill does more harm than good, as there is currently no age limit on carrying of long guns in GA. Doing away with such rights would prohibit parent/child hunting, target practice, etc. Some of the sponsors who signed on to this bill may not realize they have signed on to a bill that would restrict gun rights.

Constitutional carry should mean that the laws of the state reflect the Second Amendment and as such one should be able to carry wherever they please, such as the Vermont gun laws.

Since the Civil War, our right to carry here in GA has been under attack and that attack continues today. GCO has worked diligently in the last 8 years to restore those Constitutional rights and continue to work today. We expect more success this year in the continuation of those goals. As our members know, our goal is to make the Second Amendment mean what is says.

We urge all GCO Members to read this and every bill thoroughly and ask if this is really what you want before you contact any legislator. Make sure you know what you are talking about when you contact them, otherwise, it is just babble that does more harm than good.

Though it should be The War of Northern Aggression, but that's nitpicking.

 

[GeauxLSU]

I changed the thread title. Maybe that will untwist their shorts.
Anyone know the Constitutional Carry bill or the bill to eliminate the unConstitutional GWL that GCO is pushing this session?