Pages

 

Recent Pages by Skip Intro:
Trump Partner in Running for New FBI Building - ABC2News.com Plot to Kill Muslims in Kansas Was Foreseen in Report on Right-Wing Extremism That Politicians Slammed Donald Trump's Candidacy Is a Threat to American Democracy The Man Who Showed Donald Trump How to Exploit Power and Instill Fear Too Good to Be True? Dick Morris Might Join the Trump Campaign

Jump to bottom

20 comments

1 Skip Intro  Jul 3, 2014 9:03:44am

This is how brilliant the Georgia law is. No one, not even the police, can ask to see your firearms permit. No one.

The police chief said no one can demand a person to show their gun permit. Under the new law, he as police chief and his officers cannot demand to see a firearms permit, Childress said.

It’s almost as if the authors of this horrible piece of legislation intended to make getting a permit pointless.

2 KerFuFFler  Jul 3, 2014 9:05:54am

Thanks for the video——-I needed that! (humming…….)

3 Rightwingconspirator  Jul 3, 2014 9:23:24am

Let’s keep it real for once.

Since I really do believe in evidence-based discussion about guns, I took the trouble to read HB60, as the new law is known. If this law represents a “historic victory” for the 2nd Amendment, the NRA better find someone else to defend the beloved constitutional rights of gun owners. On the other hand, if the editors of Mother Jones really believe that this new law will result in guns being “everywhere” in Georgia, then there must be some place named Georgia other than the state where this law just passed.

Here’s what the bill basically does: 1) It allows guns to be carried in places where liquor is served, which previously had been off-limits for guns; 2) It also allows guns to be carried in churches which, like restaurants and bars, were also off-limits for guns; 3) It further allows guns to be carried in certain non-secure areas of airports, which is really funny since Atlanta’s airport was ranked #1 nationally in the number of guns confiscated in 2013.

…But if you take the time to read the new law and go back and read the current law as well, you discover that most of these “historic” changes don’t really change things at all.

First of all, the law about carrying guns into liquor-serving establishments does not prevent any bar or restaurant owner from declaring his premise off-limits to guns. Just stick a sign in the window or simply stand at the door and tell patrons to leave their guns in their cars. As for bringing guns into houses of worship, this is an “opt-in” law which means that the congregation has to agree to let parishioners bring their guns into the building before anyone can have a conversation with the Almighty while sitting on their Glock.

4 Rightwingconspirator  Jul 3, 2014 9:39:36am

I want to add CCW and open carry is a discussion that we want to happen, I really wish that were not at the behest of a law already signed. The precise requirements and regs work that goes with concealed or open carry and how that has to play out day to day is essential to avoid violence, tragic misunderstandings and worse. Cross posting in my Page on this law.

Thing is click bait screaming memes and headlines add to the problem.

5 Recreational Birth Control User  Jul 3, 2014 11:35:39am

I hope we don’t get that law here (I don’t think we have anything here like that yet). since I was young, guns make me so nervous. don’t know why. My husband keeps his guns locked away in a safe in a storage unit now. Anyways, if I have to live in a society where there are a lot of people walking around everywhere with loaded guns on their hips while I grocery shop, or what not, I will be pissed.

6 Recreational Birth Control User  Jul 3, 2014 11:36:57am

re: #3 Rightwingconspirator

does not prevent any bar or restaurant owner from declaring his premise off-limits to guns. Just stick a sign in the window or simply stand at the door and tell patrons to leave their guns in their cars.

Thank Goodness.

7 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Jul 3, 2014 12:48:07pm

re: #3 Rightwingconspirator

Let’s keep it real for once.

How was the story that started this thread not ‘real’?

8 Skip Intro  Jul 3, 2014 12:59:57pm

re: #7 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

How was the story that started this thread not ‘real’?

RWC doesn’t agree with it.

9 Rightwingconspirator  Jul 3, 2014 2:49:37pm

re: #7 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

How was the story that started this thread not ‘real’?

re: #8 Skip Intro
How cute a little gatling gun. That would be fun at the range. Just got back from ASR, planning a nice family shoot for tomorrow. Mom, two teen kids and the daughters boyfriend.

I refer to the perception of the law. Oh and by what measure could this not have happened before the law passed? Convenience store right, not bar?

Like the writer said above in the first paragraph I clipped in rather well…

Both the proponents and critics have misrepresented the law. Hence “Keeping it real” as the point of my post. Skip, obviously not just me disagreeing right? After all what the law actually says matters.

10 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Jul 3, 2014 2:52:07pm

re: #9 Rightwingconspirator

I refer to the perception of the law. Oh and by what measure could this not have happened before the law passed? Convenience store right, not bar?

So why did you say “Let’s keep it real for once” as your opening? I’m getting confused. Is there anything in the post that’s about the ‘perception of the law’, or the video, or what that you’re saying is inaccurate?

Or the post saying that now cops nor anybody can’t ask to see your permit?

11 Rightwingconspirator  Jul 3, 2014 4:00:35pm

re: #10 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

The point of the article linked and Paged is “keeping it real” as in what the law says and means in it’s actual language. Rather than what the NRA or gun control advocates have said.

Oh and “for once” is two fold. one is the sheer frequency of laws about guns being misrepresented and just a little a bit reflecting upon Skips frequent use of hyperbole on this subject, as illustrated by the old ad.

12 Rightwingconspirator  Jul 3, 2014 4:05:35pm

re: #10 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

Or the post saying that now cops nor anybody can’t ask to see your permit?

You should define your scenario less broadly.

13 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Jul 3, 2014 4:18:38pm

re: #11 Rightwingconspirator

The point of the article linked and Paged is “keeping it real” as in what the law says and means in it’s actual language. Rather than what the NRA or gun control advocates have said.

Oh and “for once” is two fold. one is the sheer frequency of laws about guns being misrepresented and just a little a bit reflecting upon Skips frequent use of hyperbole on this subject, as illustrated by the old ad.

Okay. But the thread was already ‘keeping it real’, right, before you showed up to drop knowledge? The story shows one example of a problem that occurs with carrying weapons around.

re: #12 Rightwingconspirator

You should define your scenario less broadly.

Nope. I mean it broadly. That a policeman, seeing that someone has a gun, asks that person to produce their CCW license—which they should have to have on their persons at all time.

Why is this such an onerous burden? What is the problem with simply producing the CCW license, which is something granted under conditions set by the state?

14 Skip Intro  Jul 3, 2014 4:27:29pm

re: #13 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

Nope. I mean it broadly. That a policeman, seeing that someone has a gun, asks that person to produce their CCW license—which they should have to have on their persons at all time.

Why is this such an onerous burden? What is the problem with simply producing the CCW license, which is something granted under conditions set by the state?

Because of the NRA’s interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Obviously you don’t have to produce papers to use the 1st Amendment (unless you’re a minority trying to vote), so why should you have to do that to carry a gun?

15 goddamnedfrank  Jul 4, 2014 1:02:26am

re: #13 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

Why is this such an onerous burden? What is the problem with simply producing the CCW license, which is something granted under conditions set by the state?

What’s funny is that in many states (I don’t know about Georgia) a cop or game warden can demand to see your hunting or fishing license simply by observing you in possession of hunting equipment or fishing tackle while anywhere near a natural habitat conducive to such (woods, wilds, & natural waters.) The mere possession of such gear in the wilds is considered prima facie evidence that you are engaged in the regulated activity.

Why anybody would think that their carrying a handgun in public should be exempt from the same level of basic scrutiny is beyond me, since their right to legally be in possession of that firearm stems from the same kind of State issued permit.

16 Romantic Heretic  Jul 4, 2014 5:01:37am

Is the US such a dangerous place that firearms must be carried at all times? And if so, how does everyone packing improve things?

17 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Jul 4, 2014 5:07:23am

re: #16 Romantic Heretic

Is the US such a dangerous place that firearms must be carried at all times? And if so, how does everyone packing improve things?

No. In most parts of the US, we enjoy a very low violent crime rate.

18 Rightwingconspirator  Jul 4, 2014 7:11:28pm

re: #13 Fairly Sure I’m Still Obdicut

Why is this such an onerous burden? What is the problem with simply producing the CCW license, which is something granted under conditions set by the state?

Well since I have not posed it as an onerous burden the question becomes awkward to address. I don’t have a problem with producing the license. The reason or circumstance under which the question is appropriate is really the point. I would say with reasonable cause. Not because this is guns but because that would be the general rule as I understand it, and would prefer.

By what measure would one support a call for credentials without cause?

19 goddamnedfrank  Jul 5, 2014 1:45:16am

re: #18 Rightwingconspirator

Well since I have not posed it as an onerous burden the question becomes awkward to address. I don’t have a problem with producing the license. The reason or circumstance under which the question is appropriate is really the point. I would say with reasonable cause. Not because this is guns but because that would be the general rule as I understand it, and would prefer.

By what measure would one support a call for credentials without cause?

The mere presence of a handgun should itself be considered cause. In many states a CCW means concealed, as in not readily apparent. If the cop can tell you’re carrying a gun, if it’s visible or if it prints then they should be able to ask for your license, just like a game warden can demand that you produce a valid fishing license if he sees you out hiking with tackle. The presence of the gun should be considered prima facie evidence that the person is engaging in a regulated activity, because they are. If you predicate the demand to produce that license on some other suspicious activity you’re eventually going to miss some critical opportunities to avert serious, violent crimes.

I don’t get how this is at all controversial, or in any way not readily apparent. The gun is a regulated item, just like a car. It’s very dangerous, just like a car. But unlike a car the gun doesn’t have a readily visible external license plate identifying it. The cop can’t just radio in to check on the serial number of the gun being worn by a pedestrian like they can with a car.

If the cop can tell you’re carrying a gun, then the question is always appropriate. This retreat to a preference for some “general rule as [you] understand it,” is built entirely on a lazy conflation between incredibly different activities. The pedestrian who is visibly carrying a firearm is fundamentally different than the one who is not, just like the guy walking through the forest with a hunting rifle is fundamentally different than the one who is not. Making it so police are unable to reliably ascertain the legality of a person’s carry inside cities and towns is simply insane, especially when game wardens can readily demand proof of a hunting license in the wilds.

20 Fairly Sure I'm Still Obdicut  Jul 5, 2014 5:30:37am

re: #18 Rightwingconspirator

Well since I have not posed it as an onerous burden the question becomes awkward to address. I don’t have a problem with producing the license. The reason or circumstance under which the question is appropriate is really the point. I would say with reasonable cause. Not because this is guns but because that would be the general rule as I understand it, and would prefer.

By what measure would one support a call for credentials without cause?

You say that you don’t have a problem with producing the license and then immediately say you have a problem with producing the license.

Not because this is guns but because that would be the general rule as I understand it, and would prefer.

Why would you prefer it? Why do you think guns should be treated so laxly compared to other things?

Basically, what Frank said above.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
3 days ago
Views: 116 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 278 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1