16-11-124

Discussion in 'GA Laws and Politics' started by geaux_tigers, Mar 6, 2007.

  1. geaux_tigers

    geaux_tigers Member

    994
    0
    16
    16-11-124 reads:
    If "this part" refers to the all of the statutes that comprise "Georgia Firearms and Weapons Act" and subsections (1) and (2) are meant to exempt on-duty peace officers and military from the entirety of "Georgia Firearms and Weapons Act", doesn't it also exempt anyone in possession of "a sawed-off shotgun, sawed-off rifle, machine gun, dangerous weapon, or silencer " in accordance with National Firearms Act from the entirety of "Georgia Firearms and Weapons Act"?

    In other words, wouldn't it allow me to carry my loaded Rock River Arms SBR with me as I go to a football game or apply for my GFL renewal without threat of (successful) prosecution?

    If not, why not?
     
  2. Rammstein

    Rammstein New Member

    5,798
    0
    0

  3. Adam5

    Adam5 Atlanta Overwatch

    13,288
    60
    48
    If that's the case (and it reads that way to me), does anyone know where I can get a good deal on a Glock 18?

    J/K (sorta)
     
  4. geaux_tigers

    geaux_tigers Member

    994
    0
    16
    Guess that depends on your definition of a good deal. :)
     
  5. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,387
    394
    83
    No.

    This part refers to 120-124.

    That is part 2, Dangerous Weapons.

    Public gatherings are in part 3, carrying.
     
  6. slabertooch

    slabertooch New Member

    4,322
    0
    0
    USP Tactical for me w/ threaded barrel of course.

    But a Baretta 93R would be a nice secondary, if you like burst fire, rather than full auto.

    Or a MP5K PDW :minigun:
     
  7. geaux_tigers

    geaux_tigers Member

    994
    0
    16
    No.

    This part refers to 120-124.

    That is part 2, Dangerous Weapons.

    Public gatherings are in part 3, carrying.[/quote:a5sws6gz]

    Ok. I can see the parts when I look at LexisNexis. I don't recall ever having seen those "parts" referenced before like that. It's rather confusing that there is an organizational element that isn't included when code sections are cited (i.e. 16-11-124). I learn something new every day on this board. :)