Whoa! Slow down.Looks like the latest version is up. I'm liking the new additions regarding online issuance and the 22 day notification window.
Does make me wonder if this language:
"The probate court shall be authorized to implement online application processes for
weapons carry licenses and renewal licenses."
Should be changed to:
"The probate court shall
be authorized toimplement online application processes for
weapons carry licenses and renewal licenses..." (and obviously the currently available methods)
My concern is the Democrat counties will drag their feet in actually implementing it, if at all. I'd guess a number of the Metro ATL counties would get around to it in 3-5 years or so and Chatham County might have it by around 2035 or so, if left to their own devices. It'll cost an extra $55 on top of the current license cost, just because they say so, regardless of the law. They'll scream and holler that they need more money, and the usual excuses.
Definitely some good changes in the bill, in regards to this issue, though.
I'm gonna tell my Rep and Senator my thoughts.
Whoa! Slow down.
Think about the context of why that language was added.
The bill said (and still says) that they must accept applicants first come- first served. The probate judges cried. Covid. We are all going to die. So the legislature said, Fine. You can do it online or by mail. But the language about first come-first served is still there.
If the probate judge refuses to provide an online application process, then she must accept applications first come, first served and cannot complain about not using alternatives that the legislature made available by law for her.
Historically there is resistance to aggregation of power from local probates (159) to a single state agency. I live in DeKalb, therefore a well-behaved state agency would benefit me. There are about 149 examples where well-behaved local probates are more beneficial to others than a single state agency might be though. Yes, it would solve misbehaving probate whack-a-mole but there would be far fewer people that shake hands with, dine with, and attend worship with issuers if it were rolled up to state level. There is also a concern that if an anti-2A individual were placed over a single state agency...I would be interested in hearing the pros/cons of letting the DNR become the issuing authority. My limited knowledge tells me that they are already adept and well able to handle tons of online applications & renewals. Plus, don't they already have access to NICS? Couldn't they perform the background checks w/o another agency having to do it for them? Wouldn't this be eliminating a middle man?
This is a shame and a disgrace, Covid or not. It adds further credence to just going ahead and making the license optional for lawful Georgia citizens. The PJs want to claim they aren't infringing on anyone's rights, just how your allowed to exercise them.Give it to anyone but the the Probate Judges.
That was brought up in the committee hearings on HB640 several times. The word was on the tip of everyone's tongue, but no one could pronounce it. You could almost hear it.. "permitless carr.."Better idea. No permit/license/permission slip necessary. A few places off limits but all is generally open to carry. If permission denied by property owner so be it. But property owner is liable to the victim for any criminal activity that occurs on that property and immune from liability for any legal self defense activity if something goes wrong by person claiming self defense.
We'll get there at some point, absent a sea change in control of the legislature to a less gun-friendly stance. But it's a process and not an event. A lot of people are in favor of it now, but enough are timid about it that it will take time to warm them up to make a majority.On the tip of a tongue. Almost hear it. No one could pronounce it.
They seem just plain afraid of the idea. Call that idea simple freedom and personal responsibility.
The legislature is a process also. Names and faces come and go, some longer than others but always changing. Why can't you take Mr or Ms X, smack 'em across the head, remind them that they claimed they were in favor of "X" and gently persuade them to get "X" passed? Sometimes you gotta take the bull by the........horns, eh?We'll get there at some point, absent a sea change in control of the legislature to a less gun-friendly stance. But it's a process and not an event. A lot of people are in favor of it now, but enough are timid about it that it will take time to warm them up to make a majority.