[oldschool68]

But honestly I'm pretty content knowing that joe blow down the street without a permit cant just stick his 9mm to his side and go for a stroll through a mall.

but the thing is... joe blow can... AND DOES... do just that. See my post. If I didnt care about the law, I would carry anyways. Hell, I am big guy... I could smuggle an Ak and a cooler of coors under most my jackets

 

[drtybykr]

But honestly I'm pretty content knowing that joe blow down the street without a permit cant just stick his 9mm to his side and go for a stroll through a mall.

but the thing is... joe blow can... AND DOES... do just that. See my post. If I didnt care about the law, I would carry anyways. Hell, I am big guy... I could smuggle an Ak and a cooler of coors under most my jackets

:lol:

 

[GAGunOwner]

But yeah now we can preach the EVERONE should carry thing.

I don't think many here "preach that everyone should carry." There are quite simply some people that should not carry arms. That said, non-felon, sane adult citizens should have their right to carry respected if they so choose to excersize it.

 

[GAGunOwner]

He shouldn't have a permit or a gun. As far as I'm concerned he should lose his ability to purchase or carry.

For how long? Month? Year? Ten years? Life? Life even if pardoned?

 

[TippinTaco]

But yeah now we can preach the EVERONE should carry thing. But honestly I'm pretty content knowing that joe blow down the street without a permit cant just stick his 9mm to his side and go for a stroll through a mall. Forgive me if thats not how a Georgia carry member should think. But I guess as american citizens we're all entitled to our own opinions.

I'd like to know what you mean by "joe blow" because that sounds very elitist. Does "joe blow" mean the guy that can't get off of work to go apply at the probate court? Or the guy that needs to hold on to that $80 bucks for another month because he needs it to pay for his kid's braces?

If by "joe blow" you mean a felon, etc. I've got news for you, he's already strolling in the mall with that high-point and he's around you and your kids everyday.

I'm aware that he is around us, but the fact is I have a better chance of pin pointing him now than if tha majority of the state of GA decided to take up arms and carry every where. As of now I PERSONALLY see others with handguns and two things come to mind: either he is a GWL holder or a LEO. I'm still cautious about the person. I don't have any issues with anyone that hasn't been convicted of a serious crime from owning a gun and that includes drug charges. but the moment you start threatening people with bodily harm and get charged with it then you must've stepped a little to far over that line of I'm going to beat your @#[email protected], it seems more like you traveled into the death threats side.

Do you GAGun go around threatening people with bodily harm while carrying your firearm on your side? Do you tell people you're going to kill them? Have you been charged with terroristic threat?

At what point GAGun do we tell someone that they can't own a firearm? Because if we were to do as you've mentioned and FOLLOW THE COTUS STRICTLY TO THE T, then all federal laws on selling felons firearms should be removed and should be deemd unconstitutional. This in turn would allow any felon to purchase a handgun at his leisure.

Ehh he who casts stones must do so outside the glass house right

 

[TippinTaco]

But yeah now we can preach the EVERONE should carry thing.

I don't think many here "preach that everyone should carry." There are quite simply some people that should not carry arms. That said, non-felon, sane adult citizens should have their right to carry respected if they so choose to excersize it.

ehh I know this will hurt GAGun:

http://www.mygeorgiadefenselawyer.com/georgia-criminal-offenses-penalties/disorderly-conduct/

Terroristic threats are a felony in Georgia. You may be found guilty of terroristic threats if you threaten:

To commit any crime of violence,
To release any hazardous substance, or
To burn or damage property with the intent of causing terror or evacuation.
If you are found guilty of terroristic threats, you could face a fine of no more than $1,000 and prison time not less than 1 year and not more than 5 years.

*If the threat is an act of retribution against someone for assisting law enforcement or a member of the court in an investigation or for attending court as a witness, judge, attorney, or other actor of the court; you face a fine of up to $50,000 and will serve no less than 5 and no more than 10 years in prison.

Terroristic Acts are also a felony in Georgia. You could be charged with and found guilty of terroristic acts if you:

Use a burning cross or other symbol with the intent of terrorizing someone or their household,
While not acting lawfully, throw an object at a vehicle while moving or occupied, or
Release any hazardous or simulated hazardous material with the intention of causing terror or evacuation.
If found guilty of terroristic acts you face a fine of up to $5,000 and prison time of not less than one year and not more than ten.

*If someone suffers a serious injury during the commission of the terrorist act, you face a fine of up to $250,000 and prison time of not less than 5 years and not more than 40.

** If the terroristic act is an act of retribution against someone for assisting law enforcement or a member of the court in an investigation or for attending court as a witness, judge, attorney, or other actor of the court; you face a fine of up to $100,000 and will serve no less than 5 and no more than 20 years in prison.

 

[oldschool68]

As of now I PERSONALLY see others with handguns and two things come to mind: either he is a GWL holder or a LEO.

key word in that sentence is "SEE" ... what about the guy that has 3 armed robberies with the tec-9 under his XXXXL hoodie that you dont see? or his buddies dressed similarly that are milling around the gas station that you are standing in?

edit to add: my main point to your arguments is that it appears you believe that gun control and restrictions apply to everyone. Again... If I did not care about the law and was a "bad guy joe blow" I would not be wasting time and educating myself on this forum. I would be happily carrying concealed everywhere I went.

 

[GAGunOwner]

Right now we're about to be faced with endless Anti-Gun bills that are being written up as we speak, because someone capable of purchasing a handgun LEGALLY did so. In doing that he murdered a kid, shot a Congresswoman and murdered a judge. He was off the radar just like most of us are.

So your position is essentially to throw another person's rights under the bus, to protect YOUR rights, because the actions of a mentally disturbed third person several states away. Right?

Also, contrary to what MSNBC may tell you, don't you think Jered lied on the form about his drug use/addiction? If so I wouldn't call his gun purchase legal. If I am wrong please let me know.

 

[GAGunOwner]

Do you GAGun go around threatening people with bodily harm while carrying your firearm on your side? Do you tell people you're going to kill them? Have you been charged with terroristic threat?

I've never been charged with anything...

 

[oldschool68]

Right now we're about to be faced with endless Anti-Gun bills that are being written up as we speak, because someone capable of purchasing a handgun LEGALLY did so. In doing that he murdered a kid, shot a Congresswoman and murdered a judge. He was off the radar just like most of us are.

So your position is essentially to throw another person's rights under the bus, to protect YOUR rights, because the actions of a mentally disturbed third person several states away. Right?

Also, contrary to what MSNBC may tell you, don't you think Jered lied on the form about his drug use/addiction? If so I wouldn't call his gun purchase legal. If I am wrong please let me know.

And if he was not under the radar... he would have found another way to obtain a weapon and carry out his plan that was determined to accomplish.

I feel like Tippin is not seeing the point here. If someone wants to do something bad enough... no law, rule, etc. is going to stop him... period.

If a guy wants to rob a bank... but he wants to use a gun and have at least one other person with him... do you think he is going to rob a gas station alone with a sharpened pencil?

NO.. he is going to get a gun, legally or illegally, get a buddy, and rob a bank.

You cant stop a person that is determined to do something... if you could... all of our spouses would be happier.

 

[TippinTaco]

SOOOOOO Terroristic threats in GA are Felonies... but Oldschool here BEAT the system because he plead First Offender. So please help me understand your logic here... He should be able to carry because of the COTUS, but someone shouldn't be able to because they're a felon.. where do you stand if the person beat a felony charge by pleading first Offender? He wasn't pardoned.. He plead guilt under the FO and served a lighter sentence. At this point its unclear if he threatened to murder an entire family of dolphins or if he set a cross on fire in someones yard. all we know is he commited a FELONY but took a plea bargain to a lesser sentence.

Oldschool- I understand your point, but the fact is you COMMITED a felony. at what extent of the crime was actually serious, none the less you commited the felony but plead guilty and used first Time Offender. You didnt get caught with 6 ounces of cocaine, or a dime bag of weed. you did something that THREATENED someones life or well being for a Judge to charge AND SENTENCE you with Terroristic Threat. It is what it is, I'm not making a mountain out of an ant hill.

Bad guys carry guns all the time, we are all aware. Just because you were a First time Offender to a GA state felony, and got off with a lesser sentence, doesn't quite make you the most reputable person to be able to own or carry a firearm. I'm sorry you threatened your girlfriends new boyfriend, or got pissed one day in traffic, but you made a choice that day to commit a crime no matter how big or little it is, and now you may possibly see how such choices might hurt you.

I would rather you illegally carry a firearm and murder someone, than you get a GWL and be on this forum and 6-9 months later we find out a GWL permit holder shot up a bank. Your crime is a insight as to what you've been capable of doing, and how you've used your judgement.

GAGun: I've never been charged with anything...

My point exactly. I'm not denying him rights to own a gun. HE DID THAT WHEN HE COMMITED A FELONY!!!! Just because he used his First Time Offender for it doesn't mean he should be capable of carrying or purchasing a handgun.

 

[GAGunOwner]

At what point GAGun do we tell someone that they can't own a firearm? Because if we were to do as you've mentioned and FOLLOW THE COTUS STRICTLY TO THE T, then all federal laws on selling felons firearms should be removed and should be deemd unconstitutional. This in turn would allow any felon to purchase a handgun at his leisure.

I don't know...somewhere between convicted violent non-pardoned felons and the law being totally repealed. Anthything else probably is unconstitutional and should probably be overturned.

 

[GAGunOwner]

GAGun: I've never been charged with anything...

My point exactly. I'm not denying him rights to own a gun. HE DID THAT WHEN HE COMMITED A FELONY!!!! Just because he used his First Time Offender for it doesn't mean he should be capable of carrying or purchasing a handgun.

A felony is only what a majority of the doofuses in the General Assembly say a felony is (and most of them are doofuses).

 

[oldschool68]

SOOOOOO Terroristic threats in GA are Felonies... but Oldschool here BEAT the system because he plead First Offender. So please help me understand your logic here... He should be able to carry because of the COTUS, but someone shouldn't be able to because they're a felon.. where do you stand if the person beat a felony charge by pleading first Offender? He wasn't pardoned.. He plead guilt under the FO and served a lighter sentence. At this point its unclear if he threatened to murder an entire family of dolphins or if he set a cross on fire in someones yard. all we know is he commited a FELONY but took a plea bargain to a lesser sentence.

Oldschool- I understand your point, but the fact is you COMMITED a felony. at what extent of the crime was actually serious, none the less you commited the felony but plead guilty and used first Time Offender. You didnt get caught with 6 ounces of cocaine, or a dime bag of weed. you did something that THREATENED someones life or well being for a Judge to charge AND SENTENCE you with Terroristic Threat. It is what it is, I'm not making a mountain out of an ant hill.

Bad guys carry guns all the time, we are all aware. Just because you were a First time Offender to a GA state felony, and got off with a lesser sentence, doesn't quite make you the most reputable person to be able to own or carry a firearm. I'm sorry you threatened your girlfriends new boyfriend, or got pissed one day in traffic, but you made a choice that day to commit a crime no matter how big or little it is, and now you may possibly see how such choices might hurt you.

I would rather you illegally carry a firearm and murder someone, than you get a GWL and be on this forum and 6-9 months later we find out a GWL permit holder shot up a bank. Your crime is a insight as to what you've been capable of doing, and how you've used your judgement.

GAGun: I've never been charged with anything...

My point exactly. I'm not denying him rights to own a gun. HE DID THAT WHEN HE COMMITED A FELONY!!!! Just because he used his First Time Offender for it doesn't mean he should be capable of carrying or purchasing a handgun.

I need to correct a few things there. First of all you do not plead "guilty" to First Offender. therefore upon successful completion there is no "guilty" or "conviction" therefore, in the state's eyes, no felony was committed.

Second, if rights were not fully restored under the first offender, then there would be no purpose for a first offender statute and thus it would not exist.

Third, I did not "get off" with a lesser sentence. In fact, the sentence is exactly the same. Five years jail time that was, in my case, probated.

Fourth, First Offender is completely up to the Judge presiding over the case and is something that is considered heavily before being allowed. Many first offender requests, being agreed upon between defense counsel and prosecution are often denied by the Judge. Therefore, if the Judge did not see me a good candidate for rehabilitation (which is one of the founding principles long forgotten by our justice system) then I would have been denied it.

Carry on.

 

[TippinTaco]

Right now we're about to be faced with endless Anti-Gun bills that are being written up as we speak, because someone capable of purchasing a handgun LEGALLY did so. In doing that he murdered a kid, shot a Congresswoman and murdered a judge. He was off the radar just like most of us are.

So your position is essentially to throw another person's rights under the bus, to protect YOUR rights, because the actions of a mentally disturbed third person several states away. Right?

Also, contrary to what MSNBC may tell you, don't you think Jered lied on the form about his drug use/addiction? If so I wouldn't call his gun purchase legal. If I am wrong please let me know.

And if he was not under the radar... he would have found another way to obtain a weapon and carry out his plan that was determined to accomplish.

I feel like Tippin is not seeing the point here. If someone wants to do something bad enough... no law, rule, etc. is going to stop him... period.

If a guy wants to rob a bank... but he wants to use a gun and have at least one other person with him... do you think he is going to rob a gas station alone with a sharpened pencil?

NO.. he is going to get a gun, legally or illegally, get a buddy, and rob a bank.

You cant stop a person that is determined to do something... if you could... all of our spouses would be happier.

Oldschool- you can't even use that as a reason alone for you to be able to carry. EVEN if we played with the idea, you're asking this community to AGREE with giving someone that has commited a terrorristic Threat felony a GWL so he can "legally" carry amongst us? Dood don't try to remove the fact you commited a serious forcible felony!! It may have been a minor thing of he said she said, but the fact is YOU WERE CHARGED AND CONVICTED!! Just like the rest of us, go hire a super lawyer to get the records exsponged or pardoned, but until that time you're a felon no matter how little the situation was.

I'm not reading between the lines, I've been here long enough to have the bad guys every where with illegal guns argument burned into the back of my brain. As much as I admire the fact you're trying to be legal and honest about a permit is great.

GaGUN - As much as you and I agree that they're doofuses in the General Assembly, I think terroristic threats sits perfectly under the Felony row. to be charged and convicted on such a crime and he wasn't found guilty by jury, he plead First Offender to the crime. that alone shows he admited guilt to what ever he did for a lesser sentence. Terroristic threats of any nature is considered a Forcible Felony. By pleading FO, he was able to run around the hurdle that all felones are faced with. So technically he beat the system. again I dodn't know what he did or why or how, all I know is the charge in which he was convicted of which could be an array of things. But if you read the legal term and meaning for Terroristic threats its obvious it was serious in some form.

Oldschool- thanks for clearing that up

 

[GAGunOwner]

TippinTaco,

So really, you are against 1st offender?

 

[budder]

As an aside,

(a) A person commits the offense of a terroristic threat when he or she threatens to commit any crime of violence, to release any hazardous substance, as such term is defined in Code Section 12-8-92, or to burn or damage property with the purpose of terrorizing another or of causing the evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation or otherwise causing serious public inconvenience or in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience. No person shall be convicted under this subsection on the uncorroborated testimony of the party to whom the threat is communicated.

So someone else was with the two of you and you still made the threat?

 

[oldschool68]

Tippin... if you are all for the law, then please go read statute pertaining to treatment and definitions under the First Offender Act. You are spouting ignorance based upon personal bias, speculation, and likely misinformation that you were fed without confirming truth.

You keep saying that pleading under FOA is guilty and that I am guilty of commiting a forcible felony, both of which I am not pursuant to law.

I will gladly continue this discussion, but not until you educate yourself on the law and associated definitions.

Should you be lazy or inept at google-ninja:

"Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 42-8-62, “pon fulfillment of the terms of probation, upon release by the court prior to the termination of the period thereof, or upon release from confinement, the defendant shall be discharged without court adjudication of guilt...the discharge shall completely exonerate the defendant of any criminal purpose and shall not affect any of his or her civil rights or liberties; and the defendant shall not be considered to have a criminal conviction.â€

If terroristic threats was a serious violent felony, pursuant to 17-10- 6.1, I would not have qualified under the First Offender.

I am going by the law... if you would like to continue this "game" then I request that you do the same.

I have no problem with you saying, "First offender should be a guilty and you should not be allowed to own a gun!" because that is an opinion based upon you own personal beliefs.

I do have a problem with you twisting the law and throwing false statements out there.

 

[oldschool68]

As an aside,

(a) A person commits the offense of a terroristic threat when he or she threatens to commit any crime of violence, to release any hazardous substance, as such term is defined in Code Section 12-8-92, or to burn or damage property with the purpose of terrorizing another or of causing the evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation or otherwise causing serious public inconvenience or in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience. No person shall be convicted under this subsection on the uncorroborated testimony of the party to whom the threat is communicated.

So someone else was with the two of you and you still made the threat?

yes... an employee of my ex-girlfriend (interpret that as you may)

 

[TippinTaco]

As an aside,

(a) A person commits the offense of a terroristic threat when he or she threatens to commit any crime of violence, to release any hazardous substance, as such term is defined in Code Section 12-8-92, or to burn or damage property with the purpose of terrorizing another or of causing the evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation or otherwise causing serious public inconvenience or in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience. No person shall be convicted under this subsection on the uncorroborated testimony of the party to whom the threat is communicated.

So someone else was with the two of you and you still made the threat?

yes... an employee of my ex-girlfriend (interpret that as you may)

lol I was pretty close. Listen Oldschool I hope you get it all worked out one way or another. I don't consider people with permits "an elite group" or anything or that sort, but in this government its basically a privledge right now. It's not going to take much for them to decide on some extrememly retarded laws to pass that would make it even harder for us to protect ourselves, so I'm more protective over the fact that one commited a felony than just any normal guy asking about permits and carrying.