[00Dan]

Here is this session's version.

http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/HB/543

 

[Gunstar1]

Needs to work on the wording a little bit.

Just a quick read but it looks like it makes it illegal for a teenager to hunt or target shoot with a rifle on someone else's land. They can't ride in someone else's car with that rifle either.

 

[Monkeyboy]

May need work, may not pass, but it's a great start.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[rabbivj]

yall know GGO is gonna be pushing the hell out of that.

 

[CoffeeMate]

Section 1-2: Should really also make reference to our own State constitution, specifically Article I, Section 1, Paragraph VIII, as well as OCGA 1-2-6(9).

 

[CoffeeMate]

Line 19: Looks like it was scraped from our State Constitution, but "insure" should be "ensure".

 

[CoffeeMate]

Lines 38 and 42: Renumbering things is bad practice. Use "Reserved" instead.

 

[CoffeeMate]

Lines 121-124... For a "Constitutional Carry" Act, doesn't five years seem a bit long and harsh for a violation involving a "malum prohibitum" off-limits location? Presumably such an off-limits "gotcha!" location was enacted counter to Constitutional Carry anyway. Doesn't six months (or less) seem more reasonable and in alignment with the spirit of this Act?

 

[CoffeeMate]

(When are we going to stop all this "controlled substance" stuff?)

 

[CoffeeMate]

Line 144: "Notwithstanding" (B) is unnecessary.

 

[CoffeeMate]

Line 148 section (g): Two "gotcha!"'s too close together (five years) makes one a felon. Where are all those invisible lines again?

 

[CoffeeMate]

Lines 210-217: Missing some strike-throughs.

 

[CoffeeMate]

Lines 218-227: Missing a strike-through.

 

[CoffeeMate]

Lines 232-261: Need to step back a minute and rewrite that into some semblance of order rather than continue the piecemeal pasting.

 

[CoffeeMate]

Lines 397-411: There's something "tail-chasing" there (inadvertent recursion?). If you meet these non-exempt qualifications then you are exempt from the qualifications.

I'm guessing the point is to allow judges to be exempt so long as they don't turn crazy or become a felon.

1) Why not just say that in the statute?

2) What about all the others on the exempt list? They can still be exempt if they turn crazy or become a felon (just not judges)?

 

[CoffeeMate]

428 state and its political subdivisions, shall condition employment upon any agreement by a
429 prospective or current employee that prohibits an employee from entering the parking lot and access

 

[00Dan]

Am I reading this correctly by interpreting it to say that it would be unlawful for any individual under 21 years to carry without a license, but also removes the age requirement to acquire a license?

 

[Gunstar1]

Am I reading this correctly by interpreting it to say that it would be unlawful for any individual under 21 years to carry without a license, but also removes the age requirement to acquire a license?

No. It moves the license requirements to 126. So it it still 21 or 18 (if in the military) for a license.

 

[00Dan]

No. It moves the license requirements to 126. So it it still 21 or 18 (if in the military for a license).

So for anyone who is ineligible for a license due to age, all this does is remove their ability to carry a long gun. Seems like this will need some amendments and cleanup if it is to have any hope of passing.

 

[Adam5]

I would like to see this pass, with some tweaks, but the GA legislature is not ready to give back that much freedom.