Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

Knotty philisophical question here

2K views 21 replies 9 participants last post by  Malum Prohibitum 
#1 ·
In as much as the State has pre-empted all firearms laws and GCO has gone after counties and cities who violate that pre-emption and Kennesaw's gun ordinace is comming up on 25 years.

Should GCO demand the repeal of Kennesaw's ordinance?

(Doncha just hate questions like this :x )
 
#2 ·
Personally, I think Kennesaw's law and others like it) should be repealed.

First, it's unenforceable. Second, they have never had any intention of trying to enforce it.

Therefore, it doesn't need to be on the books. We don't need government entities tying up the taxpayers' time and money with symbolic gestures.
 
#3 ·
Nice question Wiley!

mzmtg said:
Personally, I think Kennesaw's law and others like it) should be repealed.

First, it's unenforceable. Second, they have never had any intention of trying to enforce it.

Therefore, it doesn't need to be on the books. We don't need government entities tying up the taxpayers' time and money with symbolic gestures.
Exactly what I was going to write.

The last thing I want is more laws.
 
#4 ·
What if you live in public housing in Kennesaw? Is there any? That might conflict with the public gathering clause of GA state law.

I like the law. I don't think it does anything though. Let's me know if I get a chance to move to Kennesaw I should take it. Sounds like they at least have the right idea and their hearts are in the right place.
 
#8 ·
Malum Prohibitum said:
I think the first post and the second post are talking about different ordinances.

Kennesaw's ordinance featured in the AJC today is not preempted by state law.

Their gun ban is.

:wink:
I thought the regulation of firearms was at the sole discretion of the Georgia state legislature.
 
#9 ·
O.C.G.A. § 16-11-173

(d) Nothing contained in this Code section shall prohibit municipalities or counties by ordinance, resolution, or other enactment, from requiring the ownership of guns by heads of households within the political subdivision.
 
#11 ·
Why It's Allowed

There is a good, common-sense reason why the legislature allows local governments to require heads-of-households to own guns, while in other ways local governments must leave gun control issues to the State leglislature.

The Kennesaw law does not interfere with intrastate travel, or place a burden on citizens to study the law of every single jurisdiction through which they pass. That could be dozens of different jurisdictions, on just one two-hour car trip across the Atlanta metro area.

Since the Kennesaw ordinance only applies to heads of households who reside in Kennesaw, people only have to know and obey this one law. (Actually they don't have to obey it, since there's no penalty for vilolating it, and nobody ever intended to enforce it anyway, and it has loopholes that make it meaningless, except as a "middle finger salute" to the gun-banning towns of Morton Grove and Skokie, Illinois.
 
#12 ·
Re: Why It's Allowed

gunsmoker said:
There is a good, common-sense reason why the legislature allows local governments to require heads-of-households to own guns, while in other ways local governments must leave gun control issues to the State leglislature.

The Kennesaw law does not interfere with intrastate travel, or place a burden on citizens to study the law of every single jurisdiction through which they pass. That could be dozens of different jurisdictions, on just one two-hour car trip across the Atlanta metro area.

Since the Kennesaw ordinance only applies to heads of households who reside in Kennesaw, people only have to know and obey this one law. (Actually they don't have to obey it, since there's no penalty for vilolating it, and nobody ever intended to enforce it anyway, and it has loopholes that make it meaningless, except as a "middle finger salute" to the gun-banning towns of Morton Grove and Skokie, Illinois.
and thats goodenugh for me
 
#13 ·
GAGunOwner said:
O.C.G.A. § 16-11-173

(d) Nothing contained in this Code section shall prohibit municipalities or counties by ordinance, resolution, or other enactment, from requiring the ownership of guns by heads of households within the political subdivision.
Well, there ya go. Serves me right for not doing my research. #-o
Consider this thread stupid and deleted.
 
#17 ·
If anyone is gonna post a "Knotty philisophical question", I would think first of Wiley.

Actually, I read the title of the thread and my first thought, even before reading the name of the poster, was "WILEY..."

And I was correct.

As usual!

I just wish my wife of 42 years would just once say, "You're right" without sounding surprised...../#$@%&!!!!
 
#18 ·
Malum Prohibitum said:
The thread is not stupid, nor should it be deleted.
My question was based on a false assumption: That the Kennesaw gun requirement was a violation of State pre-emption. As such it was stupid. I didn't do my research.

However the premise might still require an answer. Will we be as active in overturning a law that supports gun rights but is in violation of the pre-emtion statute?

I think we should.
 
#19 ·
Macktee said:
If anyone is gonna post a "Knotty philisophical question", I would think first of Wiley.

Actually, I read the title of the thread and my first thought, even before reading the name of the poster, was "WILEY..."

And I was correct.

As usual!

I just wish my wife of 42 years would just once say, "You're right" without sounding surprised...../#$@%&!!!!
Thank you, Sir. It's nice to know my reputation exceeds me.

:cheers: :wave:
 
#20 ·
Wiley said:
Will we [i.e., GCO] be as active in overturning a law that supports gun rights but is in violation of the pre-emtion statute?
I am not aware of any.

Even if I were, I think maybe Georgians for Gun Safety or some similar group would be available to take on that sort of activity. Our volunteers and other resources are finite, and GCO has not even lifted all the local level gun bans yet! :D

Priorities.
 
#21 ·
The reason I posed the question is that I am committed to the idea that the Government must comply with its own laws if law is to mean anything.

That's what the priority should be.

The fact that I was wrong using Kennesaw as an example is immaterial.

:cheers:
 
#22 ·
Again, I am not aware of any such ordinances, so the question is merely academic at this point, but the board and the officers have a responsibility to see to it that resources are focused on the founding purpose of GCO, which is to protect and expand the right of its members to keep and bear arms under the Georgia Constitution, not to be some sort of general watchdog group over government officials.

As a member, if you have a strong disagreement with the purpose of GCO or the methods of GCO, you are always welcome to speak to me (or any other board member or officer) about them privately. It is the members (and their problems) that guide the direction of GCO, after all.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top