Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner

Marta Murder

1352 Views 16 Replies 7 Participants Last post by  RedBeard

September 6, 2006.
1 - 6 of 17 Posts
Re: Cabbies and Guns

gunsmoker said:
And I'd be willing to make GFL permits tougher to get (i.e. mandatory training, both in the classroom and on the range) in exchange for being able to carry on a daily basis in ordinary places that common citizens normally go.
Is somebody offering that? I must have missed it.

Let me tell you how that would really work if offered up by our side prior to any real action by the legislature.

We would get mandatory training. We might get restaurant carry.

Then what will you have left to trade for the rest of your liberty?

I am not aware of any anti politician arguing that he would support removal of any particular restriction if he could just get gun owners to agree to a training requirement . . .

I am also not aware of any particular problem in Georgia that training would address. Non-police appear to be more competent than police as it is. Link: ... =9831#9831
See less See more
From O.C.G.A. 16-12-123:

. . . law enforcement officer, peace officer retired from a state or federal law enforcement agency, person in the military service of the state or of the United States, or commercial security personnel employed by the transportation company who is in possession of weapons used within the course and scope of their employment . . .

I dunno, can off duty officers carry in the Marta parking lot?

This is a very unclear statute.
Re: Cabbies and Guns

gunsmoker said:
The real answer to this problem is to repeal the public gatherings clause, the mass transit weapons ban, the school and school zone ban, and allow anybody with a carry permit to carry ANYWHERE other than the sterile, controlled-access areas of airports, courthouses, prisons, etc.

And I'd be willing to make GFL permits tougher to get (i.e. mandatory training, both in the classroom and on the range) in exchange
You are under the impression that this is a negotiation! :D

They are not negotiating.

The only people you would hope to convince with this tactic (gun control legislators in the General Assembly) won't be convinced. They don't even like you carrying on Peachtree Street or at the mall. While they would be quite willing to put more onerous restrictions on the license (restrictions that we would fight), they would not be willing to give up much "in exchange."

Do you remember the speeches over the "Stand Your Ground" law? A law that changed nothing substantive about when you may or may not exercise self defense was described as if it was going to start civil war. That is what those legislators think about you, me, and the public in general.

I reassert the practical result of your tactic. The bill gets introduced making expensive and time consuming training a requirement for a license, and then the "off limits places" list gets pared away through amendments until the bill that comes out of committee decriminalizes only carry in restaurants but imposes a training requirement.

Now what are you going to trade "in exchange" for lifting the rest of the restrictions? What will be left to trade?

A real trade benefits both parties. Trading away the easy exercise of your liberty probably is not going to get you a good bargain.
See less See more
Re: maybe

gunsmoker said:
Maybe the reason so many people, including many legislators, are anti-CCW is because they know how easy it is to get one. No training of any kind.
Legislators who are "anti - CCW" are in no way going to be mollified by a training requirement and suddenly vote to remove from the list all the places off limits - like Marta and the airport and the courthouse.

I do not even believe that you believe that argument.

That is why I ended up with the practical results of this argument, which is a training restriction but little or nothing to show for it (maybe restaurant carry, which I think we can get without adding any onerous requirements to obtaining the license).
RedBeard said:
Maybe we need to require people to take a test to be able to vote. Voting is such a critical part of our society and we need to take it seriously. We cant just let anyone wield such a powerful right without making them prove they deserve that right.

Ya know?
OK, you got me with that one. I thought you were suggesting it. You are pointing out that it is as silly as requiring training to carry . . . because arms are a birthright.

Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

Mr. Coxe probably meant just, you know, a state militia . . . :roll:

Unfortunately, unless there is a huge change with some federal court decision, it really is a privilege, not a right. The state case law definitely indicates it is a privilege, although the case law still uses the term right, but it is to be regulated with any regulation the General Assembly deems "reasonable." To see how Georgia's law has evolved from a birthright to a right subject to any "regulation . . . [that] is legitimate and reasonably within the police power . . ." look here
See less See more
1 - 6 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.