Joined
·
213 Posts
I've been wondering about the origin of the "public gathering" wording that has caused so much debate and mental anguish on this site (and others, I'm sure). Also, is the ambiguous "public gathering" wording peculiar to GA?
Is it intended to be a catch-all phrase to virtually prohibit carry in public places that are not explicitly named? If that was the intent, why the need to enumerate sporting events, church carry, and establishments that serve alcohol if some or all of these would already be prohibited?
Is it possible that this law was actually somewhat thought out (albeit having adverse and unintended results)? What I'm driving at is might the wording have been intended to address the meetings of one specific organization, with it's origins in the Deep South 140 or so years ago? Since this particular organization had a well deserved reputation for violence, might it make some sense to outlaw the possession of weapons at their meetings and activities?
I'm definitely not writing in support of the wording if for no other reason than I think it leaves far too much up to the police officer, the prosecutor, the judge, and the jury. Just thinking out loud.
Any thoughts?
BB
Is it intended to be a catch-all phrase to virtually prohibit carry in public places that are not explicitly named? If that was the intent, why the need to enumerate sporting events, church carry, and establishments that serve alcohol if some or all of these would already be prohibited?
Is it possible that this law was actually somewhat thought out (albeit having adverse and unintended results)? What I'm driving at is might the wording have been intended to address the meetings of one specific organization, with it's origins in the Deep South 140 or so years ago? Since this particular organization had a well deserved reputation for violence, might it make some sense to outlaw the possession of weapons at their meetings and activities?
I'm definitely not writing in support of the wording if for no other reason than I think it leaves far too much up to the police officer, the prosecutor, the judge, and the jury. Just thinking out loud.
Any thoughts?
BB