[alnen]

It is quite a shame that no initiative was taken on the House side to amend this bill to add GWCL holders to the exempted list, even after quite a bit of polite yet persistent urging to do so. Quite a shame indeed.

:2cents::sad:

It is quite a shame, to say the least. This is getting really old. We've made great strides over the last decade, but it was not due to the efforts of our government "leadership". In fact, if it wasn't for gco's creativity in '14, and effectiveness prior to that as well, where would we be right now? We have a "republican"/"pro gun" Senate, House, AND governor, yet we are having this much trouble getting a decent bill passed and signed into law.

I'm over the debating and the vetting on this. It's an issue that boils down to a natural born, God-given right. Further, this concept is not a new issue that is foreign to Americans. Our historical roots have tremendous ties to bearing arms and using them as needed. I know most modern politicians and many non politicians see the constitution as an outdated ancient text that no longer applies, but that's not how I see it. This constitution, the supreme law of our land, is very specific about the right to bear arms. We all know this, and I know I'm preaching to the choir, but with the lack of ability to follow a simple and basic enumerated law of our nation has me frustrated.

Sorry to vent. Gco is awesome and i thank you for what you've accomplished.

 

[moe mensale]

We have a "republican"/"pro gun" Senate, House, AND governor, yet we are having this much trouble getting a decent bill passed and signed into law.

It may or may not apply in this specific instance but outside pressure can bring a lot of influence in how and what legislation gets passed. Don't forget that people like Michael Bloomberg, for instance, have promised to fund all-out war against gun rights on a state-by-state basis. It's already happened in Oregon and Washington and Nevada is next.

 

[Savannah Dan]

It is quite a shame that no initiative was taken on the House side to amend this bill to add GWCL holders to the exempted list, even after quite a bit of polite yet persistent urging to do so. Quite a shame indeed.

:2cents::sad:

^This^

 

[mountainpass]

It's up: http://www.house.ga.gov/Streaming/en-US/Channel/Georgia1

 

[mountainpass]

Passed 114-50

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

Not sure how I feel about that. There is a part of me that would have rather seen this bill fail. Does this make me an LEO basher?

 

[GAfirearmsReference]

WHAT version passed? The link to SB270 in the original post on Page 1 of this thread shows only the latest add-on dealing only with the "stolen valor" offense.
Falsely claiming to be a veteran or wearing medals that were never awarded.

Where's the rest? Where is the "House Committee substitute to SB 270 (LC 41 0821S) in its entirety?

http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/161467.pdf

 

[70755]

WHAT version passed? The link to SB270 in the original post on Page 1 of this thread shows only the latest add-on dealing only with the "stolen valor" offense.
Falsely claiming to be a veteran or wearing medals that were never awarded.

Where's the rest? Where is the "House Committee substitute to SB 270 (LC 41 0821S) in its entirety?

http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/161467.pdf

Go to http://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/en-US/Display/20152016/SB/270
and then click on LC 41 0821S/hss 41 0 which is the house committee substitute. There are 2 further amendments which show up as AM 41 0207 and "open current version" which is amendment AM 41 0211

 

[Nemo]

Not sure how I feel about that. There is a part of me that would have rather seen this bill fail. Does this make me an LEO basher?

Yes.

But the LAWbotomy is to blame for that.

Nemo

 

[GAfirearmsReference]

thanks

got it; thanks. I wasn't looking down far enough on the web page.

Here's a link to the 7-page "LC 41 0821S" component, with 8 enumerated sections. http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/160737.pdf

And here's the amendment "AM 41 0207" which is just 2 pages long.
http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20152016/161466.pdf

 

[etbob9]

These lines are the reporting requirement in the swatting bill that was also merged into SB 270, that the Sheriff's Association did not want in the bill.

[quote from GCO summary of SB 270] Summary of SB 270
This bill would:
Make "swatting" a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature for first offense
Make "swatting" a felony punishable by not less than 1 or more than 10 years imprisonment, a fine of not less than $5,000 or both.

What lines in SB 270 reflects the addition of "swatting"?
Maybe this will define swatting.

 

[mountainpass]

SB270 was stripped of 1060 language(which was added in senate committee) and passed. Has to go back to house.

 

[etbob9]

What is the definition of "swatting" in this application?

 

[mountainpass]

Passed house 112-46 as it started life.

Edit: To the Gov's desk.

 

[tmoore912]

Passed house 112-46 as it started life.

Edit: To the Gov's desk.

That's it............the last bill that could have been amended to change Campus Carry. If the Governor doesn't want Campus Carry, he will have to veto it now.
40 days.

 

[Phil1979]

The ball's in your court, Governor.

Later in the news...

"Governor Deal has signed campus carry into law with little fanfare, saying that while he agrees people should have the right to protect themselves on college campuses, there are issues of concern to him with this bill that he plans to have addressed next session."

 

[Nemo]

"Governor Deal has signed campus carry into law with little fanfare

Citation please.

Nemo

 

[mark5019]

wish he had the Cajuns to keep his word

 

[Phil1979]

You want future news AND a citation? Talk about wanting your cake and eating it, too! ;-)

Citation please.

Nemo

 

[Nemo]

You want future news AND a citation? Talk about wanting your cake and eating it, too! ;-)

OOHhhKaayy I think I did not really understand your thought pattern.

Nemo