| Author | Topic |
|---|
stoker
back to top
| Posted: Fri Feb 26th, 2010 03:37 pm |
ManinBlack wrote: mae0618, I am sure most of what you say is in jest. As we both know an ordinance is nothing but a piece of paper signed by a majority of the powers that be in hopes that they can control the general population with it. Ordinances are not Laws and are subject to a more difficult test in terms of enforcement. I have personally challenged more than one ordinance and been successful as most ordinances are not actually legal, only the opinion of a few.
While I do believe that honest people should have the right to own guns. (I have a few myself) the idea that an ordinance could be enacted and (enforced) that says that a person must have a (loaded gun) in their home is not something I would advocate. I do believe they have the ordinance, but I don't believe that they have ever tried to enforce it. If it is a deterrent, it would only be for those uninformed enough to think that whatever group passed this (ordinance) could or would for that matter try to enforce it. Big Joke.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,!!!!
mae0618 wrote:
harleylady wrote: its a shame when we have armed robbers, people breaking into homes and business and all our city and county commissioners want to do is examples: new tennis courts; new layout for roads(Riverside's little stupid circle) increasing water rates (riverside ismostly elderly andthe average water billis 48.00 because they are charged Double rates!, voting in their mayor not the allowing, us, the People of Rome vote for this and as always using SPLOST money for anything they deem fit. Why can we not use some of the money to public safely? To enhance our police dept? give them the equipment that is needed to help fight in the increased crime that we our seeing. oh that's right THE CRIME IS NOT IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD
Actually we could reduce the crime rate by half and not have the city spend any money at all.... just do what Kennesaw did and pass an ordinance that says each homeowner is REQUIRED to have a loaded gun in the house! I guarantee a drop in crime....
Probably both good arguments. I don't know the legality but even having an such ordinance gives the impression that the population would abide by it regardless of the truth. I doubt thieves would know that everyone doesn't actually have a gun laying around the house, but the thought that they might just may be enough to make them rethink breaking in to find out. 
As for home here, they are welcome to show up and see for themselves if they wish.
|
mae0618
back to top
| Posted: Fri Feb 26th, 2010 08:15 pm |
Radius wrote: If my memory serves me correctly mae0618, Kennesaw's crime rate dropped 88% within the first year the law was passed...a statistic that sends the anti-gun moon-bats into fits of rage.
In today's world we're expected to be a kinder and gentler nation of people and respect the rights of others who have no problem with sticking a gun in our faces and taking from us whatever they see fit. Same goes with how our soldiers are being expected to fight wars. Compassion and restraint have unquestionably replaced brute force knock-down power and total annihilation of the enemy...violent criminals not withstanding.
As long as this lunacy continues to permeate the mentality of our country and it's leaders, then we're bound to lose both wars against crime and terror.
Also, I heard someone on the radio the other day say, though I do need to look it up to be sure, that the crime rate in Kennesaw has remained at that lower rate.
|
mae0618
back to top
| Posted: Fri Feb 26th, 2010 08:27 pm |
stoker wrote: ManinBlack wrote: mae0618, I am sure most of what you say is in jest. As we both know an ordinance is nothing but a piece of paper signed by a majority of the powers that be in hopes that they can control the general population with it. Ordinances are not Laws and are subject to a more difficult test in terms of enforcement. I have personally challenged more than one ordinance and been successful as most ordinances are not actually legal, only the opinion of a few.
While I do believe that honest people should have the right to own guns. (I have a few myself) the idea that an ordinance could be enacted and (enforced) that says that a person must have a (loaded gun) in their home is not something I would advocate. I do believe they have the ordinance, but I don't believe that they have ever tried to enforce it. If it is a deterrent, it would only be for those uninformed enough to think that whatever group passed this (ordinance) could or would for that matter try to enforce it. Big Joke.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,!!!!
mae0618 wrote:
harleylady wrote: its a shame when we have armed robbers, people breaking into homes and business and all our city and county commissioners want to do is examples: new tennis courts; new layout for roads(Riverside's little stupid circle) increasing water rates (riverside ismostly elderly andthe average water billis 48.00 because they are charged Double rates!, voting in their mayor not the allowing, us, the People of Rome vote for this and as always using SPLOST money for anything they deem fit. Why can we not use some of the money to public safely? To enhance our police dept? give them the equipment that is needed to help fight in the increased crime that we our seeing. oh that's right THE CRIME IS NOT IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD
Actually we could reduce the crime rate by half and not have the city spend any money at all.... just do what Kennesaw did and pass an ordinance that says each homeowner is REQUIRED to have a loaded gun in the house! I guarantee a drop in crime....
Probably both good arguments. I don't know the legality but even having an such ordinance gives the impression that the population would abide by it regardless of the truth. I doubt thieves would know that everyone doesn't actually have a gun laying around the house, but the thought that they might just may be enough to make them rethink breaking in to find out.
As for home here, they are welcome to show up and see for themselves if they wish.
Yes, if you research the subject, you find that the ordinance is not really enforceable. But, imagine you are gonna rob a house, where do you think would be better for you to go? Somewhere where only the criminals have guns? Or Kennesaw where the city council has made it apparent that they are very friendly to gun owners, and have given the green light to everyone having a gun in their house?
It's like Ann Coulter wrote in one of her books. She was talking about being mugged in Washington DC (how can that be possible? Weren't guns banned in DC until recently? But I digress...). She didn't WANT to have a gun, she just wanted the mugger to think she MIGHT have a gun. But, of course, since she is a law abiding citizen, and was PROHIBITED from carrying a gun, he could be pretty sure she was unarmed, and was therefore PREY to him!
In fact, I would go so far as to say it is your DUTY to arm and defend yourself. There are, I think, 300,000 Firearms License Holders in Georgia, out of a population of 9 million. Not enough!!!
As for me, I didn't want to have to depend on someone near me being one of those license holders with a concealed (or openly carried) weapon when I needed them, so I went ahead and got my own license and firearms.
It's better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.
|
mae0618
back to top
| Posted: Fri Feb 26th, 2010 08:28 pm |
ManinBlack wrote:
While I do believe that honest people should have the right to own guns.
Well I hope so.... I think there is an ammendment or something to that effect, right????
|
jesse jackson
back to top
| Posted: Fri Feb 26th, 2010 08:59 pm |
mae0618 wrote: ManinBlack wrote:
While I do believe that honest people should have the right to own guns.
Well I hope so.... I think there is an ammendment or something to that effect, right????
There are some who don't accept that.....except for their bodyguards.
|
coolhead64
back to top
| Posted: Fri Feb 26th, 2010 09:48 pm |
ManinBlack wrote: mae0618, I am sure most of what you say is in jest. As we both know an ordinance is nothing but a piece of paper signed by a majority of the powers that be in hopes that they can control the general population with it. Ordinances are not Laws and are subject to a more difficult test in terms of enforcement. I have personally challenged more than one ordinance and been successful as most ordinances are not actually legal, only the opinion of a few.
While I do believe that honest people should have the right to own guns. (I have a few myself) the idea that an ordinance could be enacted and (enforced) that says that a person must have a (loaded gun) in their home is not something I would advocate. I do believe they have the ordinance, but I don't believe that they have ever tried to enforce it. If it is a deterrent, it would only be for those uninformed enough to think that whatever group passed this (ordinance) could or would for that matter try to enforce it. Big Joke.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,!!!!
mae0618 wrote:
harleylady wrote: its a shame when we have armed robbers, people breaking into homes and business and all our city and county commissioners want to do is examples: new tennis courts; new layout for roads(Riverside's little stupid circle) increasing water rates (riverside ismostly elderly andthe average water billis 48.00 because they are charged Double rates!, voting in their mayor not the allowing, us, the People of Rome vote for this and as always using SPLOST money for anything they deem fit. Why can we not use some of the money to public safely? To enhance our police dept? give them the equipment that is needed to help fight in the increased crime that we our seeing. oh that's right THE CRIME IS NOT IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD
Actually we could reduce the crime rate by half and not have the city spend any money at all.... just do what Kennesaw did and pass an ordinance that says each homeowner is REQUIRED to have a loaded gun in the house! I guarantee a drop in crime....
An ordinance is a local law
§ 36-1-20. Ordinances for governing and policing of unincorporated areas of county (a) The governing authority of each county, for the purpose of protecting and preserving the public health, safety, and welfare, is authorized to adopt ordinances for the governing and policing of the unincorporated areas of the county, violations of which ordinances may be punished by fine or imprisonment or both. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, such ordinances may provide for traffic regulation, including adoption of the uniform rules of the road under Chapter 6 of Title 40, may provide for the regulation and control of litter in the same manner as municipal ordinances under Code Section 16-7-48, and may provide for the implementation and enforcement of any power or duty vested in the county governing authority.
(b) Each such ordinance shall specify the maximum punishment which may be imposed for a violation of the ordinance; and in no case shall the maximum punishment for the violation of any such ordinance exceed a fine of $1,000.00 or imprisonment for 60 days or both; provided, however, that for violation of a pretreatment standard or requirement adopted pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act the ordinance may specify that the fine may be up to $1,000.00 per day for each violation by an industrial user.
Not to mention numerous other state statutes allowing counties and cities to adopt ordinances, I mean, I hate to continue to prove you wrong time and time again, but you usually are.
|
jesse jackson
back to top
| Posted: Sat Feb 27th, 2010 03:01 am |
Coolhead, if you are right, then you are right. No need to brag, or posture. If you know something then state it, back it up if necessary, but to gloat does you no good.
Just advice from an old man.....use all the salt needed.
|
ManinBlack
Guest
back to top
| Posted: Sat Feb 27th, 2010 07:05 am |
Coolhead , Take any of these ordinances to Court and they will lose. An ordinance has now standing past the last two crooked guys who put their name on them. I have beat them time and time again. You are kid and should keep your mouth shut. You don't have a clue how to deal with a man like me.
Edited by Bigdaddy. Please see the rules for posting.
|
xalleykatx
back to top
| Posted: Sat Feb 27th, 2010 07:09 am |
My sign reads, This house is protected 6 nights a week with a crazed man and a shotgun. You figure out his off night.
|
USNavyVet
back to top
| Posted: Sat Feb 27th, 2010 07:44 pm |
Here is a question, please dont bash me, I am serious, not trying to kick the ant pile, a serious thouhgt/quesion for you here:
"Have yo been robbed, pulled a gun, and confronted with someone's mortality?" Honestly? If yes...."did YOU pull the trigger?"
I have guns, I have them locked up. I have pulled triggers and knew the "potential" of lives lost each time in a war environment. It was reality & just what happened then. In a civilian world, do you have the ability to rationalize all that Law Enforcement have to when faced with pulling the trigger? Is the person actually armed? Did they commit the robbery and have stolen property on them? Is it enough for you that they are just on your property to shoot?
It is very easy to fill your chest & say "They'll pry this gun from my cold dead hands" then when faced with the reality of taking another life for robbery is a sobering reality. Can I say and honestly accept my tools in the garage are worth a Meth heads life.... Defending my family might be another issue....
By the way, don't get me wrong, I have guns, use them, and can/will/would defend my family with them.... its just that being confronted with shooting a teen kid at 4am, (or adult for that matter) breaking into a car or business that really changed my way to deal with these questions. It is my "opinion" that accepting a life of Christianity and believing in total trust in God that has implanted the "question-voice" in me...before I do what I would have done easily before.
Thoughts?
....the kid lived
|
toosavoter
Guest
back to top
| Posted: Sat Feb 27th, 2010 08:17 pm |
From Wikipedia: "Kennesaw's law was amended in 1983 to exempt those who conscientiously object to owning a firearm, convicted felons, those who cannot afford a firearm, and those with a mental or physical disability that would prevent them from owning a firearm. It mentions no penalty for its violation."
|
stoker
back to top
| Posted: Sat Feb 27th, 2010 09:31 pm |
USNavyVet wrote: Here is a question, please dont bash me, I am serious, not trying to kick the ant pile, a serious thouhgt/quesion for you here:
"Have yo been robbed, pulled a gun, and confronted with someone's mortality?" Honestly? If yes...."did YOU pull the trigger?"
I have guns, I have them locked up. I have pulled triggers and knew the "potential" of lives lost each time in a war environment. It was reality & just what happened then. In a civilian world, do you have the ability to rationalize all that Law Enforcement have to when faced with pulling the trigger? Is the person actually armed? Did they commit the robbery and have stolen property on them? Is it enough for you that they are just on your property to shoot?
It is very easy to fill your chest & say "They'll pry this gun from my cold dead hands" then when faced with the reality of taking another life for robbery is a sobering reality. Can I say and honestly accept my tools in the garage are worth a Meth heads life.... Defending my family might be another issue....
By the way, don't get me wrong, I have guns, use them, and can/will/would defend my family with them.... its just that being confronted with shooting a teen kid at 4am, (or adult for that matter) breaking into a car or business that really changed my way to deal with these questions. It is my "opinion" that accepting a life of Christianity and believing in total trust in God that has implanted the "question-voice" in me...before I do what I would have done easily before.
Thoughts?
....the kid lived If you have doubts about being able to pull the trigger in any situation, then it's best you leave the guns locked up. JMO
Sent you a PM
|
coolhead64
back to top
| Posted: Sun Feb 28th, 2010 04:40 am |
ManinBlack wrote: Coolhead , Take any of these ordinances to Court and they will lose. An ordinance has now standing past the last two crooked guys who put their name on them. I have beat them time and time again. You are kid and should keep your mouth shut. You don't have a clue how to deal with a man like me.
Edited by Bigdaddy. Please see the rules for posting.
Habitual law breaker? Sounds like it to me.
I believe people take this ordinances to court all the time (mainly the dog ones) and lose.
|
ME!
back to top
| Posted: Sun Feb 28th, 2010 05:14 am |
there was another robbery earlier this evening at a convenience store. two black males wearing black jeans and black hoodies, got $248. but I didn't catch where it happened.
|
mae0618
back to top
| Posted: Tue Mar 2nd, 2010 01:20 am |
coolhead64 wrote: ManinBlack wrote: mae0618, I am sure most of what you say is in jest. As we both know an ordinance is nothing but a piece of paper signed by a majority of the powers that be in hopes that they can control the general population with it. Ordinances are not Laws and are subject to a more difficult test in terms of enforcement. I have personally challenged more than one ordinance and been successful as most ordinances are not actually legal, only the opinion of a few.
While I do believe that honest people should have the right to own guns. (I have a few myself) the idea that an ordinance could be enacted and (enforced) that says that a person must have a (loaded gun) in their home is not something I would advocate. I do believe they have the ordinance, but I don't believe that they have ever tried to enforce it. If it is a deterrent, it would only be for those uninformed enough to think that whatever group passed this (ordinance) could or would for that matter try to enforce it. Big Joke.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,!!!!
mae0618 wrote:
harleylady wrote: its a shame when we have armed robbers, people breaking into homes and business and all our city and county commissioners want to do is examples: new tennis courts; new layout for roads(Riverside's little stupid circle) increasing water rates (riverside ismostly elderly andthe average water billis 48.00 because they are charged Double rates!, voting in their mayor not the allowing, us, the People of Rome vote for this and as always using SPLOST money for anything they deem fit. Why can we not use some of the money to public safely? To enhance our police dept? give them the equipment that is needed to help fight in the increased crime that we our seeing. oh that's right THE CRIME IS NOT IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD
Actually we could reduce the crime rate by half and not have the city spend any money at all.... just do what Kennesaw did and pass an ordinance that says each homeowner is REQUIRED to have a loaded gun in the house! I guarantee a drop in crime....
An ordinance is a local law
§ 36-1-20. Ordinances for governing and policing of unincorporated areas of county (a) The governing authority of each county, for the purpose of protecting and preserving the public health, safety, and welfare, is authorized to adopt ordinances for the governing and policing of the unincorporated areas of the county, violations of which ordinances may be punished by fine or imprisonment or both. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, such ordinances may provide for traffic regulation, including adoption of the uniform rules of the road under Chapter 6 of Title 40, may provide for the regulation and control of litter in the same manner as municipal ordinances under Code Section 16-7-48, and may provide for the implementation and enforcement of any power or duty vested in the county governing authority.
(b) Each such ordinance shall specify the maximum punishment which may be imposed for a violation of the ordinance; and in no case shall the maximum punishment for the violation of any such ordinance exceed a fine of $1,000.00 or imprisonment for 60 days or both; provided, however, that for violation of a pretreatment standard or requirement adopted pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act the ordinance may specify that the fine may be up to $1,000.00 per day for each violation by an industrial user.
Not to mention numerous other state statutes allowing counties and cities to adopt ordinances, I mean, I hate to continue to prove you wrong time and time again, but you usually are.
I knew I could count on you, son!!!! :-)
|
|
|
