I actually agree with this Gun Control Group's law suit. (1 Viewer)

[blaxshep]

ATLANTA (AP) — A tiny Georgia city and a national gun control group are facing off in a legal battle over a city ordinance requiring gun ownership, with the constitutionality of the law and broader messages about gun rights taking center stage.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in May filed a federal lawsuit against Nelson, a city of roughly 1,300 residents about 50 miles north of Atlanta, saying a recently adopted ordinance requiring heads of household to own a gun and ammunition is unconstitutional.

"We definitely think this law is misguided and unconstitutional in Nelson and anywhere else where it's passed," lawyer Jonathan Lowy of the Washington-based Brady Center said in a recent interview. "But it's also important to send a message to other jurisdictions around the country that might be inclined to pass similar misguided, unconstitutional laws."

The government should not be forcing citizens to own a gun any more than they should be infringing on the right to own one.


Ga. city spars with national gun control group - Houston Chronicle

 

[Excon]

ATLANTA (AP) — A tiny Georgia city and a national gun control group are facing off in a legal battle over a city ordinance requiring gun ownership, with the constitutionality of the law and broader messages about gun rights taking center stage.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in May filed a federal lawsuit against Nelson, a city of roughly 1,300 residents about 50 miles north of Atlanta, saying a recently adopted ordinance requiring heads of household to own a gun and ammunition is unconstitutional.

"We definitely think this law is misguided and unconstitutional in Nelson and anywhere else where it's passed," lawyer Jonathan Lowy of the Washington-based Brady Center said in a recent interview. "But it's also important to send a message to other jurisdictions around the country that might be inclined to pass similar misguided, unconstitutional laws."

The government should not be forcing citizens to own a gun any more than they should be infringing on the right to own one.


Ga. city spars with national gun control group - Houston Chronicle

Buying one is insurance.

And we already know the government can force you to buy insurance.

 

[repeter]

Buying one is insurance.

And we already know the government can force you to buy insurance.

Insurance can't accidentally shoot you or your loved ones.

Anyway, I'm not sure why you'd want to have all the untrained people required to have guns, seems like you're asking for more accidents to happen.

 

[Excon]

Insurance can't accidentally shoot you or your loved ones.

Neither can a gun.

Anyway, I'm not sure why you'd want to have all the untrained people required to have guns, seems like you're asking for more accidents to happen.

Any accident, would be an accident.

Not my job or the governments job to prevent them.

 

[soot]

Buying one is insurance.

And we already know the government can force you to buy insurance.

By that logic the government can force you to buy anything that can even remotely be viewed as insurance.

Car doesn't have side curtain airbags?

You're gonna need to run out and have those installed.

They're "insurance".

Wife is on the pill?

Doesn't matter, go get yourself some condoms. They're "insurance".

What? You feed your kids without having all your food tested by one of the government approved independent food safety labs? That's a no-go. A neighbor could have thrown poison through your window.

Get that food tested (for a nominal fee). It's "insurance".

We can play this silly game all night!

 

[Excon]

By that logic the government can force you to buy anything that can even remotely be viewed as insurance.

Car doesn't have side curtain airbags?

You're gonna need to run out and have those installed.

They're "insurance".

Wife is on the pill?

Doesn't matter, go get yourself some condoms. They're "insurance".

What? You feed your kids without having all your food tested by one of the government approved independent food safety labs? That's a no-go. A neighbor could have thrown poison through your window.

Get that food tested (for a nominal fee). It's "insurance".

We can play this silly game all night!

:doh
None of which has to do with being forced to purchase a gun.
And a great argument against having to purchase insurance in the first place.
But we already know how that turned out.
But it is meaningless to this topic.


The government can force you to buy insurance.
A gun offers insurance.
So they should be able to force it's purchase.

 

[repeter]

Neither can a gun.

Any accident, would be an accident.

Not my job or the governments job to prevent them.

Gun's allow fatal accidents to happen, which wouldn't have happened had the gun not been there.

Neither is it the government's job to go out of the way to cause accidents.

 

[Excon]

Neither is it the government's job to go out of the way to cause accidents.

:doh
Really?
You are going to say something as ridiculous as that?
Really?

The Government wouldn't be causing the accident.
That is akin to saying the roads the government creates cause all the accidents.

 

[repeter]

:doh
Really?
You are going to say something as ridiculous as that?
Really?

The Government wouldn't be causing the accident.
That is akin to saying the roads the government creates cause all the accidents.

If the government created roads and then didn't require anyone to have licenses, then yeah, the government was irresponsible, more so than any individual driver who caused an accident.

Equivalently, if the government is requiring ownership of guns, but doesn't regulate, you're asking for trouble.

 

[Excon]

If the government created roads and then didn't require anyone to have licenses, then yeah, the government was irresponsible, more so than any individual driver who caused an accident.

No. They would not be, as we are supposedly free to travel as we like on "Right-of ways".
Nor should it be their responsibility.

Equivalently, if the government is requiring ownership of guns, but doesn't regulate, you're asking for trouble.

Not even close to being equivalent.

 

[repeter]

No. They would not be, as we are supposedly free to travel as we like on "Right-of ways".
Nor should it be their responsibility.

Not even close to being equivalent.

We're going to go nowhere with this discussion. I'm going to say the comparison holds, and government is responsible. You're going to say they aren't. We're going to keep going back and forth, with nothing besides rhetorical skill deciding who "wins," and I doubt either of us would ever say the other won. We have fundamentally different views about what government is. With that being said, let's agree to disagree.

 

[Excon]

We're going to go nowhere with this discussion. I'm going to say the comparison holds, and government is responsible. You're going to say they aren't. We're going to keep going back and forth, with nothing besides rhetorical skill deciding who "wins," and I doubt either of us would ever say the other won. We have fundamentally different views about what government is. With that being said, let's agree to disagree.

We can do that, but you are still wrong. :mrgreen:

 

[jamesrage]

Gun's allow fatal accidents to happen, which wouldn't have happened had the gun not been there.

Neither is it the government's job to go out of the way to cause accidents.

Which is around 600 a year.

FIREARMS TUTORIAL
In the U.S. for 2010, there were 31,513 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600. 600 out of 310,000,000 firearms is 0.00019%

 

[jamesrage]

ATLANTA (AP) — A tiny Georgia city and a national gun control group are facing off in a legal battle over a city ordinance requiring gun ownership, with the constitutionality of the law and broader messages about gun rights taking center stage.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in May filed a federal lawsuit against Nelson, a city of roughly 1,300 residents about 50 miles north of Atlanta, saying a recently adopted ordinance requiring heads of household to own a gun and ammunition is unconstitutional.

"We definitely think this law is misguided and unconstitutional in Nelson and anywhere else where it's passed," lawyer Jonathan Lowy of the Washington-based Brady Center said in a recent interview. "But it's also important to send a message to other jurisdictions around the country that might be inclined to pass similar misguided, unconstitutional laws."

The government should not be forcing citizens to own a gun any more than they should be infringing on the right to own one.


Ga. city spars with national gun control group - Houston Chronicle

I can agree with this lawsuit. A right implies that it is optional for you to exercise.

 

[tech30528]

Anyone here from Georgia?

Oh wait, I'M from Georgia.

You know why an outside group had to complain about the law instead of someone in Nelson? Because they likely all owned guns anyway. They just expressed it as law so candy assed lawyers like this meddling asshole would know where not to visit.

K I'm off to bed. Got a two day rifle instructors course in the morning.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

If the US Government can force you to buy health care insurance then why can't a local government force you to own a gun?

 

[TurtleDude]

If the US Government can force you to buy health care insurance then why can't a local government force you to own a gun?

especially since one can argue that police protection and cleaning up a robbery costs us tax payes money

 

[blaxshep]

If the US Government can force you to buy health care insurance then why can't a local government force you to own a gun?

Certainly the SC can justify a Federal gun ownership mandate then by calling such legislation a tax.

 

[Jerry]

ATLANTA (AP) — A tiny Georgia city and a national gun control group are facing off in a legal battle over a city ordinance requiring gun ownership, with the constitutionality of the law and broader messages about gun rights taking center stage.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in May filed a federal lawsuit against Nelson, a city of roughly 1,300 residents about 50 miles north of Atlanta, saying a recently adopted ordinance requiring heads of household to own a gun and ammunition is unconstitutional.

"We definitely think this law is misguided and unconstitutional in Nelson and anywhere else where it's passed," lawyer Jonathan Lowy of the Washington-based Brady Center said in a recent interview. "But it's also important to send a message to other jurisdictions around the country that might be inclined to pass similar misguided, unconstitutional laws."

The government should not be forcing citizens to own a gun any more than they should be infringing on the right to own one.


Ga. city spars with national gun control group - Houston Chronicle

[sarcasm]Let's do like ObamaCare does: You don't have to own a gun, but if you don't own a gun then you get to pay a special tax every year.[/sarcasm]

*****
What you're not seeing about this law, how it's a wolf in sheep's clothing, is that you have to be able to prove you own a gun in order to comply with the law. You have to prove you own a gun, and the only way to enforce that is with registration.

I don't know why heymarket liked your post because heymarket supports registration.

 

[Jerry]

Insurance can't accidentally shoot you or your loved ones.

Neither can a gun.

The person holding the gun does the shooting. The gun doesn't act on it's own.

 

[VanceMack]

I dont know that i agree with the law, but at least there IS constitutional backing. As per the Constitution and the US Code, every able bodied adult is a member of the militia (organized or un organized) and as such could be tasked to provide for the defense of the country. Like the US Code, the law in this town provides for exclusions based on conscientious objector status.

 

[Morrigi]

The law in question also allows those unwilling to own a gun to opt out and it is more of a political stand than anything else.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Heh. Just me, or did a lawyer for the Brady Campaign just concede that the government has no business keeping people from owning guns?

 

[American]

Gun's allow fatal accidents to happen, which wouldn't have happened had the gun not been there.

Neither is it the government's job to go out of the way to cause accidents.

Not if the perp you're up against has a gun.