Georgia Town Considers Mandatory Gun Ownership

Posted on March 7, 2013 at 8:34 am by Bob Cesca

From Georgia Republicans who probably objected to government-mandated health insurance:

A city in Georgia is considering a proposal as soon as next month that requires every homeowner to own a gun. Citing limited police resources and slow response time, Nelson City Councilman Duane Cronic said armed residents would deter crime instead.

Yeah, not sure if serious.

It’s the NRA-generated agitprop that the true intent of the 2nd Amendment was to provide security in times of lawlessness. It wasn’t. Obviously.

This entry was posted in Georgia, Guns and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/LeShan-Jones/100000478051440 LeShan Jones

    This is typical of the gun-nuts. Their
    paranoid personalities have convinced them that the only thing they have to fear
    is crime, crime, crime.

    Any and every debate with these
    guys, if they don’t descend into insurrectionist crap will revolve around
    crime, crime, crime.

    The number of people killed
    weekly by firearms doesn’t matter because…CRIME!

    The fact that gun owners are more
    likely to shoot themselves or others in their home doesn’t matter
    because…CRIME…HOME BREAK-INS!!!!

    The gun advocate side is really
    just one big mass of paranoia and fear; it’s their main motivating feature.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      Add to that the fact that crime has been decreasing over the last 20 years. Experts don’t know why, but it has definitely and significantly decreased. Not that the American public knows this. For that to happen the Fourth Estate would actually have to do it’s job.

      • MiddleMittenLiberal

        Here in the middle-of-the-mitten a local county commissioner decided that we do NOT need security at the county court house (where they meet) because “The current Board of Commissioners values FREEDOM (my emphasis) over security in a civilized society in which law-abiding citizens have a Fourth Amendment right to be secure in their persons, houses…” (articles in today’s local paper)…blah, blah…. I’m sure the local judges are thrilled. This nut-job apparently rammed this through with no public hearing, etc.

        • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

          Well, don’t be so sure that county judges will be smart enough to be worried. Back when I was a Probation Officer, I was routinely in court to testify against or for an offender during violation hearings. Anyway, there was this one male judge who got mad at me for wearing pants to court. This was in 1991, mind you. I always dressed up for court and it’s not like I was wearing jeans with holes in them. He ordered me, in open court to wear proper attire, i.e., a skirt. My first thought was, “Are you sh*tting me?!” Second thought, “Oh crap, if one of these offenders goes nuts, has a gun or gets a gun and starts going nuts, I’ll be the first person shot because I won’t be able to maneuver in a skirt.” You just can’t run and leap over those long wooden rows in a skirt. They get in the way of low crawling, etc, etc, etc. All this went through my mind and I carried a 357 Magnum as my duty weapon. According to the gun fetishists I shouldn’t have been scared of nothing with firepower like that.

          A few points here: 1) county judges can be conservative idjits too, 2) It’s the OTHER security personnel who want the added security the most, and 3) law enforcement/corrections has always been and will always be a pawn in the eyes of politician. I sincerely hope that no one goes nuts in those courtrooms.

          PS: Next hearing in front of that judge, I wore a sexy little outfit with a short skirt and as an added bonus the ensemble included a tie. ;)

  • http://twitter.com/tlavely Tony Lavely

    It’s really a way to rid themselves of ex-felons and others prohibited from owning firearms.

  • http://twitter.com/rycarson Ryan Carson

    Actually, they are partially right. The question is what kind of lawlessness. The answer: slave uprisings in the south in which the military may not intervene to return the “property” of white slaveowners. Thus, they needed armed militias to deter and combat possible slave rebellions.

  • mrbrink

    Mandatory gun ownership makes sense when you need every hand on deck to stand in front of schools, hospitals, and polling places.

    • muselet

      Yes, but there’s no real need for guns. Pick handles can work, too.

      –alopecia

      • bphoon

        I remember Lester Maddox, responding to charges that he kept ax handles at his Pickrick Restaurant to prevent blacks from eating there, complaining that the media continually got things about him all wrong. He never used ax handles, he said, they were pickaxe handles.