Skip to main content

View Diary: Georgia: now with more freedumb than ever! (103 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So unlike driving a car, holding a gun (11+ / 0-)

    Drunk is now legal. Don't worry, folks, he was a responsible gun owner, until he shot and killed you, now that he is no longer considered responsible, he can't have his gun in a bar again...I mean you are dead, but you should be happy.

    •  Call to ATF (11+ / 0-)

      (Caller) Hello? ATF? I have a problem: Some friends are coming over and we're goona do some man stuff, you know.. and I was wondering, what liquer goes best with .40 caliber guns?

      (ATF) That depends,..whatcha smokin?

      Legal means "good".
      [41984 | Feb 4, 2005]

      by xxdr zombiexx on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 06:26:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nope (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blackhand, notrouble

      Can not handle firearms if intoxicated.  New law allows you into a bar (like many, many states already) but you can't drink.  Btw, alcohol is available outside of bars and permitted owners aren't getting drunk and shooting people.  This will be no different.

      •  I will admit that the tradition here in Georgia (5+ / 0-)

        has been to fetch your gun from the car before returning to the bar.

        Waiting until your target has exited the drinking establishment has always been optional.

        Waiting to hear your explanation for why the bar owner shouldn't have the right to ban guns from their place of business.

        Nothing human is alien to me.

        by WB Reeves on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 08:48:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They do. All private establishments can post (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WB Reeves, blackhand

          All private establishments can post no gun signs.  And should.  Then, people who don't want to go into gun free zones can decide, just like people who don't want to be around them.

          •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            allie4fairness

            Can you cite that portion of the bill?

            So this State Law just makes it unlawful for local towns, municipalities and school boards to impose such bans?

            Nothing human is alien to me.

            by WB Reeves on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:18:33 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Standard (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              GAladybug, blackhand, notrouble

              http://www.cnn.com/...

              "The law also allows Georgians to carry guns into bars and churches as long as the property owner hasn't banned them. Anyone bringing a gun into a church that prohibits them won't be arrested but could pay a fine up to $100, the law says."

              In Minnesota, for example, any private business or location can post a sign (there are specific guidelines that the sign must meet-size, font size, color etc). Failure to heed to the sign means nothing.  You would have to be specifically asked to leave.  If you still won't leave, they can call police and then they can trespass you.  It is a misdemeanor with a $25 fine (if I recall). So, Georgia is no different, in this regard, except with a higher fine.

              Again, I support private businesses being able to prohibit guns in their place.  I won't do business with them, but I support their right.

              •  Do you really think a sign that says No guns (3+ / 0-)

                will stop a drunken gun nut from not shooting up the place?  Really?  So a life is worth 25 bucks in the state of Ga.  or maybe 100.00..  Bad news for cops having to respond to bar fights.. The domestics just got more dangerous and lethal.   I hope the responsbile gun owner wears a white hat so we know the difference between good and bad guys regarding totin not tokin.

                Just how much Koch do Right Wingers want in their life? . United Veterans of America

                by Vetwife on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 10:28:21 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Interesting (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sharon Wraight

                You really think you should have the right to carry a gun anywhere you choose, even to the point of boycotting businesses and houses of worship that don't allow it?

                In the latter case, would you refused to attend the weddings and funerals of loved ones if they were held in locations that banned guns? Would you refuse to visit family and friends in their homes if they didn't allow firearms?

                Do you actually carry a firearm everywhere you go?

                I do appreciate you taking the time illuminate this aspect of the law, although the absurdity, not to mention inequity, of requiring an unarmed property owner to confront an armed trespasser ought to be self apparent.

                Wouldn't it be simpler to require all people to be armed at all times?

                Nothing human is alien to me.

                by WB Reeves on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 10:39:43 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'll assume your query is in good faith, (0+ / 0-)

                  So I'll answer accordingly.

                  Yes, I feel I should be able to carry my firearm anywhere as long as its legal (all federal buildings including post offices, etc, are illegal with a 10 year sentence). I've passed the most stringent checks possible in the country.  I have never been arrested, let alone convicted, for any crime.  No drug history or mental illness problems.  I have proven proficiency with my firearms that far surpass the average police officer.

                  People boycott businesses everyday, for lots of reasons.  In fact, everyday on Kos, someone comes up with a new boycott.  In this very thread, no less than a dozen people advocate boycotting the entire state of Georgia.  So yes, I reserve the right to take my business elsewhere.

                  Of course, I go to weddings, funerals, school functions etc, unarmed.  I have no problem doing so, as long as the choice is mine, and I'm FREE to make it myself.

                  As for your last sentence, lol, not everyone should be armed.  But, if you pass the NCIS background check, and pass proficiency test and posses knowledge of all applicable laws, why not?

                  •  Hmm (0+ / 0-)

                    I admit I find it curious that you would boycott some places that ban guns, which you admit is legal, and not others. Seems inconsistent. Why only private businesses?

                    Your point about other boycotts isn't germane since I'm not arguing that you shouldn't boycott. Just wondering at your inconsistency.

                    I didn't ask if you attended weddings and funerals. I asked if you would attend them if held at houses of worship that banned guns.

                    As for this:

                    lol, not everyone should be armed.  But, if you pass the NCIS background check, and pass proficiency test and posses knowledge of all applicable laws, why not?
                    you're simply ignoring the context of the question.

                    Nothing human is alien to me.

                    by WB Reeves on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 11:24:05 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Not inconsistent at all (0+ / 0-)

                      For the examples you gave like churches and synagogues (weddings and funerals), or schools and hospitals, where I live, those businesses don't have the option to allow or ban guns on the premises.  Its a blanket ban, so I don't hold each individual place responsible.  I'll only boycott places that have a choice and then choose to prohibit firearms.  

                      As for your last question that you seem to think I ignored: you asked should everyone be armed, right?  I answered, no.  Pretty simple.

                      •  Nope, not what I asked you. (0+ / 0-)

                        Context is your friend, if you're arguing in good faith.

                        I do appreciate you taking the time illuminate this aspect of the law, although the absurdity, not to mention inequity, of requiring an unarmed property owner to confront an armed trespasser ought to be self apparent.

                        Wouldn't it be simpler to require all people to be armed at all times?

                        Not at all the same thing as:
                        ...you asked should everyone be armed, right?
                        If you insist on ignoring what was actually said in favor of substituting your own mistranslation, there's no point in continuing.

                        Nothing human is alien to me.

                        by WB Reeves on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 11:49:31 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

      •  Google "man shot in bar fight" (4+ / 0-)

        Follow the links and read the stories.

        When you are done in about 50 years or so, come back and let us know what you think.

        I am a warrior for peace. And not a gentle man... Steve Mason, 1940-2005

        by Wayward Wind on Wed Apr 23, 2014 at 09:28:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site