GA governor to sign bill enabling guns...

[TemplarKormac]

Hm...wouldn't that kind of commitment/mental illness notification depend on comprehensive background checks...including at gun shows and online...to be at all effective?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Nope. Simply notifying the state of someone being certifiably mentally ill would disqualify them from owning a firearm. All you need is a registry of people with mental issues. They'll run your name at the gun show, or at a gun store and determine your eligibility. I think it's rather ingenious.

You missed the point. The law addresses ....court ordered custody.... related to mental illness issues. Who could be against that aspect regarding obtaining firearms? The usual low information left?

What are you talking about? Can you show me where I made such a claim?

 

[dr.d]

I'm sure the intent of the mandatory notification of court ordered psychiatric care was intended for the instant name check. If the same law was in effect in Virginia the worst school shooting in history would not have happened in Va. Tech because the maniac who was ordered to undergo psychiatric counseling for stalking coeds would not have been able to "legally" obtain a weapon.

So...Ur saying that an aspiring gun purchaser would have to notify a vendor of his legal name (with proof of course) ...and the gun dealer would have to check it against the restricted list?....That WOULD amount to a kind of "background check", no?
I was under the impression that buyers at certain gun shows or online did not have to show ID or provide any personal info...Am I wrong about that?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

First of all a crazy person probably would not have an alternate I.D. A photo I.D. and another i.D. is required for gun purchases. The law goes such a long way toward eliminating the maniac glitch that it's no surprise that it had bi-partisan support including Jimmy Carter's son.

Um...a lot of crazies r able to maintain a calm demeanor when purchasing a gun...that's why u hear a lot of folks say about mass killers after the fact..."He was so quiet"...even pleasant and friendly. The true psychos don't come across drooling and acting crazy...like in the movies u'know.
Also..the mass killers we know of so far had no mental illness commitment history...even the killer of all those little kids in the elementary school..and the Columbine killers...and the movie theater psycho...etc. So how would that be a deterrent?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Spoonman]

...to be legally brought into schools, churches and "unsecured" government buildings...
2nd Amendment championing
Or...
Political posturing in an election year
?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

just keeping inline with the 2nd amendment

 

[whitehall]

So...Ur saying that an aspiring gun purchaser would have to notify a vendor of his legal name (with proof of course) ...and the gun dealer would have to check it against the restricted list?....That WOULD amount to a kind of "background check", no?
I was under the impression that buyers at certain gun shows or online did not have to show ID or provide any personal info...Am I wrong about that?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

First of all a crazy person probably would not have an alternate I.D. A photo I.D. and another i.D. is required for gun purchases. The law goes such a long way toward eliminating the maniac glitch that it's no surprise that it had bi-partisan support including Jimmy Carter's son.

Um...a lot of crazies r able to maintain a calm demeanor when purchasing a gun...that's why u hear a lot of folks say about mass killers after the fact..."He was so quiet"...even pleasant and friendly. The true psychos don't come across drooling and acting crazy...like in the movies u'know.
Also..the mass killers we know of so far had no mental illness commitment history...even the killer of all those little kids in the elementary school..and the Columbine killers...and the movie theater psycho...etc. So how would that be a deterrent?

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

WTF is with the radical left? Are they watching too many movies? A calm demeanor only works when you are smuggling drugs across the border. Americans are required to produce a photo I.D. and another I.D. verifying the original I.D. to purchase a firearm. The name check may or may not reveal the recent incarceration of a maniac. the question is whether you want to protect the identity of the maniac or risk the lives of family?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

House Bill 60, or the Safe Carry Protection Act of 2014 -- which opponents have nicknamed the "guns everywhere bill" -- specifies where Georgia residents can carry weapons. Included are provisions that allow residents who have concealed carry permits to take guns into some bars, churches, school zones, government buildings and certain parts of airports.

Georgia law allows guns in some schools, bars, churches - CNN.com

Allowing those with a concealed carry permit to possess a firearm in such venues is perfectly appropriate.

There is no objective, documented evidence indicating that carrying a firearm in such places poses a greater ‘threat’ than carrying a concealed firearm anywhere else.

 

[dr.d]

Hm...wouldn't that kind of commitment/mental illness notification depend on comprehensive background checks...including at gun shows and online...to be at all effective?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Nope. Simply notifying the state of someone being certifiably mentally ill would disqualify them from owning a firearm. All you need is a registry of people with mental issues. They'll run your name at the gun show, or at a gun store and determine your eligibility. I think it's rather ingenious.

You missed the point. The law addresses ....court ordered custody.... related to mental illness issues. Who could be against that aspect regarding obtaining firearms? The usual low information left?

Sadly...u represent the "low info"element in this matter...Most of the known mass and psycho killers (at columbine, at college campuses; Lanza who shot down all those elementary school kids, the movie theater shooters, etc.) have NO MENTAL ILLNESS COMMITMENT HISTORY...
If any have a diagnosis at all; it's for outpatient treatment...and submitting all of those multitudes for gun ownership screening would not only violate confidentiality, but would be prohibitive...Ur talking housewives w PMS, veterans w PTSD, Teens w depression, and a plethora of folks with anxiety disorders ranging from mild OCD thru trichotellanemia, and debilitating phobias...These disorders r all forms of mental illness, but have nothing to do with a predisposition to violence...
So how would submitting names of individuals w a court ordered commitment history help...since most of our known gun wielding psychokillers have none?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[dr.d]

House Bill 60, or the Safe Carry Protection Act of 2014 -- which opponents have nicknamed the "guns everywhere bill" -- specifies where Georgia residents can carry weapons. Included are provisions that allow residents who have concealed carry permits to take guns into some bars, churches, school zones, government buildings and certain parts of airports.

Georgia law allows guns in some schools, bars, churches - CNN.com

Allowing those with a concealed carry permit to possess a firearm in such venues is perfectly appropriate.

There is no objective, documented evidence indicating that carrying a firearm in such places poses a greater ‘threat’ than carrying a concealed firearm anywhere else.

There is also no "clear objective evidence" that carrying a firearm around freely everywhere promotes safety...And can make it more handy to use when annoyed, as in the case of the ex-cop who shot a dad in a movie theater for making a phone call..or the one that shot a teen for playing music too loud in his car...
Incidentally, I believe that there is a provision in the law that prevents cops from checking suspects for guns in any venue...unless a crime has already been committed...
Yup...Georgia is now gonna be a much safer place...NOT.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Missourian]

Missouri has had most of this on the books for some time now...not schools, but bars, churches and some government buildings...and it was so earth-shaking that not a soul outside the state even bothered to comment on it.

We also have armed teachers...the Slimes did report that... http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/04/1...ns-teachers-to-carry-guns.html?pagewanted=all

And you know what? The world didn't come to an end...in fact, nothing really changed at all...despite the chicken little-esque mewlings of our liberal minority.


Crime is still down and shootings outside the blue zones (major metropolitans) are still at record lows.

 

[dr.d]

it's way too early to know if carrying guns openly in all venues while preventing cops from checking out suspicious persons...will actually be harmless..
And I wouldn't call concern for the safety of our kids "mewling"...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Spoonman]

House Bill 60, or the Safe Carry Protection Act of 2014 -- which opponents have nicknamed the "guns everywhere bill" -- specifies where Georgia residents can carry weapons. Included are provisions that allow residents who have concealed carry permits to take guns into some bars, churches, school zones, government buildings and certain parts of airports.

Georgia law allows guns in some schools, bars, churches - CNN.com

Allowing those with a concealed carry permit to possess a firearm in such venues is perfectly appropriate.

There is no objective, documented evidence indicating that carrying a firearm in such places poses a greater ‘threat’ than carrying a concealed firearm anywhere else.

There is also no "clear objective evidence" that carrying a firearm around freely everywhere promotes safety...And can make it more handy to use when annoyed, as in the case of the ex-cop who shot a dad in a movie theater for making a phone call..or the one that shot a teen for playing music too loud in his car...
Incidentally, I believe that there is a provision in the law that prevents cops from checking suspects for guns in any venue...unless a crime has already been committed...
Yup...Georgia is now gonna be a much safer place...NOT.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

then again there is no evidence that shows any restrictive gun laws has reduced violence

 

[Political Junky]

Governor Nathan Deal was elected to Congress as a Conservative Democrat in 1993, but switched to Republican in 1995.

Nathan Deal

 

[The Rabbi]

Nope. Simply notifying the state of someone being certifiably mentally ill would disqualify them from owning a firearm. All you need is a registry of people with mental issues. They'll run your name at the gun show, or at a gun store and determine your eligibility. I think it's rather ingenious.

You missed the point. The law addresses ....court ordered custody.... related to mental illness issues. Who could be against that aspect regarding obtaining firearms? The usual low information left?

Sadly...u represent the "low info"element in this matter...Most of the known mass and psycho killers (at columbine, at college campuses; Lanza who shot down all those elementary school kids, the movie theater shooters, etc.) have NO MENTAL ILLNESS COMMITMENT HISTORY...
If any have a diagnosis at all; it's for outpatient treatment...and submitting all of those multitudes for gun ownership screening would not only violate confidentiality, but would be prohibitive...Ur talking housewives w PMS, veterans w PTSD, Teens w depression, and a plethora of folks with anxiety disorders ranging from mild OCD thru trichotellanemia, and debilitating phobias...These disorders r all forms of mental illness, but have nothing to do with a predisposition to violence...
So how would submitting names of individuals w a court ordered commitment history help...since most of our known gun wielding psychokillers have none?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

You are correct. The Colorado theater shooter, the Connecticut shooter, Jared Loughner and others were all law abiding citizens right up until the moment they began shooting people. Nothing in any background check would have prohibited them from owning a gun.
So?

This law is fine. More freedom is always good. I hope other states follow on.

 

[Missourian]

(Personal attack omitted...and this is the OP who posted this in Clean Debate)...it's way too early to know if carrying guns openly in all venues while preventing cops from checking out suspicious persons...will actually be harmless..
And I wouldn't call concern for the safety of our kids "mewling"...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

"It's...for the children!!!" As a single tear rolls down a cheek...(fade to black)

Read what you just wrote...your own logic...and apply it inversely.

If, as you assert, it is too early to categorize it as harmless, it is equally to early to categorize it as harmful.

What we know for a fact is that the evidence so far indicates that our new laws are helpful, and have not been the least bit harmful.

You see, a criminal, or someone determine to injure or kill others, doesn't give two shits whether or not it's legal to carry a firearm into a church, a school or a government building...only law abiding citizens are deterred by such restrictions.

Those are the people, the responsible law abiding citizens, that will PROTECT your children, and risk their own lives to do it.

 

[dr.d]

Actually...it DOES appear that most of the mass killers and "annoyed" shooters were not hardened criminals or previously committed psychos...
But they sure were folks that found guns handy when they got mad at somebody or the world at large..
Now that there will be more guns in more places in Georgia...and with cops prevented by law from checking out suspicious persons..it will be even easier for those armed to act out by blowing away any source of irritation..when drunk or just pissed off ...
If this is Georgia's notion of "freedom"... Those of us who who prefer to feel free to move about without fear of being blown away by someone having a bad day..will prefer to stay away.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually...it DOES appear that most of the mass killers and "annoyed" shooters were not hardened criminals or previously committed psychos...
But they sure were folks that found guns handy when they got mad at somebody or the world at large..
Now that there will be more guns in more places in Georgia...and with cops prevented by law from checking out suspicious persons..it will be even easier for those armed to act out by blowing away any source of irritation..when drunk or just pissed off ...
If this is Georgia's notion of "freedom"... Those of us who who prefer to feel free to move about without fear of being blown away by someone having a bad day..will prefer to stay away.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I dont think they want people with an irrational fear of weapons there anyway.

 

[chikenwing]

Actually...it DOES appear that most of the mass killers and "annoyed" shooters were not hardened criminals or previously committed psychos...
But they sure were folks that found guns handy when they got mad at somebody or the world at large..
Now that there will be more guns in more places in Georgia...and with cops prevented by law from checking out suspicious persons..it will be even easier for those armed to act out by blowing away any source of irritation..when drunk or just pissed off ...
If this is Georgia's notion of "freedom"... Those of us who who prefer to feel free to move about without fear of being blown away by someone having a bad day..will prefer to stay away.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Yep there will be one under every rock,and they are all coming for YOU!!

 

[dr.d]

Georgia was not all that attractive anyway...now there's another good reason to stay away...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Spoonman]

Georgia was not all that attractive anyway...now there's another good reason to stay away...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I kind of think they wouldn't be too upset if liberals packed it in and moved on

 

[oldfart]

Hm...wouldn't that kind of commitment/mental illness notification depend on comprehensive background checks...including at gun shows and online...to be at all effective?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I'm sure the intent of the mandatory notification of court ordered psychiatric care was intended for the instant name check. If the same law was in effect in Virginia the worst school shooting in history would not have happened in Va. Tech because the maniac who was ordered to undergo psychiatric counseling for stalking coeds would not have been able to "legally" obtain a weapon.

So...Ur saying that an aspiring gun purchaser would have to notify a vendor of his legal name (with proof of course) ...and the gun dealer would have to check it against the restricted list?....That WOULD amount to a kind of "background check", no?
I was under the impression that buyers at certain gun shows or online did not have to show ID or provide any personal info...Am I wrong about that?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I just recently received a federal firearms license for a new business my son and I are launching (retail gun store). We are required to see proof of identity for all firearm purchasers and we intend to retain copies of all ID including a thumbprint. If you want to purchase guns anonymously go someplace else. We do not want your business. Reputable firearms dealers have the same opinion. So do their insurers (I do that too).

Now I understand that militiamen, the NRA, skinheads, and domestic terrorists don't like this. They go to gun shows where there are no controls and get what they want.

There is no "restricted list". There is a database we log on to which tells us if the person can legally buy a firearm. It doesn't tell us why a sale may be blocked. The purchaser may be a mental patient, a convicted felon, or on a watch list. We don't know and frankly don't care. We sell guns, ammo, and accessories to Americans who want them for hunting, sport, personal protection, or in line of their work (police, security services, & military). None of these people should have a problem with the background check.

 

[Missourian]

I'm sure the intent of the mandatory notification of court ordered psychiatric care was intended for the instant name check. If the same law was in effect in Virginia the worst school shooting in history would not have happened in Va. Tech because the maniac who was ordered to undergo psychiatric counseling for stalking coeds would not have been able to "legally" obtain a weapon.

So...Ur saying that an aspiring gun purchaser would have to notify a vendor of his legal name (with proof of course) ...and the gun dealer would have to check it against the restricted list?....That WOULD amount to a kind of "background check", no?
I was under the impression that buyers at certain gun shows or online did not have to show ID or provide any personal info...Am I wrong about that?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I just recently received a federal firearms license for a new business my son and I are launching (retail gun store). We are required to see proof of identity for all firearm purchasers and we intend to retain copies of all ID including a thumbprint. If you want to purchase guns anonymously go someplace else. We do not want your business. Reputable firearms dealers have the same opinion. So do their insurers (I do that too).

Now I understand that militiamen, the NRA, skinheads, and domestic terrorists don't like this. They go to gun shows where there are no controls and get what they want.

There is no "restricted list". There is a database we log on to which tells us if the person can legally buy a firearm. It doesn't tell us why a sale may be blocked. The purchaser may be a mental patient, a convicted felon, or on a watch list. We don't know and frankly don't care. We sell guns, ammo, and accessories to Americans who want them for hunting, sport, personal protection, or in line of their work (police, security services, & military). None of these people should have a problem with the background check.

It's not the background check they object to...it is the RECORD of their purchase.

Why does the government need to know that Missourian is buying an over under 12 gauge serial number 46669965515CZ
Why can't the background check be...is Missourian ok to buy a firearm today? Great, thanks, bye.