Constitutional Carry

[Porter Rockwell]

Because we should allow any moron strap on a loaded weapon &walk amongst our children.

If someone is a "moron" they still have Rights until they have been adjudged guilty of a crime and / or the mental health community thinks they are a danger to society. That's what you have jails, prisons, and mental institutions for.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Nonsense.

Requiring a license to carry a firearm is also Constitutional carry, being perfectly consistent with the Second Amendment.

You're the one posting nonsense. Black's Law Dictionary (the most authoritative in the legal business) says that a license is:

"The permission by a competent authority to do an act, which, without such permission would be illegal, a trespass or a tort."

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you have a problem with. If I have the Right, I don't need permission.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

You keep repeating this, as if you were trying to stop the conversation dead in its tracks and redirect all the discussions where you personally want them. Stop trying to hijack this thread, your buffoonery and trolling is not amusing.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

You keep repeating this, as if you were trying to stop the conversation dead in its tracks and redirect all the discussions where you personally want them. Stop trying to hijack this thread, your buffoonery and trolling is not amusing.

Your trolling and buffoonery is not amusing. I started the thread so I should have a better handle on what it is I want to have a conversation about. If it takes a repetitive post to get it there, I'm cool with it. I'm not going to allow trolls and those who act cowardly lead me around like a dog on a leash.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I started the thread so I should have a better handle on what it is

I think we all agree with that.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Horse Shit! The the 2nd Amendment does that NOW, shit-for-brains!

That bill is likely designed to be contested in Court if and when it becomes law in Georgia, and to eventually work its way to SCOTUS! Its what the malcontents of the Fascistic Far Right do and have been doing for decades!

News Flash to the OP and his ilk; The Anti-Federalists lost all their arguments the day the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful. According to one website:

"At this time, there are 5 states that have Constitutional Carry laws: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming, with others pending in Colorado, New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana."

Constitutional Carry Among States: Reciprocity for All! - USA Carry

Georgia now gets added to the list with pending legislation.

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux. Despite the FACT that most laws governing firearms favored gun owners in the earliest court rulings, the SCOTUS has seen fit to legislate from the bench and subvert the Constitution.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG. And so I urge all those in Georgia to act now and contact their state legislators.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful.

Ask me if I give a tinker's damn about you tender sensibilities, fool! If stating your foolish interpretations of Constitutional law is horseshit and letting you know others feel you've got shit-for-brains for spreading your horseshit among the that of your brethren who have gone before you, then you should learn rather than crawl up upon your cross and pretend an outrageous injury, fool!

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux.

Deflect much, Homer? I made no bloody argument, fool! I stated a Constitutional FACT referring to the defeat of the Anti-Federalist's 'persuasions and protestations' in Constitutional Hall that summer in 1787 and their later responses to "Publius" re: the Federalist Papers.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG.

So to my alleged, "...filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration..." post, you reply with WHAT? "You go even further making the bold claim I factually erred in my post, but you were to ******* timid and weak to note where or how. I'm fairly sure I know that to which you were itching to bring up. Well back at your dumb ass...Judicial Review, District of Columbia v. Heller, Section III of Justice Scalia's decision, paragraph 1-3. It's the law of the land now, and that portion starts with, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you have a problem with. If I have the Right, I don't need permission.

So you are in direct conflict with a SCOTUS decision which puts the lie to your screwy conclusion and falsely claimed knowledge of the law as interpreted. Now piss and moan and claim your dumb ass is right and the rest of the world is all wrong if it doesn't agree with your non-cleverness and simpleton's credo!

The 2A as interpreted via Judicial Review permits the right to bear arms as circumscribed by law, custom and precedent. Don't like it, Chump...Too damn bad! That's the Constitution at work while we still have it and your ilk hasn't burned it and declares it's mere mention a Thought Crime!!

 

[Porter Rockwell]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Horse Shit! The the 2nd Amendment does that NOW, shit-for-brains!

That bill is likely designed to be contested in Court if and when it becomes law in Georgia, and to eventually work its way to SCOTUS! Its what the malcontents of the Fascistic Far Right do and have been doing for decades!

News Flash to the OP and his ilk; The Anti-Federalists lost all their arguments the day the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful. According to one website:

"At this time, there are 5 states that have Constitutional Carry laws: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming, with others pending in Colorado, New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana."

Constitutional Carry Among States: Reciprocity for All! - USA Carry

Georgia now gets added to the list with pending legislation.

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux. Despite the FACT that most laws governing firearms favored gun owners in the earliest court rulings, the SCOTUS has seen fit to legislate from the bench and subvert the Constitution.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG. And so I urge all those in Georgia to act now and contact their state legislators.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful.

Ask me if I give a tinker's damn about you tender sensibilities, fool! If stating your foolish interpretations of Constitutional law is horseshit and letting you know others feel you've got shit-for-brains for spreading your horseshit among the that of your brethren who have gone before you, then you should learn rather than crawl up upon your cross and pretend an outrageous injury, fool!

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux.

Deflect much, Homer? I made no bloody argument, fool! I stated a Constitutional FACT referring to the defeat of the Anti-Federalist's 'persuasions and protestations' in Constitutional Hall that summer in 1787 and their later responses to "Publius" re: the Federalist Papers.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG.

So to my alleged, "...filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration..." post, you reply with WHAT? "You go even further making the bold claim I factually erred in my post, but you were to ******* timid and weak to note where or how. I'm fairly sure I know that to which you were itching to bring up. Well back at your dumb ass...Judicial Review, District of Columbia v. Heller, Section III of Justice Scalia's decision, paragraph 1-3. It's the law of the land now, and that portion starts with, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you have a problem with. If I have the Right, I don't need permission.

So you are in direct conflict with a SCOTUS decision which puts the lie to your screwy conclusion and falsely claimed knowledge of the law as interpreted. Now piss and moan and claim your dumb ass is right and the rest of the world is all wrong if it doesn't agree with your non-cleverness and simpleton's credo!

The 2A as interpreted via Judicial Review permits the right to bear arms as circumscribed by law, custom and precedent. Don't like it, Chump...Too damn bad! That's the Constitution at work while we still have it and your ilk hasn't burned it and declares it's mere mention a Thought Crime!!

You talk a lot of trash on the Internet, but you Keyboard Commandos are always trying to make up for some kind of deficit with your anonymous Keyboard Commando gutter language.

Oddly I agree with a lot of what you say; however, the EARLIEST court decisions supported the original intent. So, while the Heller Court did infer that the federal government doles out Rights, the SCOTUS certainly had no de jure / lawful authority to do so. It's a separate argument. I'm going to do a thread on that just for the fun of shutting your pie hole and proving you are a blowhard hiding behind a keyboard because you suffer from a severe case of inadequacy.

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Horse Shit! The the 2nd Amendment does that NOW, shit-for-brains!

That bill is likely designed to be contested in Court if and when it becomes law in Georgia, and to eventually work its way to SCOTUS! Its what the malcontents of the Fascistic Far Right do and have been doing for decades!

News Flash to the OP and his ilk; The Anti-Federalists lost all their arguments the day the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful. According to one website:

"At this time, there are 5 states that have Constitutional Carry laws: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming, with others pending in Colorado, New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana."

Constitutional Carry Among States: Reciprocity for All! - USA Carry

Georgia now gets added to the list with pending legislation.

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux. Despite the FACT that most laws governing firearms favored gun owners in the earliest court rulings, the SCOTUS has seen fit to legislate from the bench and subvert the Constitution.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG. And so I urge all those in Georgia to act now and contact their state legislators.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful.

Ask me if I give a tinker's damn about you tender sensibilities, fool! If stating your foolish interpretations of Constitutional law is horseshit and letting you know others feel you've got shit-for-brains for spreading your horseshit among the that of your brethren who have gone before you, then you should learn rather than crawl up upon your cross and pretend an outrageous injury, fool!

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux.

Deflect much, Homer? I made no bloody argument, fool! I stated a Constitutional FACT referring to the defeat of the Anti-Federalist's 'persuasions and protestations' in Constitutional Hall that summer in 1787 and their later responses to "Publius" re: the Federalist Papers.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG.

So to my alleged, "...filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration..." post, you reply with WHAT? "You go even further making the bold claim I factually erred in my post, but you were to ******* timid and weak to note where or how. I'm fairly sure I know that to which you were itching to bring up. Well back at your dumb ass...Judicial Review, District of Columbia v. Heller, Section III of Justice Scalia's decision, paragraph 1-3. It's the law of the land now, and that portion starts with, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you have a problem with. If I have the Right, I don't need permission.

So you are in direct conflict with a SCOTUS decision which puts the lie to your screwy conclusion and falsely claimed knowledge of the law as interpreted. Now piss and moan and claim your dumb ass is right and the rest of the world is all wrong if it doesn't agree with your non-cleverness and simpleton's credo!

The 2A as interpreted via Judicial Review permits the right to bear arms as circumscribed by law, custom and precedent. Don't like it, Chump...Too damn bad! That's the Constitution at work while we still have it and your ilk hasn't burned it and declares it's mere mention a Thought Crime!!

You talk a lot of trash on the Internet, but you Keyboard Commandos are always trying to make up for some kind of deficit with your anonymous Keyboard Commando gutter language.

Oddly I agree with a lot of what you say; however, the EARLIEST court decisions supported the original intent. So, while the Heller Court did infer that the federal government doles out Rights, the SCOTUS certainly had no de jure / lawful authority to do so. It's a separate argument. I'm going to do a thread on that just for the fun of shutting your pie hole and proving you are a blowhard hiding behind a keyboard because you suffer from a severe case of inadequacy.

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

Oddly I agree with a lot of what you say; however, the EARLIEST court decisions supported the original intent.

What, "...EARLIEST court decisions supported the original intent."? What are they, and cite the cases and which bloody century were they heard. You're a bloody fraud!

So, while the Heller Court did infer that the federal government doles out Rights, the SCOTUS certainly had no de jure / lawful authority to do so.

Hey Dummy, before you use a legal term like de jure, you better know the true legal definition and use it in its proper context. Claiming that term translates to "legal authority" and applying it to SCOTUS in effect claiming the High Court didn't have standing to perform Judicial Review in DC v. Heller is flat out stupid AND ignorant! You're just a damn shill, a fraud and dumber than a box of rocks & you don't know what the Hell you're talking about!

I'm going to do a thread on that just for the fun of shutting your pie hole and proving you are a blowhard hiding behind a keyboard because you suffer from a severe case of inadequacy.

That will be entertaining, given your abject intellect and inability to cite any foundational or supporting facts. Instead, you turn to ad hominem as a substitute for facts and actual information, Smack! Oh and calling me and others a blowhard and a keyboard commando is called projection for those of your 'difficulties' who are struggling with mental issues of that sort! You should stop before you embarrass yourself further, asswipe, but you won't, will you!

 

[Stormy Daniels]

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Poor little snowflake. Sounds like Marco Rubio during the primaries with his repetitive elevator pitch.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Horse Shit! The the 2nd Amendment does that NOW, shit-for-brains!

That bill is likely designed to be contested in Court if and when it becomes law in Georgia, and to eventually work its way to SCOTUS! Its what the malcontents of the Fascistic Far Right do and have been doing for decades!

News Flash to the OP and his ilk; The Anti-Federalists lost all their arguments the day the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful. According to one website:

"At this time, there are 5 states that have Constitutional Carry laws: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming, with others pending in Colorado, New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana."

Constitutional Carry Among States: Reciprocity for All! - USA Carry

Georgia now gets added to the list with pending legislation.

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux. Despite the FACT that most laws governing firearms favored gun owners in the earliest court rulings, the SCOTUS has seen fit to legislate from the bench and subvert the Constitution.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG. And so I urge all those in Georgia to act now and contact their state legislators.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful.

Ask me if I give a tinker's damn about you tender sensibilities, fool! If stating your foolish interpretations of Constitutional law is horseshit and letting you know others feel you've got shit-for-brains for spreading your horseshit among the that of your brethren who have gone before you, then you should learn rather than crawl up upon your cross and pretend an outrageous injury, fool!

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux.

Deflect much, Homer? I made no bloody argument, fool! I stated a Constitutional FACT referring to the defeat of the Anti-Federalist's 'persuasions and protestations' in Constitutional Hall that summer in 1787 and their later responses to "Publius" re: the Federalist Papers.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG.

So to my alleged, "...filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration..." post, you reply with WHAT? "You go even further making the bold claim I factually erred in my post, but you were to ******* timid and weak to note where or how. I'm fairly sure I know that to which you were itching to bring up. Well back at your dumb ass...Judicial Review, District of Columbia v. Heller, Section III of Justice Scalia's decision, paragraph 1-3. It's the law of the land now, and that portion starts with, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you have a problem with. If I have the Right, I don't need permission.

So you are in direct conflict with a SCOTUS decision which puts the lie to your screwy conclusion and falsely claimed knowledge of the law as interpreted. Now piss and moan and claim your dumb ass is right and the rest of the world is all wrong if it doesn't agree with your non-cleverness and simpleton's credo!

The 2A as interpreted via Judicial Review permits the right to bear arms as circumscribed by law, custom and precedent. Don't like it, Chump...Too damn bad! That's the Constitution at work while we still have it and your ilk hasn't burned it and declares it's mere mention a Thought Crime!!

You talk a lot of trash on the Internet, but you Keyboard Commandos are always trying to make up for some kind of deficit with your anonymous Keyboard Commando gutter language.

Oddly I agree with a lot of what you say; however, the EARLIEST court decisions supported the original intent. So, while the Heller Court did infer that the federal government doles out Rights, the SCOTUS certainly had no de jure / lawful authority to do so. It's a separate argument. I'm going to do a thread on that just for the fun of shutting your pie hole and proving you are a blowhard hiding behind a keyboard because you suffer from a severe case of inadequacy.

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

Oddly I agree with a lot of what you say; however, the EARLIEST court decisions supported the original intent.

What, "...EARLIEST court decisions supported the original intent."? What are they, and cite the cases and which bloody century were they heard. You're a bloody fraud!

So, while the Heller Court did infer that the federal government doles out Rights, the SCOTUS certainly had no de jure / lawful authority to do so.

Hey Dummy, before you use a legal term like de jure, you better know the true legal definition and use it in its proper context. Claiming that term translates to "legal authority" and applying it to SCOTUS in effect claiming the High Court didn't have standing to perform Judicial Review in DC v. Heller is flat out stupid AND ignorant! You're just a damn shill, a fraud and dumber than a box of rocks & you don't know what the Hell you're talking about!

I'm going to do a thread on that just for the fun of shutting your pie hole and proving you are a blowhard hiding behind a keyboard because you suffer from a severe case of inadequacy.

That will be entertaining, given your abject intellect and inability to cite any foundational or supporting facts. Instead, you turn to ad hominem as a substitute for facts and actual information, Smack! Oh and calling me and others a blowhard and a keyboard commando is called projection for those of your 'difficulties' who are struggling with mental issues of that sort! You should stop before you embarrass yourself further, asswipe, but you won't, will you!

If there is a fraud in the room, that sir, would be YOU. You pretend to be some kind of god, knowing everything about every topic. You say things to people so that you can compensate for an obvious shortcoming (for those who have a real education, think Freud.)

You fall back on the standard left wing canard when you respond to people which shows us you have nothing but left wing drivel to back up your filth that exemplifies a lack of proper upbringing. You wish I were projecting, but you are what you are and filling up a posting with gutter language cannot change that.

Finally, for those who may stumble across this thread, not only do I know how to give proper citations, but I also know how to shepardize my cites because, unlike the blowhard, I just happen to have a legal education. Thoughtcrimes, if you ever had a thought, it would be a crime. Your mother did a shitty job of raising you and it's a shame that you grew up without a father to teach you right from wrong.

Aside from that, if they took a hundred people like you and turned their brains into dynamite, they couldn't get enough charge to blow one's nose. Little man, peck your keyboard and act be an embarrassment to yourself and to your family. Don't expect me to play along.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

 

[Pogo]

I don't know why the tard who started this topic could not make the simple statement that there is a bill in Georgia which will allow you to carry a firearm WITHOUT A PERMIT.

Thank you. This thread is most informative in what it leaves out.

 

[Pogo]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Horse Shit! The the 2nd Amendment does that NOW, shit-for-brains!

That bill is likely designed to be contested in Court if and when it becomes law in Georgia, and to eventually work its way to SCOTUS! Its what the malcontents of the Fascistic Far Right do and have been doing for decades!

News Flash to the OP and his ilk; The Anti-Federalists lost all their arguments the day the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful. According to one website:

"At this time, there are 5 states that have Constitutional Carry laws: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming, with others pending in Colorado, New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana."

Constitutional Carry Among States: Reciprocity for All! - USA Carry

Georgia now gets added to the list with pending legislation.

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux. Despite the FACT that most laws governing firearms favored gun owners in the earliest court rulings, the SCOTUS has seen fit to legislate from the bench and subvert the Constitution.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG. And so I urge all those in Georgia to act now and contact their state legislators.

Are YOU in Georgia?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Horse Shit! The the 2nd Amendment does that NOW, shit-for-brains!

That bill is likely designed to be contested in Court if and when it becomes law in Georgia, and to eventually work its way to SCOTUS! Its what the malcontents of the Fascistic Far Right do and have been doing for decades!

News Flash to the OP and his ilk; The Anti-Federalists lost all their arguments the day the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful. According to one website:

"At this time, there are 5 states that have Constitutional Carry laws: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming, with others pending in Colorado, New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana."

Constitutional Carry Among States: Reciprocity for All! - USA Carry

Georgia now gets added to the list with pending legislation.

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux. Despite the FACT that most laws governing firearms favored gun owners in the earliest court rulings, the SCOTUS has seen fit to legislate from the bench and subvert the Constitution.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG. And so I urge all those in Georgia to act now and contact their state legislators.

Are YOU in Georgia?

Of course. Where did you think I was at?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Since there are those who pretend to be clueless - Hell maybe they are clueless, I will repeat what the OP is about:

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

We can repeat it on every page of this thread so that those who have lived under a rock for at least 25 years know what the terminology of Constitutional Carry means.

When you see the term "Right to Life," you know damn well it will have something to do with abortion. You leftists are all either pretending to be stupid OR you genuinely ARE stupid. Constitutional Carry ALWAYS has reference to carrying firearms.

 

[Vastator]

To: All those in the state of Georgia

Yes, I put it in all caps. A bill for constitutional carry has been introduced here in Georgia. It needs co - sponsors. So, I'm sure that all of you will be calling on your state senators and representatives (send both e mails and make phone calls.)

https://www.13wmaz.com/article/news...i ... 2d38f04ae2

House Bill HB 2 has been pre-filed. We need to shore up support in the House in the next two weeks. If you need help finding out who your state rep is, you have several options:

* http://www.senate.ga.gov/senators/en-US ... lator.aspx

* Call the county Registrar of Elections in the county you live in

* Contact the state capitol

* PM me (but, like the folks above, I will need to know where you live.)

Don't know if you're still registered to vote?

https://registertovote.sos.ga.gov/GAOLV ... ack-button

Let's git 'er done guys.

DON'T LET THIS SIT ON THE BACK BURNER. THIS BILL NEEDS TO COME OUT OF THE CHUTE AS THE MOST IMPORTANT BILL OF THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION. GET YOU REPRESENTATIVES TO BECOME CO-SPONSORS.

Posted with the permission of the original author at:

U.S.Militias In the News forum

It's revealing that nowhere in this entire OP, or its title, or its forum, is the word "gun" mentioned in any form. Nor is the word "firearm"..

Revealing in that it is ass-sumed that the verb "carry" must "naturally" mean one thing. If there's a more telling example that we're mired in a culture of sicko gun fetishism, I can't think of it.

Damn if you don't run into a lot of anal retentive people when it comes to this issue: liberals trying to hijack the thread and make fun of the site from which the story was accessed and now a silly post trying to flame gun owners.

If you don't like the Constitution, your Freedoms, your Liberties, why don't you pack your rags and move to some third world cesspool where you will be happy?

They aren't looking to become happy. Their only life's goal is to make everyone else as angst ridden, and miserable as they are...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Constitutional Carry = Wear you weapon in public without asking the government for a license, permission, etc. to do what you already had a Right to do in the first place.

At least you're consistent at being wrong and ridiculous.

The Supreme Court has never ruled that requiring a license to carry a firearm is unconstitutional.

And absent such a ruling, requiring a license to carry a firearm is likewise Constitutional carry.

 

[Pogo]

To those who have no idea what the Hell this is about, this thread is about a bill in the House of Representatives, in the state of Georgia that will acknowledge your Right to keep and Bear Arms.

Should the bill pass, your constitutional Right to keep and bear Arms means you will not need the government's permission to carry a weapon in Georgia. So, now you can return to the first post and help if you support the Second Amendment.

The buffoonery of trolls and nutjobs trying to hijack this thread is not amusing.

Horse Shit! The the 2nd Amendment does that NOW, shit-for-brains!

That bill is likely designed to be contested in Court if and when it becomes law in Georgia, and to eventually work its way to SCOTUS! Its what the malcontents of the Fascistic Far Right do and have been doing for decades!

News Flash to the OP and his ilk; The Anti-Federalists lost all their arguments the day the Constitution was ratified by New Hampshire on June 21, 1788.

First, I don't appreciate you coming here with your filth and garbage. Such cowardly and stupid acts are representative of those who are both ignorant and disrespectful. According to one website:

"At this time, there are 5 states that have Constitutional Carry laws: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming, with others pending in Colorado, New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana."

Constitutional Carry Among States: Reciprocity for All! - USA Carry

Georgia now gets added to the list with pending legislation.

As for your argument about anti- Federalists - Politics is always in a state of flux. Despite the FACT that most laws governing firearms favored gun owners in the earliest court rulings, the SCOTUS has seen fit to legislate from the bench and subvert the Constitution.

Outside of your post being filthy, nasty, disrespectful and not worthy of serious consideration, it was factually WRONG. And so I urge all those in Georgia to act now and contact their state legislators.

Are YOU in Georgia?

Of course. Where did you think I was at?

One can't tell since your profile lists no location. And this site is crawling with wags who have no shortage of advice for people that live nowhere near them.

 

[Pogo]

Constitutional Carry ALWAYS has reference to carrying firearms.

Aaaaaaand we're straight back to my original point. Which was never in dispute.