VICTORY: Gun-Rights Advocates Score a MAJOR Win in Ohio

[SavannahMann]

Carrying a gun isn't probable cause. That would be like saying someone who has cash in their pocket might be going to buy drugs.

The constitutional carry laws don't mean you can't get a CCW permit. It means one isn't required, as it should be. Anyone who wants to get a permit is free to get one and anyone who travels to states that don't have constitutional carry will need a CCW permit.

Hi. I’m not sure which Country you live in. But presence of cash is enough for the cop to seize it under Civil Asset Forfeiture. There have been a number of news stories about this over the years. Where citizens have to sue to get their cash back, proving to the court that they earned it legally, and did not intend to buy illicit substances with it.

In fact. Cops claim that there is drug residue on the money, and use that as proof it was used in the drug trade.

Welcome to America. I hope you enjoy your stay.

 

[marvin martian]

Georgia is liable to be a Democratic State by the end of the year. With Trump screwing up the Republicans, the odds of them holding the statewide offices and legislature is less than even money.

That's bad news for civil rights.

 

[SavannahMann]

That's bad news for civil rights.

Well. You could suggest that Trump shut his loser mouth and let the Conservatives at it. But he is literally incapable of doing so.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Hooray us!
I'll still renew my permit, though - allows me to carry in all the other states I go to.

I'd be very careful about carrying in other states. There are states like California that don't recognize CCW permits issued by other states.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'd be very careful about carrying in other states. There are states like California that don't recognize CCW permits issued by other states.

I'm not going to CA.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Hi. I’m not sure which Country you live in. But presence of cash is enough for the cop to seize it under Civil Asset Forfeiture. There have been a number of news stories about this over the years. Where citizens have to sue to get their cash back, proving to the court that they earned it legally, and did not intend to buy illicit substances with it.

In fact. Cops claim that there is drug residue on the money, and use that as proof it was used in the drug trade.

Welcome to America. I hope you enjoy your stay.

How many traffic stops have you been in where the officer questioned you about the cash in your billfold?

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

I'd be very careful about carrying in other states. There are states like California that don't recognize CCW permits issued by other states.

I don't go to those states. Fuck'em

 

[progressive hunter]

I live in Georgia, where we have the CCW permit. We’re a Shall Issue state. So other than a small fee to process the paperwork, there isn’t really anything else.

I support that. I support the CCW requirement. I have a CCW. And here is why I support it. When I present it to the Police, they know that I am a law abiding individual. In fact, CCW holders are the least criminal group in the Nation. Police have more criminals, based upon convictions, than CCW personnel.

True story. I was involved in a minor fender bender. No big deal. When the cop showed up I handed him my licenses. Both of them, the CCW underneath the drivers. He looked at it and asked if I was armed. I said I was. He told me to put the gun in my car. I walked to my car, opened the back door, and stuck the gun on the seat. I then turned and showed him my empty hands.

He ran the license and registrations of both parties involved in the minor accident, and then wrote the accident report for the insurance.

Before he departed, he told me that I had handled the interaction about as well as anyone ever had. I didn’t start out screaming I have a gun, and kept it low key.

Without that CCW, the guy carrying the gun, is he carrying legally, or illegally? Is he a criminal who is on his way to rob someone? Or is he a law abiding individual going about his business? The only way to know is to run the individuals through the system to see if they have any felony convictions, or other disqualifying events in their history.

So cops will be running the “good guys” through the system a lot more. Wasting time, wasting resources, and drawing from the few hours a day they have to do their jobs.

A CCW shows that you’re a law abiding individual.

And training? Training would have saved a lot of people a lot of trouble. Take the Brunswick Trio. Georgia has no training requirement. I took a class because I wanted to be sure I understood what the law was. When the story with the McMichaels broke, I knew they had broken the law, because they literally did everything I was told not to do by the Cop teaching the course.

I knew it was illegal to try and place someone under Citizens Arrest if I had not seen them commit a crime. I knew it was illegal to pull my weapon unless there was a reasonable belief of a threat to life. A reasonable belief, that means seeing a weapon or actions by the individual to show danger.

I knew that Travis had committed Aggravated Assault. I knew that they were going to prison for Felony Murder. The cop teaching the course on his day off, told me all of that.

Training would have told Greg and Travis what their rights, and responsibilities, and where those rights ended. They would have avoided Prison for the rest of their lives if they had understood just how much trouble they were going to be in.

Training means you understand what is going on better. You have someone help you understand what is going to be happening if God Forbid you ever need that bang stick. Training means you are better prepared for that day, and increase your own chances of survival, and help you avoid Criminal Prosecution because you didn’t have a clue what the law said.

And the law says things you may think is wrong, but that is what your actions will be judged by.

I support Concealed Carry. I support the Second. I also support Law enforcement in making their jobs easier, and safer.

a CCW in no way shape or form means youre a law biding citizen,, only that youve never been caught,,

and since the law says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" a CCW is in violation of the law and promoting them means you are not a law abiding citizen,,

 

[SavannahMann]

marvin martian

Let me see if I can explain it to you. Kemp, the current Republican Governor won against Stacey Abrams by 50,000 votes. 50k.

The general feeling in the state is that Kemp hasn’t done a bad job. He’s doing all right.

But Trump is pushing a strong Primary challenge in the person of Sonny Purdue. Purdue lost to Warnock in the Senate Race last election.

Now for Purdue to win, the Trumpists have to turn out and select him in the Primary. Let’s say that 2% of the Conservatives stay home in the General. Purdue loses to Abrams.

Turn it around. Kemp wins the primary. 2% of the Trumpists stay home. And Abrams wins.

There is only one race in Georgia where the Trump Endorsed candidate is winning in the polls. That is Herschel Walker challenging Warnock for the Senate Seat. Walker is leading by about 1%.

Oh. And that is before everyone starts to make an issue of Walkers own admission in his autobiography where he announces he suffers from Multiple Personality Disorder. So we can say Warnock is going to win can’t we?

Without Trump getting involved. Kemp probably would have won re-election. Not certain, but probable.

With Trump going after those people for not falling on their sword and denouncing their own election, the Democrats probably win.

 

[SavannahMann]

a CCW in no way shape or form means youre a law biding citizen,, only that youve never been caught,,

and since the law says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" a CCW is in violation of the law and promoting them means you are not a law abiding citizen,,

Moron.

Concealed Carry Permit Holders More Law Abiding Government Police

2nd Amendment critics commonly portray concealed carry permit holders as dangerous to American society. They are More Law Abiding Government Police.

ncsportsmenslaw.com

It is better for you to shut up now before you remove all doubt about what a blithering idiot you really are.

 

[progressive hunter]

Moron.

Concealed Carry Permit Holders More Law Abiding Government Police

2nd Amendment critics commonly portray concealed carry permit holders as dangerous to American society. They are More Law Abiding Government Police.

ncsportsmenslaw.com

It is better for you to shut up now before you remove all doubt about what a blithering idiot you really are.

I see your opinion and raise with the constitution/2nd amendment,,

U.S. Constitution - Second Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

The original text of the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

 

[SavannahMann]

I see your opinion and raise with the constitution/2nd amendment,,

U.S. Constitution - Second Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

The original text of the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

Now see. If you had half a brain you would have quit. If you had a quarter of a normal brain you would have shown any right in the Constitution that doesn’t have some restrictions. Or you would have tried to.

 

[progressive hunter]

Now see. If you had half a brain you would have quit. If you had a quarter of a normal brain you would have shown any right in the Constitution that doesn’t have some restrictions. Or you would have tried to.

what the fuck do you think SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED means,,,

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Now see. If you had half a brain you would have quit. If you had a quarter of a normal brain you would have shown any right in the Constitution that doesn’t have some restrictions. Or you would have tried to.

There's a difference here.

I think it is clear to everyone (whether they admit it or not) that the 2A was intended (at a minimum) to completely strip the FedGov of ALL power or authority over arms.

 

[SavannahMann]

what the fuck do you think SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED means,,,

You do know there were a lot of restrictions when it passed don’t you? For example. It was illegal for a Free Black to possess a firearm. It was illegal to arm Indians.

So one has to wonder what the Founders intended if they had Restrictions in place that remained in place after the passage.

Of course you know nothing of the actual history. You are like all idiots, putting your own personal spin and definitions on the phrases.

 

[SavannahMann]

There's a difference here.

I think it is clear to everyone (whether they admit it or not) that the 2A was intended (at a minimum) to completely strip the FedGov of ALL power or authority over arms.

No it isn’t. When the Second was ratified there were a lot of restrictions on weapons. And over the next fifty years there would be even more. From leaving your gun at the city limits to bans on who could possess a weapon. For example the Militia would search Slave Quarters and confiscate any weapons found.

Checking your gun as you entered various buildings was common even in towns that allowed you to carry.

The question on the intent of the founders is far more complicated than just reading the words.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No it isn’t. When the Second was ratified there were a lot of restrictions on weapons.

By the FedGov?

How?

It didn't even exist yet.

And over the next fifty years there would be even more. From leaving your gun at the city limits to bans on who could possess a weapon. For example the Militia would search Slave Quarters and confiscate any weapons found.

Checking your gun as you entered various buildings was common even in towns that allowed you to carry.

The question on the intent of the founders is far more complicated than just reading the words.

All of this is state and local action. Zero FedGov.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You do know there were a lot of restrictions when it passed don’t you? For example. It was illegal for a Free Black to possess a firearm. It was illegal to arm Indians.

not by FedGov. Thus, the 2A intent.

So one has to wonder what the Founders intended if they had Restrictions in place that remained in place after the passage.

Restrictions by the Federal Government? Which restrictions? Cite them.

 

[marvin martian]

You do know there were a lot of restrictions when it passed don’t you? For example. It was illegal for a Free Black to possess a firearm. It was illegal to arm Indians.

So one has to wonder what the Founders intended if they had Restrictions in place that remained in place after the passage.

Of course you know nothing of the actual history. You are like all idiots, putting your own personal spin and definitions on the phrases.

You're finally figuring out why putting restrictions on our civil rights is a problem. Too bad you'll never retain the lesson...

 

[progressive hunter]

You do know there were a lot of restrictions when it passed don’t you? For example. It was illegal for a Free Black to possess a firearm. It was illegal to arm Indians.

So one has to wonder what the Founders intended if they had Restrictions in place that remained in place after the passage.

Of course you know nothing of the actual history. You are like all idiots, putting your own personal spin and definitions on the phrases.

those were violations not restrictions,,, and the founders didnt put them in place or they would be in the 2nd A text,,