Atlanta's Exec-Order to buy S&W ONLY

B

Ben

New member
Atlanta's Mayor Bill Campbell issued an "Executive Order" that the City of Atlanta NOT do business with any gun company until they have signed the exact same contract that S&W did. I wonder how long it's gonna be until Glock signs it...?

Bill Campbell is such a BONE-HEAD,
Ben

------------------
Almost Online IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited March 20, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited March 20, 2000).]
 
actually it looks like he might be kinda smart... in an evil way. :(


if they can get the gun companies to fold easy, then they won't have to go thru the pain of legislating it.
 
Although a lot of police departments in Georgia issue Glocks, the Atlanta PD still carry S & W 59xx series autos.
 
They carry BOTH... they've been carrying S&W for a long time, but I think they're starting the transition over to Glocks... You should see more and more of them assuming this contract doesn't get in their way.

Ben

------------------
Almost Online IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited March 20, 2000).]
 
Yet another reason to despise Bill Campbell.

It's not as if we didn't already have plenty of others. At least the city limits are a small percentage of the metro area, and hold less than 20% of metro population.
 
Bear in mind that there are still plenty of cities in States where marxist gun litigation is prohibited.

Not only do I despise the marxist poverty pimps who refuse to acknowledge personal responsibility in lieu of punishing those who play by the rules but this type of thing guarantees for sure that I will never do business with Smith and Wesson nor will I ever allow these weapons in my domicile.



------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."
 
A little off topic, but didn't the Georgia General Assembly pass a bill last year that made it illegal for Georgia municipalities to sue gun makers? Or is that just in my imagination?
 
Besides the problem with the Georgia legislature, I would look very closely at the legal aspects of any order like this. Lots of politicians have gone to the state prison for manipulating contracts. Even after they leave office, there is still a staute of limitations that plays into the hands of the next prosecutor. They can be punished for manipulating the award of contracts.
I would very much like to see some of the people now playing fast and loose with the law to wind up in prison for their shinanigans.
 
FlintLock, You're absolutely correct that there is a law in Georgia preventing Campbell from suing gun manufacturers. I guess this makes Campbell a law breaker.

------------------
"Gun Control Only Protects Those in Power"
 
Flintlock. You are right up to a point. A judge, can't remember if he was state or federal, allowed that Atlanta could continue with it's lawsuit despite the fact that the law was passes. Said something to the effect that because Atlantic had started the suit prior ot passage of the law, they could continue. Another judge that should be removed from the bench. GGGRRRRRRR!
Paul B.
 
I wish someone would march through Georgia again. Atlanta has become an embarassment to the south. I could see this happening in the northeast and California. Marxist poverty pimp! What a great discription.
 
Wouldn't such an "executive order" be in conflict with other procurement laws that were put in place to keep politicians from dealing only with their "favorite" contractors?

In most places, contracts are required by law to go to the lowest bidder, or else to the supplier able to furnish the best product, in this case the most reliable, accurate and durable duty weapon. How many cops is the mayor willing to sacrifice to "safe" guns? Or will they order (gasp) guns with no internal locking mechanisms or other John Q. Citizen "safety features?"
 
If the city orders guns that have been deemed unsafe for the general public to use, they are opening themselves up for a lawsuit when the first person is shot with the unsafe gun. That is why california legislature had to put in some sort of Glock clause in the bill that is going to make guns with not external safety deemed unsafe an illegal.

------------------
It ain't mah fault. did I do dat?
 
Bill Campbell is a dipsh!t. What he is stating is discriminatory and unconstitutional. Then again, they've been ripping apart our 2nd Amendment rights for too damn long :mad:

Where are all these hot shot lawyers? Somebody should sue his ass. Come to think of it, I should get my newly found pro-gun lawyer neighbor to sue him. :D

[This message has been edited by Svt (edited March 22, 2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top