Mandatory gun ownership

2

2ndsojourn

New member
Nelson, Georgia is floating a proposed law requiring gun ownership in each home.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/07/us/georgia-gun-requirement/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

Gun ownership is a right. A right that I strongly advocate. And people have an inherent right to not exercise their right if they so choose. If you choose not to exercise that right, that's your prerogative. To make a right a requirement is another infringement on my rights. The Bill of Rights is not a Bill of Requirements, nor a Bill of Needs. And lately I've become fed up with misinformed politicians and journalist hacks with agendas trying to determine what my needs are and infringing on my rights.

From the article:

"People with physical or mental disabilities are exempt from the law, as are "paupers," felons, and those who oppose gun ownership based on belief or religious doctrine." (Emphasis mine)

Even though I appreciate their support of the 2nd Amendment, other than a token gesture, what's the purpose of enacting a law that you're not required to abide by?
 
Tex, I'm not sure I see your correlation. Here we have a town basically making it a law requiring you to own a gun unless you don't want to.
 
The law in no more invasive than the current federal laws we already have to comply with.

Personally I don't have a problem with it.

I don't think a person should have to possess a gun in their home but they should pay a tax if they choose not to.
 
If the law mandates it, then the municipality should furnish them. In Switzerland they have mandatory gun ownership for their militia, but weapons and bullets are furnished.

This was a good idea between good 'ol boys talking over a beer - but bad law to put in place.
 
You could never enforce that law, it ids definitely a moral responsibility to citizens to own and be proficient with firearms, but moral imperatives can rarely be mandated by force
sunaj
 
From dfsixstring:
"If the law mandates it, then the municipality should furnish them."

I like that one! The same as the police have. AR types with 30 round magazines. And carry permits for all.
 
While I do support firearm ownership, I do not support a requirement to own a firearm, as I feel we should have a freedom of choice, to own or not to own.
 
This proposed law is almost a direct copy of Kennesaw, GA law. But doesn't anybody see the trickery in the law. You must own a gun unless it is not in your beliefs or you oppose guns. So if you want a gun, you have to buy one. If you don't want one, you don't have to get one.

And I think this proposal, because the reasoning that police response time is so long, is more of a message to the citizens saying "Hey we can't always protect you. We are letting you know this, don't trust our police to be their in time to protect you."
 
Requiring people to own firearms is a stupid idea if someone doesn't want to own a firearm that's their right.

Reading American forums most seem to want as little government interference in peoples lives as possible. So i would assume that most Americans would be against making people have firearms just as they would be against government not wanting people to have firearms.
 
To be honest, they still have that right. As I read this idea:

The people who have made up their mind and like firearms would be requires to have one.

The people who have made up their mind and dislike firearms would not be required to have one.

The people who cannot have one, aren't required and still cannot have one.

The people who have not made up their mind... would have to make up their mind.
 
We don't need the government to tell us to do this.
Nor do we need the government to forbid us to do this.

Stupid idea - I agree.

Eat your broccoli - that would save more lives.
 
It's just the pro-gun version of an Assault Weapons Ban. It's Much Ado About Nothing. Symbolism over Substance. The only thing this would do is make the undecided people spend money on something in the back of their closet and forgotten about, or make up their mind one way or another how they feel about guns. People still have the ability to be a "conscientious objector" or own.
 
This goes against my mostly Liberarian mindset, people are free to do whatever they like, as long as they do not harm or interfere with the rights of others. Government coercing someone to buy a gun is just the opposite of freedom, as is banning their ownership.
 
You still have the choice to own or not.
Click to expand...
Yes, but laws exist to compel or prohibit behavior, and they generally have an enforcement mechanism. This one does neither. Passing laws like that can lead us to a lubricious incline.
 
Gun ownership means nothing.

Being ready, willing, and able to use a weapon is everything.

This law serves no realistic function other than to get a small town's name in the national news.
 
It wouldn't be the first place in Georgia to pass a law like this. Kennesaw has a similar law.

I think more than anything it is a message to the federal government that the citizens can be encouraged to own guns and society won't fall apart.

Kennesaw, Ga is a pretty nice place to live, I lived there for a while. They passed a similar law a while back for the same reasons. Crime is lower in Kennesaw than the areas around it.

This town isn't going to force anyone to own guns, although I would bet just about all of them own at least one gun already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top