The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/ci ... ory/nWhgr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;NELSON, Ga. — Every homeowner in a local town could soon have to own a gun or break the law. It's a controversial new plan for the city of Nelson.
I think I'll wait to read the law in question before I decide and state an opinion.The Annoyed Man wrote:I actually wouldn't support that law, because it is a violation of the rights of those who choose NOT to exercise their 2nd Amendment right. You shouldn't be forced to buy a gun any more than you should be forced to speak or go to church.
or buy health insurance.The Annoyed Man wrote:I actually wouldn't support that law, because it is a violation of the rights of those who choose NOT to exercise their 2nd Amendment right. You shouldn't be forced to buy a gun any more than you should be forced to speak or go to church.
You are probably right, and if the law was well crafted, it will have those provisions. Kennesaw Georgia did this way back in 1980. The Kennesaw ordinance says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#Gun_lawE.Marquez wrote:I think I'll wait to read the law in question before I decide and state an opinion.The Annoyed Man wrote:I actually wouldn't support that law, because it is a violation of the rights of those who choose NOT to exercise their 2nd Amendment right. You shouldn't be forced to buy a gun any more than you should be forced to speak or go to church.
I will bet the law has exceptions for various circumstances.
(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
Zackly!cardstroker wrote:or buy health insurance.The Annoyed Man wrote:I actually wouldn't support that law, because it is a violation of the rights of those who choose NOT to exercise their 2nd Amendment right. You shouldn't be forced to buy a gun any more than you should be forced to speak or go to church.