Georgia Town Wants to Make Gun Ownership Mandatory

Forget the debate over gun control for a moment: How would you feel if your city suddenly made it illegal not to own a firearm?

  • Share
  • Read Later
Andrew Unangst / Getty Images

Forget the debate over gun control for a moment: How would you feel if your city suddenly made it illegal not to own a firearm?

(MORE: Arkansas Woman Attempts to Flee Police on Power Wheels Toy Truck)

A small town in northwest Georgia has proposed just that, arguing that a single police officer isn’t enough to protect its 1,314 residents, reports WSB-TV. The trouble is that Nelson, Ga. spans two counties: Pickens to the north and Cherokee to the south, a situation that results in just one police officer available to patrol the city during the day, leaving it unguarded for 16 hours each night. A call to police still gets results from county sheriffs, but city leaders say response times can be slow.

The solution? Gun-up or else, at least if city councilman Duane Cronic has his druthers. “Every head of household will own and maintain a firearm,” said Cronic, though he claims it’s intended more as a deterrent, adding “It tells the potential intruder you better think twice.”

Would there be exceptions? Yes, reports WSB-TV: If you’re not mentally or physically capable of using a gun, a felon or you object on religious grounds. Still, Nelson residents like Lamar Kellett are having none of it: “This is big government at its worst. Government mandating what a free individual can and will have in his home,” he said.

But wait, haven’t we seen this story before? Indeed: Maybe you remember Kennesaw, Ga., a city of just under 30,000 that already has an ordinance on the books — passed back in 1982 — requiring that each household own a minimum of one firearm plus ammunition. But as Bloomberg notes (via Newser), it’s not really enforced; according to estimates, only half the town is in compliance.

MORE: LEGOs (No Really, LEGOs) Behind West Virginia Highway Shutdown

34 comments
MichaelLewis
MichaelLewis

Mandatory possesion of firearms may not be in everyones best interist. However you should be able to defend you and yours with what ever you feel comfortable with. You personaly may not like guns, but you should not infringe on the rights of others to posses them. As for me and mine. We shall be true citizens of the U.S. and be armed and ready.

MarcBond
MarcBond

“This is big government at its worst. Government mandating what a free individual can and will have in his home,”

Doesn't his also apply to haveing a licence, registation, or even fire alarms installed in homes?? This is a totally ignorant statement. I agree that we should have to have firearms in our homes, but I don't agree with being told to have them.

johnqhitman
johnqhitman

When this nation was founded, firearms ownership by a portion of society that were private citizens was a requirement by Federal Law. Look up the Militia Acts of 1792. Under current law, all able-bodied males of a certain age group are considered militia (10USC311). Under current law, the states are allowed to maintain a military force these are usually called State Defense Forces.

In some counties in this country, Law Enforcement response times can exceed an hour. The average response time nationwide is about 20 minutes. Law-Enforcement furthermore has no duty to come to your aid, this is Stare Decisis. 

Your best defense is and always will be a gun in your hand, not police on their way.

jgarrison2ster
jgarrison2ster

At last, an article that reports common sense and isn't riddles with liberal anti-gun creep propaganda. I don't care where you live, I've lived all over the country, there are very bad people everywhere. Doesn't matter if you're in a rich or poor neighborhood, they'll break down the door, shoot you and your family and steal your belongings, light up a cigarette, go to their hide out, divy up the loot, then go home and sleep. I sleep with a shotgun, handgun and a sword next to my bed and lock the bedroom door. I feel much safer than when I travel and do not have my protection with me. I don't know why anyone would have hesitation on emptying a magazine into an intruder who has bad intensions to you and your family. To me, it is a legal kill and it's just cleaning up the crap. I'd like to see more cities implement this law into effect.

BarentWagar
BarentWagar

Wouldn't this be an involuntary draft?  Instead of arming themselves, this town should just realize they are all worthless, inbred hillbillies that aren't worth living, and go full Jonestown.  I'll furnish the Koolaid.

downpour
downpour

I would rather give up my own life than have to kill another human being. If you feel you could kill someone with ease, then I'd say you are psychopathic and not really fit to be a member of modern human society.

I find it very odd that Americans, who are so obsessed with Christianity, a religion with the central tenant of: "thou shalt NOT kill"... are also so obsessed with these devices whose sole function is to kill. That commandment isn't followed by: "...unless it's in self defence."

If Jesus was more than just a fictional character, invented as a literary tool to promote the personal opinions of some ancient scholar ...then he would clearly be ashamed of America.

But even if you don't believe in any religion, then you must accept that a society can't live in fear. We mustn't let risk change the way we live our lives... and forcing people to own guns is doing exactly that.

jamesf161
jamesf161

Why didn't they petition for another officer, or form a small part-time guard from competent members of the public. That would solve issues with criminals without as much bloodshed. Is shooting a guy in the head because he's a addict, stealing to feed his addiction a good idea? Probably not. Not to mention the risks inherent in such high gun ownership.

mccann.holly
mccann.holly

Only in 'MERIKA is Universal Healthcare is unconstitutional but but forcing someone to but a gun instead is perfectly fine. 
And you wonder why the rest of the world thinks everyone in the US is a fat stupid redneck.

shamshamrobotus
shamshamrobotus

Some of the comments I am reading are just rediculous. I almost purchased a gun last year but my mom talked me out it because I am more likely to accidentally shoot my boyfriend than an actual intruder. I've lived alone for a long time and can very anxious at night, the thought of having to pull out a gun scares me to death. I would much rather own a stun gun, with that you can at least subdue the person long enough for you to get away. I think shooting someone just for being in your home is a bit much. You may end up getting robbed by someone who didn't know you were home and have no intentions of hurting you or anyone in the household. Would you feel comfortable killing someone over a TV?

josephroger
josephroger

How about insurance? Who will provide it? Who will pay for i?.. JRH

Elvisfofana
Elvisfofana

US Policy is completely nuts on so many things. Children should be protected from promiscuous thinking and shielded away from images of bear breasts and explicit nudity and sex. But please go see movies where violence is cool and please take a gun with you to school... Priorities are completely reversed. and people find it very normal. When will you be adults and stop being cowboys : guns are no option. Ban guns completely. In Europe, a lot of countries have done so and it is now proven fact that it results in less gun-related deaths. Please people : grow up !

frank59
frank59

Mandatory gun training in school curriculum's "yes" Most gun accident are with young children.

Forcing people to buy a gun that they may not be able to afford is just as unconstitutional as infringing on my 2nd amendment. Citizen should be the first line of defence, the police are only there to collect evidence and photograph the victims. Never the less it should be the right of a person to defend yourself or be a victim. I know that sound really stupid but it is a constitutional right.

RoyF
RoyF

The Kennesaw Ga law was a symbolic reaction to Morton Grove Ill law that prohibited all guns in its city limits that now ruled unconstitutional by Supreme Court McDonald Vs Chicago ruling and if Kennesaw Ga actually enforced  the law its  would have been ruled likewise had it come to it.Truth be told it did show that guns in the home deterred crime as its plummeted throughout the city limits. Morton Grove Ill couldnt say that could it?

lolololitsmack
lolololitsmack

lololololololololololololo


If you want to own a gun, fine. I personally would (I'm a minor but my family owns several guns)

If you don't want to own a gun, fine as well. It shouldn't be mandatory. I'd recommend it to anyone but it should not be mandatory.

Wild
Wild

It only makes sense. Average nationwide response time to a 911call is just under 9 minutes, with some as high as 30 minutes. As long as you have the proper training, and aren't prohibited from owning a firearm, it really is your duty to protect yourself and your family.
Courts have upheld the fact that it is not law enforcements place to protect the citizenry, only to capture criminals after the crime. If you have moral or ethical objections, fine, don't own a firearm. But you negate your ability to complain about being a victim if you actively choose not to take the steps necessary to protect yourself and your family, but have the ability to.
Towns, especially small towns, do not have the budget to hire additional staff, especially police officers. Sometimes it is hard to just make payroll without being a speed trap or passing outrageous laws that bilk the citizens like what happened in the corrupt town of Bell, California. Even large cities are having money problems - case in point, Detroit, Michigan, or Camden, New Jersey - both of these cities are woefully understaffed on law enforcement, all due to budgetary problems.
It's high time that the federal government stop trying to make us victims by passing highly restrictive and ineffective firearm laws, and more than enough time for people to start taking a more personal role in their own safety, and safety of their neighbors and community. Criminals are the problem, not guns - and people need to do more to fix the crime problem.

cathymiller4u
cathymiller4u

Here's a simple idea -- hire another police officer.  Police officers are professionally trained and tested.  You may say but that will cost tax money.  Yes it will.  But imagine how much tax money will be spent when the town is forced to defend the actions of one of its citizens who shot someone in anger/drunkness/accident. A small salary or a big lawsuit?  

RipperMrsRipper
RipperMrsRipper

Nice to see officials ask the public to help defend the public, instead of making criminals out of gun owners.



New Pro Second Amendment Site

GunRightsAttorneys.Com

steelgoat67
steelgoat67

And in York, excluding Sundays, it is perfectly legal to shoot a Scotsman with a bow and arrow. Just because it's law, does not mean that it is immune to be updated in step with modern times.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@jgarrison2ster amen, if this law goes into effect, violent crimes should go down, I mean, Switzerland is a fine example. Only 50 a year compared to 500 for Chicago, that has NO GUNS allowed to be purchased.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@downpour I am Christian and would have no problem killing a person bent on harm. I have to protect my family.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@downpour You are naive, because I would rather kill someone than allow him to harm my family or others.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@jamesf161 No, there is a lot less risk in NO gun ownership. Compare Chicago's 500 violent crimes (no guns allowed to be purchased, toughest gun regulation in the US) to Switzerland's 42-50 (they have the same laws proposed in this town) a year.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@mccann.holly Only in a liberals mind is mandating a gun unconstitutional yet socialism is perfectly fine

TheLogician
TheLogician

@shamshamrobotus So you would rather someone rob you blind, kill you and your family than shoot them. You are either very naive or very young. 75% of home intrusions end in 1) the intruder killing the homeowner or 2) the intruder severely injuring the homeowner. I value my life and my wife's life more than the drugged up thug stealing my TV.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@Elvisfofana Switzerland, dummy! Switzerland mandates one machine- style assault weapon per household and they have the 2nd lowest crime in the world, next to Luxembourg that has no major gun laws and a tiny populace. Chicago has a technical gun ban, and it is the most violent place in America.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@Wild Yeah, and the second amendment does not prevent mandatory gun ownership, it stops mandates penalizing gun owners.

StanRobertson
StanRobertson

Here's a test....Take a steak from the fridge. Get a steak knife from the drawer. Call 911, and start stabbing the steak. continue stabbing, until the police arrive. Look at the steak. That's you, or one of your loved ones. The police CANNOT be everywhere at once, nor will they EVER be able to arrive in time to stop an attack. You owe it to your loved ones to protect them, in the event of a home invasion. If you so choose to not arm yourself for personal protection, do not complain about the lack of law enforcement.

EricsBizTweets
EricsBizTweets

@cathymiller4u True. They are trained. But an armed citizen with a concealed carry license is a far better marksman. The average police officer trains 3 to 4 times a year, if that.  The average concealed carry license holder is more knowledgeable (because it interests them) and trains at least once a week on average.  Personally, I would rather have the better marksman respond if I were in need of assistance.  

downpour
downpour

@PeterNeumann @Elvisfofana

That's kind of missing the point of his argument. Certainly here in the UK I've never seen a gun in private ownership in my entire life. You hardly ever see them on police either, generally just at airports and during certain big events in cities. It's true that we should make the restrictions even tighter, nobody outside of specialist police units and the military should have them, not even farmers.

I couldn't imagine living in a country where the public are armed. This is one of the few issues that makes me feel proud of where I live. It's also the reason why I will never visit the US.

TheLogician
TheLogician

@StanRobertson Actually, you should stab the steak beforehand a few times for realist sake. If someone comes up to me with a gun drawn at me, and I had a gun, I would not think twice about blowing his head off, because I will protect myself

steelgoat67
steelgoat67

Absolutely. Steaks should be allowed to own any firearm, including assault weapons.