Saturday, July 13, 2013

Nelson, Georgia - Intelligence Center of the Country


In this Tuesday, July 9, 2013 photo, a newspaper comic depicting an elderly woman holding a gun in the wake of a recent city law requiring every head of household to own a gun and ammunition is taped to Francis Carney's front door, in Nelson, Ga. As the national debate over gun control swirled in the spring, the tiny Georgia city made a statement supporting gun rights by passing an ordinance requiring gun ownership. Now a national gun control group is using a lawsuit challenging that law to send a message of its own. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

Yahoo News

A tiny Georgia city and a national gun control group are facing off in a legal battle over a city ordinance requiring gun ownership, with the constitutionality of the law and broader messages about gun rights taking center stage.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence in May filed a federal lawsuit against Nelson, a city of roughly 1,300 residents about 50 miles north of Atlanta, saying a recently adopted ordinance requiring heads of household to own a gun and ammunition is unconstitutional.

Here's the genius rationale behind the law:

"I am still firmly in favor of the law," resident Lawrence Cooper said. "I believe that if everyone had guns crime would disappear."

5 comments:

  1. So it's not enough that the Brady Bunch demands violations of basic rights. Now they have to sue this town over nothing? This is the ugly face of desperation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The argument they're apparently using is bizarre and creative(ly stupid) even by the standards of "gun control" fanatics:

      The allegations of the complaint contend that the ordinance violates the Second Amendment's protection of the right to keep and bear arms, because, according to the Brady Center, the right to keep and bear arms involves the freedom to decide that one may more effectively defend his home by not permitting an operable firearm to be inside of his home.

      They're arguing, in effect, that the right to keep and bear arms="the right to require that no arms are kept or borne here."

      Delete
    2. So the Brady Bunch has conceded that the Second Amendment is an individual right? Beautiful.

      Delete
  2. Not surprising at all, waiting for one of the rural counties here in SC (i.e. Union or Laurens) to follow suit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. Good to hear from you, Daisy.

      Delete