1. Rick Day says:

    I have a CCW permit. It was not difficult to obtain. Even Paul Broun can get one without an oath!

    You can get one, too! Great system already in place, it is!

    The War on Some Drugs ™ has created enough of a black felony base to sooth the worries of plantation masters. Todays system guarantees legally registered firearms will be kept out of the hands of felonious desperadoes.


    PS: The thought of “State Officials” at my door demanding all my guns gave me the lulz.

    PPS: that part of the gun registration where you have to swear you have never used marijuana or a dangerous substance? Why are you forcing 70% 90% of applicants to lie?

    If the FBI and Army will take former casual inhalers, why should GA demand total abstinence, or the permit is denied?

    Dumb Law. Fix It.

  2. Painterman says:

    Read the details on where yo can legally carry a gun. Basically your car, home and the local retail outlets. That’s about it. The laws are way to restrictive about where it is legal to carry.

  3. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Big deal if you can not carry a gun everywhere. I always get a kick out of what American’s support and which parts. Why should you be allowed to carry a gun in a bank or a church? You money is federally insured and Christ teaches non-action. Hippocisy perhaps? Besides we live in a system that embraces positve law…not natural law. You trigger happy morons should read the books that inspired our nation…rather than watch fox news. John Locke would even tell you that only in a state of nature is man granted the right to kill to protect his property…after a social contract is created, it is up to the reasoned ethic of man. Not to the flawed emotions of a few passionate lunatics. This is definitely not a legitimate study,…where are the crime statistics and quantitative analyses given to determine the facts?

  4. ChuckEaton says:

    “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. ” – Goldwater during his 1963 acceptance speech as a GOP candidate for President.

  5. dorian says:

    Thanks Goldwater C. Your post reminded me of how much I love my guns and has inspired me to go out and buy more of them. I was meandering about going to a gun show this weekend, but now I am sure. Thanks!

  6. Larry says:

    Carrying a gun doesn’t make a person “trigger happy”. I know it’s cliche, but laws restricting a person from carrying (and using) whatever tool they feel prudent to protect themselves and their family only makes them targets for those who don’t obey laws.

  7. ChuckEaton says:

    I think goldwaterconservative’s moniker is a little ironic, since Barry Goldwater was one of the biggest gun toting Senators there ever was. I’ve heard he used to drive around Washington with a handgun on his carseat.

  8. Doug Deal says:

    I own no guns, and probably would not buy one if it were up to me, but I still think it is an important right. But, since my wife is a hunter, and she owns guns, and being a prosecutor, she should probably also carry one.

    If a higher percentage of people blew away intruders who have an eye toward mayhem, there would be less intruders to committ mayhem, and less willing to risk it.

  9. rugby_fan says:


    I know where you are coming from but that is such a horrible argument for fewer restrictions for owning guns.

    How would a criminal know whether or not I have any firearms in my house, should he decide to rob me?

    Moreover, if he is willing to commit a crime by having a gun, and then performing another crime with said weapon, it seems as if nothing much will stop him.

  10. ChuckEaton says:


    The criminal doesn’t know whether you have a gun in your house or not, unless of course you have the “Protected by Smith and Wesson” sign at your entrance. It’s the threat that you might have a gun which is one of a criminal’s biggest fears.

    If I told you that you had to break into a home in the middle of the night and your choice was a bungalow in Midtown, with a Hillary sign in the front yard, or a farmhouse in south Georgia with a Saxby sign in the front yard, which one would you choose?

    In a sense, even if you don’t own a gun, you still benefit from the fear that other gun owners have created in the minds of potential criminals.

  11. Jace Walden says:


    The criminal isn’t supposed to know whether or not I have a gun. That’s the deterring factor.

    In places like D.C. where personal firearms are banned, there is a really good chance that a house I’m breaking into is not protected by any kind of firearms. I am more likely to hit that house.

    I am less willing to break into a house in Georgia where there is no law prohibiting people from owning guns, where gun ownership is in fact encouraged…If I break into one of these houses, it’s either because I’m desperate or stupid. The thought of being shot and killed is enought to deter me.

  12. cheapseats says:

    Guns in the workplace a right?

    I think the employers should be the ones to determine that. Booze is legal and several places I worked had policies that made possession of booze on company property a cause for termination.

    Recently I read about a guy who shot his co-worker for stepping in the wet cement that he had just finished. To make matters worse, it turns out that the guy he shot was not the one who stepped in his cement!

    Not all gun-owners are morons but too many morons are gun-owners.

  13. BubbaRich says:

    So Georgia is a GOOD place to be a gun owner, Jace? That kind of contradicts your original words and especially the article you quote. It seems like the only thing you lack is the express right to carry a gun to a grade school, the state capital, or somebody else’s property without their permission. And I KNOW you favor property laws, right?

  14. Doug Deal says:


    I think it would be interesting to correlate those statistics to each state’s degree of gun control. I do not think DC alone proves or disproves anything in isolation.

    There are still difficulties in proving anything one way or another, though, as the only stats that should count are those that would actually be influenced by the possession of a gun by a homeowner such as burglary and robbery.

  15. Larry says:


    Others have answered, but the fact that criminals don’t know whether or not you have a gun is very important to guns being a deterrent. This is even more important when you leave your home. Georgia law prohibits carrying in many places. These places in effect become a good place for criminals to do their dastardly deeds. In other words, they don’t know whether you have a gun in your home, but they do know you don’t have one as you leave a restaurant which serves alcohol. This makes the places where you are prohibited from having a gun the most dangerous places to be, whether you normally have a gun or not.

    The criminal is willing to criminally own a gun and criminally use a gun. It is therefore our duty to make sure that he/she doesn’t have safety zones in which he/she can ply his criminal trade. We know that laws will not stop them so we need the ability to protect ourselves and families. We hope (and I believe statistics prove it out) that our ability to protect ourselves, whether we do or not, will deter at least part of the violent criminal activity.

  16. joe says:


    I decided years ago that since Georgia’s laws were in violation of the 2nd amendment, I will just ignore them. I carry when and where I feel like. I only hope that I am arrested, my judge has a gun behind the bench.

  17. Larry says:


    I didn’t say drunk people need guns. I don’t drink, but I go to a pizza place that sells beer and wine and I am prohibited from taking my gun in there. There are many people in there who aren’t consuming alcohol, but they are prohibited from carrying a gun as well. This tells any criminal with even a small part of a brain that people entering or leaving this pizza place are not armed so it makes everyone who eats there, drinking or not, perfect targets.

    People drink and drive, but that doesn’t mean we close all of the highways to all people driving cars. It simply means we deal with the people who use their cars in an unacceptable way.

  18. rugby_fan says:


    You may continue to say that the uncertainty of gun ownership is a deterrent, but I would proof.

    Please refute the statistics I provided because the run counter to your claim.

  19. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Go buy your guns…waste you money on more of them. It is your decision and your right. Goldwater conservative, as a tag, only represents the fact that I follow a philosophy that is aligned with real conservatism. I only say this to lambast most of the people in this forum who are only conservative on certain issues and then use their religion or fall for the crap that mainstream republicans campaign on. John Konop would know what I am talking about…and I suspect Doug Deal does as well.

    For the sake of informing the people on this site, I was a close personal friend of “Federalist.” He recently passed away. Not to long after being banned from Peach Pundit as a matter of fact. Really the only reason I bothered to look at this site is because he brought it up after his banishing, and I understand why he posted on it. He died from pancreatic cancer…and actually lived longer than he expected. Usually you have only a few months, he got nearly a year.

  20. GOPeach says:


    I am so sorry to hear of this. We never know who is posting on Peach Pundit and why. I relate in many ways as I am a caregiver to a brilliant man who can hardly speak any more. Many times… I am his voice. He was/is the best!

    My heart goes out to the friends and family of “Federalist”.

  21. Larry says:

    I can present statistics from John Lott and others who have compiled them, but I have no numbers which I personally compiled and upon which I can “hang my hat”. Statistics are great and can be used to prove almost any point you wish to make, but let’s take a look at the real world. Numbers range wildly, but all the evidence I’ve seen shows a significant increase in violent crime in Great Britain since they strengthened their gun control laws following the Hungerford tragedy and banned most guns following the Dublane tragedy. The criminal use of (banned) guns has increased dramatically.

    The increase of crime in GB, including the unprecedented shooting of 46 policemen, along with corresponding increases in crime in other countries which have banned guns (particularly hand guns), lead me to the conclusion that stricter gun control does nothing to reduce crime and in fact, has just the opposite effect.

    There are many reasons people feel the way they do about gun control, but we all seem to have several things in common. We are frozen to our positions, we can find evidence to convince us that we are right and we are sure the other “side” is jus incapable of understanding.

  22. juliobarrios says:

    Didn’t know that about Federalist, although it must have been his wish for people not to judge him based on his cancer. Wasn’t he the guy who wished cancer on one of the elected officials?

  23. juliobarrios says:

    It’s not really fair to compare DC to Atlanta as there are many variables that compose a city and it’s reasons for crime.

  24. rugby_fan says:


    All you are doing is ignoring the comparison between Atlanta and DC.

    I’m not twisting numbers I am saying there are X number of crimes in Atlanta while there are Y number of crimes in DC.

    Feel free to answer this though.

    New York State, which has some of the most draconian gun ownership laws in the union, has a lower crime rate per 1,000 citizens than Georgia, which has less restrictive laws. Why is that?


  25. rugby_fan says:

    And its amazing that crime is still down across the board in DC.

    Look, Jason, I am in favor of gun rights, but you don’t have to support gun rights with Kant and other half truths.

  26. Jason Pye says:

    And its amazing that crime is still down across the board in DC.

    Overall there hasn’t been a drop in violent. The highest levels occurred after the gun ban.

    I’m not coming after you and I have not given any half truths. I’m simply trying to put everything in perspective.

    I would also be happy to loan you some of John Lott’s work if you’d like.

  27. Doug Deal says:


    You make compelling arguments, but I do not think the data you provided is conclusive. People on the other side can point to Kennesaw where (whether true or not) there is a public perception that everyone has a gun by law.

    Crime rates are extremely low there. I personally would think that there is an economic and demographic reason for that, but to come to that conclusion, I would also have to allow for that conclusion in the data for Washington DC and Atlanta.

    That is the problem with sociology, and why I refuse to recognize it as a reputable science. There is no real way to run experiments, so conclusions are based on miniscule data points (a big no-no) or faulty assumptions (a bigger no-no).

  28. Doug Deal says:


    For your side of the argument, have you considered using the fact that DC is a special case, as it is the seat of government, and especially after 9/11, some crime may be reduced by tighter security to fight terrorism. It may even keep criminals out who are from surrounding areas since tighter security would mean easier targets could be found elsewhere.

    Also, as Washington gets bigger and bigger, the areas in and around Washington can change demographically. More valuable real estate could force people to be replaced by lower crime committing wealthy people.

    How do crime statistics in DC correlate to average family income and other variables?

  29. Jason Pye says:

    The reason the Parker case was filed is to allow residents of the city to have a functional firearm for self defense, which is a protected right under the Constitution.

    How do crime statistics in DC correlate to average family income and other variables?

    I’d have to do some research on that.

  30. Goldwater Conservative says:


    no. Sure locke influence the declaration…but the system created under the constitution was one of positive law. It is a social contract. Progressivism, for your point of view, must have begun upon the signing of the constitution. Every political philosopher since the creation of our country would agree…John Rawls included.

    Konop, Federalist and I often came to that same conclusion. The demographics and law enforcement statistics play a vital role as variables in the equation that determines crime statistics. Read “Revenge of the Nerds: Irrational Exhuberence” by John Cohn. Sociology and Political science are reputable, just not exact. One of the biggest problems with the general public perception is that they tend to read garbage spued out by think tanks. This is wrong. Most universities and disciplinary organizations have publications that are not popular reading material, but they do provide much more insight.

  31. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Yes, Federalist did wish cancer upon Karen Handel. He actually maintained that position as well. I could probably give you a list of people he said that about too:
    -William Rehnquist (because of his Janus-Faced Federalism)
    -Katherine Harris (for the same reason as Karen Handel)
    -Gerald Ford
    -Zell Miller
    -Rush Limbaugh (not cancer but a severe case of parkinson’s)
    He was not kidding either…he really meant every word of it. He would never have hurt anybody, just wish for natural to take its course.

  32. Malum Prohibitum says:

    Georgia makes it a felony with 20 years imprisonment and a $15,000 fine to carry a firearm a “reasonable distance adjacent to” a bus stop.

    In California, it is legal for a licensed person to carry a firearm right on to the bus.

    There, a post relevant to the original topic!

    Compare: http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/about/prohibited-places/

    Please respond without resorting to ad hominem attack.

  33. BubbaRich says:


    I think you must be looking at different stats than those you are posting, which show even the city of Atlanta has lower crime rates than DC.


    What on earth are those “murder rates” you are quoting? First of all, they are fictional, since I can’t find any murder stat where DC is worse than Atlanta. But what does an “80% murder rate” mean?

  34. Jason Pye says:

    That was my fault, I shouldn’t have put a percentage sign next to the number. That should be 80.6 murders per 100,000 residents.

    The stats are based on the FBI’s numbers.

  35. BubbaRich says:


    Sorry, I missed that you were making an entirely irrelevant comparison of crime stats between the center city of a metropolitan area, and an entire, mostly rural state. If you want to compare something more realistic, both the City of Atlanta and Washington, DC have a rate of around 25-30 murders per 100,000 inhabitants.

    I lived up in Suburban Maryland few years ago, but the only guns we ever heard about were the ones being shot at us by the DC sniper. You may have seen our local gas station and post office on the news where the sniper started his spree. Not really related to what you’re saying, except that the gun control laws are mostly irrelevant a few miles away from their small location.

Comments are closed.