Sheriff tells citizens to "be armed"

[RVTECH]

The problem is with the 'acceptance' of weed as a 'medicine' with states handing out 'medical marijuana' cards as a legal stop gap to allow people to be stoned 24/7. All this has done is to INCREASE the illegal grow and traffic of MJ. Legalization only gives the middle and upper class users a way to buy without having to go to the 'street' to buy - but the lower class not being able to afford legal MJ will still use the 'street' which rely on illegal growing operations. Then there are the states which MJ is still illegal and depend on illegal growing operations - and finally there are the LEGAL retailers of weed (such as in Oregon) who will UNDOUBTEDLY use illegal growers for supply. This is becoming a bigger problem than EVER considered and any legalization only makes it worse.

 

[aikikenjitsu]

I know that the Feds are no go, but I know that Oregon and thought that Washington still had a State preemption keeping local cities from going ban crazy??? And for now signs do not have any force of law for businesses open to the general public.

Right now our gun rights are slowly circling the drain. I personally think that if the next three presidents are pro gun and pro constitutional, a stopper will be dropped on our drain. If signs ever get force of law, I'll be buying everything from the net. As it is, I buy sixty percent of my stuff through it right now.
Still packing my Ruger .380 LCP with a ten round magazine and one in the chamber.
Sifu

 

[aikikenjitsu]

I was pissed when at a recent "gun show" I had to go back to my car and empty my pockets etc. to go through the metal detector...WTF? Ah, but lots of LEOs packing and admiring the goods.

That doesn't make sense, once you took everything out of your pockets why didn't they just let you in?? I mean they know what you have, so back into the pockets they go and in you go.They sound kind of rare stupid.
Sifu

 

[Brutus57]

The point was, they wanted ME or anyone like me disarmed. I just think it's bubblegum.

Brutus Out

 

[wired]

So a prospective LEO was already violating the law? I suspect these murders have deeper 'roots' than most understand - and this is why the 'Stay armed' response from the sheriff to the surviving family members was made. It's probably something out of control for the area and more like a community in Mexico having to deal with a drug cartel.

I get more of a feeling that it isnt like a family having to deal with a drug cartel. More likely they were a drug cartel of sorts and they were cutting in on another cartels business or they were having cashflow issues to their parent cartel.

 

[aikikenjitsu]

The point was, they wanted ME or anyone like me disarmed. I just think it's bubblegum.

Brutus Out

I get it, you were carrying a gun. Gotcha.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Gravity at eleven. Stay tuned.

 

[aikikenjitsu]

Gravity at eleven. Stay tuned.

?

 

[Certaindeaf]

?

It's kinda like explaining a joke.
See, gravity is a constant and so are kittens.
Do you understand?

 

[aikikenjitsu]

It's kinda like explaining a joke.
See, gravity is a constant and so are kittens.
Do you understand?

Yeah, enough cats can be a constant

 

[PaulB47]

The problem is with the 'acceptance' of weed as a 'medicine' with states handing out 'medical marijuana' cards as a legal stop gap to allow people to be stoned 24/7. All this has done is to INCREASE the illegal grow and traffic of MJ.

These people died because of the drug laws.

MJ is a plant. Without the laws, people could grow it anywhere, or buy it from their neighbors. There would be no grow operations and cartels, and no reason to kill over it. This event could not happen in Oregon (except possibly for grow operations based on selling weed in other states where prohibition still exists).

Yours is the same logic as alcohol prohibition.

Crime always drops when prohibitions are lifted. As to people being stoned 24/7, that is their business, not yours.

Why do so many people think trampling liberty is the solution to problems? And this is a gun forum?

 

[HuckleberryFun]

I was pissed when at a recent "gun show" I had to go back to my car and empty my pockets etc. to go through the metal detector...WTF? Ah, but lots of LEOs packing and admiring the goods.

Brutus Out

We wouldn't want the irresponsible unwashed masses carrying a gun at a gun show, would we? You/they might hurt somebody.
Cops never shoot innocent people, so we're safe. (yes sarcasm)

 

[tac]

It's long, folks, but still worth reading from beginning to end....

Gun Ownership - It's The
Law In Kennesaw
By Jonathan Hamilton and David Burch
Marietta Daily Journal Staff Writers
<broken link removed>
3-14-1
KENNESAW, Ga - Several Kennesaw officials attribute a drop in crime in the city over the past two decades to a law that requires residents to have a gun in the house.
In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition.
The ordinance states the gun law is needed to "protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants."
Then-councilman J.O. Stephenson said after the ordinance was passed, everyone "went crazy."
"People all over the country said there would be shootings in the street and violence in homes," he said. "Of course, that wasn't the case."
In fact, according to Stephenson, it caused the crime rate in the city to plunge.
Kennesaw Historical Society president Robert Jones said following the law's passage, the crime rate dropped 89 percent in the city, compared to the modest 10 percent drop statewide.
"It did drop after it was passed," he said. "After it initially dropped, it has stayed at the same low level for the past 16 years."
Mayor Leonard Church was not in office when the law was passed, but he said he is a staunch supporter of it.
"You can't argue with the fact that Kennesaw has the lowest crime rate of any city our size in the country," said Church, who owns a denture-making company in Kennesaw.
The author of the ordinance, local attorney Fred Bentley Sr., attributes at least some of the decrease in crime to the bill.
"I am definitely in favor of what we did," he said. "It may not be totally responsible for the decrease, [but] it is a part."
Although he is pleased with the outcome, Bentley said he was originally opposed to drafting the law.
"I didn't think it could be written in a constitutional fashion," he said. "Obviously, it was constitutional, because the American Civil Liberties Union challenged it in court and we won."
Jones said the ACLU challenged the law in a federal court just after it was passed. In response, the city added a clause adding conscientious objectors to the list of those exempt.
Although the law is now being credited with a drop in crime, Jones said that was not the law's original purpose. He also pointed out that Kennesaw did not have a big problem with crime before.
"The crime rate wasn't that high to start with. It was 11 burglaries per 1,000 residents in 1981," he said.
According to the Kennesaw Police Department, the city's most recent crime statistics show 243 property crimes per 100,000 residents in 1998, or .243 per 1,000.
The city's crime rate continues to be far below other metro Atlanta city's with similar populations, like Decatur. In 1998, Decatur recorded 4,049 property crimes per 100,000 residents.
Jones said one motivation for the council passing the ordinance had to do with publicity.
"It was done in response to a law passed by Morton Grove, Ill., outlawing gun ownership within the city limits," he said. "Several council members were upset Morton Grove had gotten a lot of attention with their ordinance so they decided to top them.
"They figured the gun ownership ordinance would knock that city right off the front pages. They were right."
Jones said the ensuing publicity surrounding the law has given Kennesaw worldwide name recognition.
"I have been to Australia and Europe and when I tell people I am from Kennesaw they recognize the name as the place that requires everyone to own a gun," he said.
But Stephenson said the issue was not publicity-driven but issue-driven.
"We believed in the right of people to own guns," he said.
Jones said he has sold 550 copies of a 1994 book about the first-of-its-kind law, "The Law Heard 'Round the World."
He said the law in its final form has many loopholes, so not everyone is required to own a gun.
"There are many outs," he said. "When you look at it, almost anyone could fit into one of the exempted groups."
Kennesaw Police Chief Dwaine Wilson said no one has ever been prosecuted under the ordinance.
Among those exempt are residents "who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine." Others exempt include the physically and mentally disabled, paupers and those convicted of a felony.
The law contains no clause addressing punishment for violating the law. If convicted, City Clerk Diane Coker said punishment would be determined by the general penalty clause of the Kennesaw Code Ordinance - probably a fine of about $100.
Jones said the unusual law has not deterred anyone from moving to Kennesaw.
"Our population has increased just like everyone's in Georgia in the past 20 years," he said. "The law really hasn't done any harm to the city's growth."
The city's population in 1998 was recorded at 14,493 - a sharp increase over the 8,936 residents recorded in the 1990 census.
Cobb Chamber of Commerce president Bill Cooper said odd laws are typically not counted as strike against a city when a business is looking to relocate.
"These laws don't have laws don't have an impact on a company's decision to move to Cobb County," Cooper said.
"Many communities have strange laws that are out of date. Businesses look at many factors when relocating, such as quality of life, education, infrastructure and available workforce."
Bentley said the law actually may have helped business development.
"Kennesaw is home to more manufacturing businesses than any other Cobb city," he said. "Companies have said they want to be located in conservative areas."

How would that work out in Chicago, I wonder?

tac

 

[wired]

The problem is with the 'acceptance' of weed as a 'medicine' with states handing out 'medical marijuana' cards as a legal stop gap to allow people to be stoned 24/7. All this has done is to INCREASE the illegal grow and traffic of MJ. Legalization only gives the middle and upper class users a way to buy without having to go to the 'street' to buy - but the lower class not being able to afford legal MJ will still use the 'street' which rely on illegal growing operations. Then there are the states which MJ is still illegal and depend on illegal growing operations - and finally there are the LEGAL retailers of weed (such as in Oregon) who will UNDOUBTEDLY use illegal growers for supply. This is becoming a bigger problem than EVER considered and any legalization only makes it worse.

Why do you think the legal retailers UNDOUBTEDLY use illegal growers for supply. They get audited by the state and there are plenty of legal growers in the state to fill the demand. There is no need to use illegal suppliers and the penalty for doing so will put the retailer in jail. The prices on weed in the legal stores have settled down to the point where the deals on the street arent much better and the stuff you get in the store is of excellent quality and is very consistent. At least in Washington the selection of legally grown and marketed weed in the stores is amazing and at very good price points.