Hey, Georgia Gun Owners…

OK – lunch time question that should make Georgia gun owners go hummmm…

So today I’ve gone back and started to re-read the Georgia Constitution. In it, Art. I Sect. I Para VIII – Arms, right to keep and bear, it states the following:

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but the General Assembly shall have power to prescribe the manner in which arms may be borne.”

So if this is the case, where does the General Assembly think they get the power to tell gun owners WHERE they can carry their guns? The key phrase is “power to proscribe the MANNER in which arms may be borne.” The last time I checked, the manner in which you do something is HOW you do it NOT WHERE…

If you look up the word “manner” on free dictionary, (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/manner) it states the following:

man·ner (mnr)
1. A way of doing something or the way in which a thing is done or happens. See Synonyms at method.
2. A way of acting; bearing or behavior.
3. manners
a. The socially correct way of acting; etiquette.
b. The prevailing customs, social conduct, and norms of a specific society, period, or group, especially as the subject of a literary work.
4. Practice, style, execution, or method in the arts: This fresco is typical of the painter’s early manner.
a. Kind; sort: What manner of person is she?
b. Kinds; sorts: saw all manner of people at the mall.

Do you see anything about WHERE something can be done? I sure don’t. So with my simple understanding of the English language, ANY law they try to pass that regulates WHERE you can carry is a violation of the Georgia Constitution! The Constitution is written in plain English and is clear. The problem is that we the people are letting our politicians MAKE the issue difficult and confusing.

The Supreme Court has stated that any law that is unconstitutional is no law at all and can be ignored by Citizens. (I’ll need to find the exact case cite but it’s out there…) So if the legislature tries to pass a law that limits where we carry, or adds conditions to saying who can carry, we can do a number of things.

  1. Ignore the law and carry anyway.
  2. Ignore the law and carry anyway and then sue each and every representative and senator that voted “YES”, in their personal capacity, for passing a law OUTSIDE their Constitutional authority – (color of law). When someone does something under “color of law” they automatically give up any immunity they may have had in the course of performing their duties and can be sued as individuals.
  3. Do 1 or 2 above and then get the local Sheriff, (our Constitutionally elected Law enforcement officer) to arrest them and hold them for treason.

I know, it all seems just a bit extreme but somehow we the people need to start standing up and demanding that our elected “representatives” start following the Law and the Constitution! They just can’t make this stuff up as they go along anymore. If a few of these “representatives” get caught and prosecuted, the rest will hopefully get the message pretty quickly and will stop trying to legislate our rights away from us.

Would that stop private enterprises from saying whether people could carry into their businesses? No, they can set whatever rules they want for their private business or property. I believe though, once gun owners stopped going into these businesses and the criminals start, these private business owners would change their minds pretty quickly.

Would that stop the grubberment from setting rules for entering grubberment buildings? No, they could still do that too… Although I would question that situation as well – public buildings are just that – public. Paid for or rented with our tax dollars. Just sayin’…

And on THAT note – lets address the whole “carry permit” thing… Do YOU see anywhere in the text of Art. 1 Sect. 1 Para VIII any verbiage that allows the General Assembly to make you get a “permit” to exercise your right to keep and bear arms? I don’t.

Back to the dictionary. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/permit) Permit is defined as:

per·mit (pr-mt)
v. per·mit·ted, per·mit·ting, per·mits
1. To allow the doing of (something); consent to: permit the sale of alcoholic beverages.
2. To grant consent or leave to (someone); authorize: permitted him to explain.
3. To afford opportunity or possibility for: weather that permits sailing.
To afford opportunity; allow: if circumstances permit.
n. (pûrmt, pr-mt)
1. Permission, especially in written form.
2. A document or certificate giving permission to do something; a license or warrant: a building permit.

Forcing someone to get a permit – permission to do something that otherwise would be illegal – is converting their “right” into a privilege! God gave me my rights and only through due process of Law can any grubberment take them away. Converting a right into a privilege by legislative fiat is NOT due process. And neither is trying to change the meaning of the Constitution via legislative action. Changes like that must be voted on by the people or they are null and void.

In any situation that concerns our rights – we MUST be diligent and fight against any infringement by government. We must educate ourselves in the Law and then be willing to fight to keep our rights when they are attacked, even in small ways, by the people and processes that are suppose to be protecting those very same rights.



About imjustaregularjoe

I'm just a regular joe - I work hard to pay my bills, try and spend time with my wife and kids, and wonder about all the CRAZINESS going on in the world today! Things should be easier - it's either right or wrong, black or white. But now everyone has their own shade of gray... Me? I'm just asking questions...
This entry was posted in Commentary, Gun Rights, Jurisdiction, Legislation, Observations and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.