By 2ndAmendmentSupporter

April 30, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

The letter states; “The United States is the most highly armed country in the world with 90 guns for every 100 citizens according to the 2007 Small Arms Survey”, and I am proud to be considered one of the ones contributing to the number of firearms per citizen ratio…

Donnie Henriques, mayor of Woodstock, goes on to say “Contrary to popular belief, gun violence is not an urban, gang or a criminal problem. More than 16,000 suicides, accidental deaths of children and domestic violence related homicides by use of a firearm in the home occur each year and more than $2.3 billion is spent annually on medical costs attributed directly to gun violence.” But what the good mayor has not researched is the break down of how many of those numbers were committed by prior felons, how many of those numbers were committed in criminal acts, and finally how few (if any) were committed by persons who obtained a Georgia Firearm License. Ummm OK Mr. Mayor, your sponge fact is quickly drying up and is in need of our fear factor water.

One question, has the good mayor ever gone on record in such a flagrant manner to denounce the sale of alcohol inside the city limits of Woodstock? How do the numbers of DUI related deaths country wide stack up to firearm related deaths? How about that stat for Georgia? But we don’t see you banning or calling for a ban of alcohol in your city.

This fear mongering must stop.

By Ed Stone

April 30, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

The City of Woodstock used to ban the carry of firearms within the city limits in violation of state law. This was in the bad old days before GCO. Woodstock was forced to repeal this ordinance in 2007 by the actions of GeorgiaCarry.Org. As a result, this letter from Woodstock should not come as a surprise.

Please note that there is not a single sentence in the Woodstock letter that actually addresses any provision in HB 89. Rather, it generally addresses Georgians with firearms licenses being “allowed to possess guns in public places for discretionary use.” In other words, like the Atlanta press conference last week, it is simply a call for more gun control.

Gun bans affect only the scrupulously law abiding, and this is particularly true of the gun bans the Governor is considering in HB 89.

GeorgiaCarry.Org

By D2D

April 30, 2008 5:12 PM | Link to this

In response to Mr. Henriques, Mayor of Woodstock, and his statement of “Ironically research summarized in Private Guns, Public Health, demonstrates gun owners to be disproportionately at risk for gun injuries…” Is that along the same lines of thought that firefighters stand a greater risk of being burned by fire or possibly a butcher of a meat market stands a higher probability of cutting himself. The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US. To believe in the fear mongering incited by numerous media outlets we should expect millions dead each year, but this simply is not fact. We are not discussing individual gun ownership with regards to House Bill 89 though. With House Bill 89, the discussion should be focused on those who have obtained a Georgia Firearms License; found to be a safer group than even law enforcement. So with that not being addressed correctly let us move to another issue; one surrounding the right of Self-Protection and the inadequacy provided due to time restraints by law enforcement. In June 1996, it took the Newark police an average of 13 minutes to send a squad car to such crimes as robberies, burglaries and carjackings. In New York, the average was 10 minutes in 1992, to 8.5 minutes in 1993, to 8 minutes in 1995. The city of Roswell, Georgia it takes an average of 7 minutes. In Austin, Texas for emergency calls, called “Priority One,” response times were fast — usually less than 10 minutes. But for more routine, “Priority Four” calls, three-and-a-half hours for an aggravated robbery by assault. House Bill 89 addresses this downfall by allowing those who have passed the requirements to obtain a Georgia Firearms License to properly defend themselves in the crucial moments it counts to INNOCENT SAVE LIVES. Some citizen’s are suffice with lenghty response times, but as for those who wish to survive another day, we take on the responsibility of the God given right of self-protection backed fully by the US Constitution and the Georgia Constitution. Self-Protection is a up close, personal, right here, right now issue that if it results to life or death I, and other Georgia Firearm Licensees, desire the right of self-protection to safe guard our breath of life. Whether it be 5 minutes or hours later, either is too late of a response to provide adequate life insurance protection for me and my family. House Bill 89 isn’t new law, it is however an attempt to right the wrongs of current law thereby restoring Georgia law abiding citizen’s right to carry a firearm in more common, every day places for the purpose of self-protection. Unless the mayor can afford to put a officer of the law with each person within his city, he (in his letter) has requested his citizen’s be crippled by a veto that will afford pleasures to those who wish to commit lethal crimes against unarmed Georgia citizens.

By Edward

April 30, 2008 5:16 PM | Link to this

The mayor wrote “….but more than likely will escalate the frequency of armed confrontation between police and persons traveling armed…”. Are you kidding me Mayor? You can only speak for yourself. Do not ever try to speak for the law abidding GFL holders in our great state.

By Dave_The_Rave

April 30, 2008 6:19 PM | Link to this

Brady Center Talking points:

Wild West!

Blood in the streets!

Rivers of blood running downtown!

Drunks with guns!

Someone will shoot up Outback Steakhouse!…yada yada yada

This is a trust issue, some politicians in Georgia just don’t trust the peasants with guns.

This is also a class issue, some politicians in Georgia think the unwashed masses of “rednecks” couldn’t possibly use ANY type of good judgment because they aren’t as “enlightened” as they are.

“Redneck” has replaced the “N” word as the favorite term of derision aimed at people who are deemed “beneath” the ruling elites.

By TheUnarmedSheep

April 30, 2008 7:04 PM | Link to this

We need gun free safety zones! Just like VA Tech had! That is sarcasm for you slow minded liberals. Get it? VA Tech was a gun-free zone and everyone died because only the CRIMINAL had the gun! Sigh, I know you don’t get it so I don’t know why I’m wasting my time.

BTW, next time you bump into me at the mall food court, or a Wendy’s or McDonald’s keep in mind that I am carrying a firearm. It is legal for me to do so and I’ve done it for many years. And yet I don’t have this overwhelming urge to shoot the place up. I wonder why not? After all, it is the evil gun that turns otherwise non-violent people into raving blood thirsty lunatic killers. Right?

By davidharrison

April 30, 2008 7:12 PM | Link to this

Good for the mayor. He has balls. More than you can say for the legislators and governors across America who have sold out the people who elected them into office. These corrupt politicans bought & paid for by the gun industry need to be removed from office. They are destroying our society, and they are being paid to do it.

America is being gunned down by other armed Americans. Human target practice, total disregard for human life. Second amendment my fanny, most gun nuts couldn’t tell you a single other amendment if their lives depended on it.

Get the guns out of our lives, get the gun nuts on prozac, send our legislators to Beijing where their lack of scruples can best be put to use.

By Dave_The_Rave

April 30, 2008 7:33 PM | Link to this

“Second amendment my fanny, most gun nuts couldn’t tell you a single other amendment if their lives depended on it.”

LOL…and liberals and other forms of communists pretend that the 2nd doesn’t exist at all.

“Gun Nuts” - another way liberals look down their noses at other people. The Germans used to use terms like this for Gays, Gypsies,Jews and others that they deemed to be “undesirables”……and we all know how that turned out.

By Churchill

April 30, 2008 7:37 PM | Link to this

I ain’t gonna take no gruff from a lib about nothing. I love Hannity. Operation chaos is running on pure American hate an we won’t quit till we ruin the country. I get off on division and root for riots. Peace.

By Brian

April 30, 2008 7:39 PM | Link to this

This letter by the mayor of Woodstock was another attempt at scaring the populace into blindly following the opinions of those who choose to ignore fact, and instead lead by emotion.

“While a paramount objective of any elected body is safety of the public they serve, we are inclined to believe the proposed amendments will not only fall seriously short of enhancing public safety but more than likely will escalate the frequency of armed confrontation between police and persons traveling armed, entering public property armed, consuming alcoholic beverages while armed or reacting overtly to what they perceive as a threat to another.” If the city council of Woodstock and/or the mayor had read HB 89 they would see that it clearly spells out that it is unlawful for a GFL holder to consume alcohol while carrying in a restaurant that serves alcohol. Further, it is currently against state law to be under the influence while carrying a concealed weapon, this will not be changed.

“Governor, we live in a civilized society and if we as elected representatives believe the safety of our constituency to be so threatened by those with criminal intent then we should commit the resources necessary to strengthen our law enforcement components, not relax restrictions of legitimate legislation.” This is impossible. Is the mayor suggesting the government hire a LEO to spend every waking moment with me and my family? That would equate to 3 additional cops for just my family and I. This is unrealistic, and for an elected official to suggest this is borderline incompetence. Were I a resident of Woodstock, I would question how my mayor intended on paying for this, I can only assume additional taxes.

By Prince von Ahole

April 30, 2008 7:52 PM | Link to this

Unarmed sheep your a real bad man with your sidearm, when the deal goes down you will be hiding behind the asian lady handing out samples as she karate chops the evil-doer. Eliminate all guns. Read a newspaper from the Nordic countries or Europe. Nobody getting shot. Eliminate guns and fight like a man. Peace.

By F.Kendall

April 30, 2008 8:16 PM | Link to this

These laws are common in other states. The fear mongering must stop! I have a CCW, I’ve been checked thru and thru. I carry all the time unless I intend going into a bar and enjoying an adult beverage. The idea that ccw owners will go into bars and shoot up the place is nuts. I am unaware of one being recorded within memory. Mayor Franklins response is typical for an ultra left member of mayor Bloombergs anti gun club. He leads, she follows in step. Thing is that my right to protect myself and my family who are in Atlanta trump the restaurants property rights hands down. Mine is a human life, theirs is just a bit of land. Sorry Shirley, I win.

All these claims on what ‘might’ happen never have. CCW holders have less trouble with the law than off duty cops. I mean really now, we are the good guys and we have the right to protect ourselves from the criminals on the streets of Atlanta and the police I know (and thats a lot) agree. The AJC is just following the moveon.org anti gun rhetoric they were told to follow by the editors. Thats what a left wing liberal paper does. Pray on the fears and incite them for political agenda. Never telling the ‘whole truth’. The facts and figures simply do not back up what Shirley and the AJC are saying. The fact is it’s the other way around. They lie to you and incite your fears, its what the left does.

Well I’m calling you out on it. You don’t have any numbers to back your statements up, if you did you would have quoted them. You didn’t. Only your “elitist” opinion looking down on the people who make this city what it is. Stay out of my life Shirley, I don’t need you or your “agenda driven” opinion, never have, never will for 50+ years here.

I guess I’m just another “bitter American” holding on to my bible, my guns and my family. It’s what my Father and Mother taught me to do and I’m proud of it.

By Dave

April 30, 2008 11:22 PM | Link to this

You have to love how the left wraps itself in the Bill of Rights, but then pretends the 2nd Amendment doesn’t exist. We have a Constitution which does not allow us the pleasure to pick and choose which parts to follow based on what we feel like at the moment. The Constitution tells us how to run government and tells us what government can and cannot do. If you don’t like it, you should work to amend it.

The right to self defense is a God-given right that transcends government and even the Constitution. The Constitution, in fact, only recognizes and guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, rather than “granting” it as so many like to claim.

Who is going to protect me if I’m out at night and I get carjacked? Or if I’m at the movies and walking back to my car? Or at a diner with a friend? If someone pulls a gun or knife on me or someone close by, it’s ridiculous to think I’ll be able to pull a cellphone out, call 911 and have the cops show up within seconds.

The gun control lobby claims there’s an epidemic of gun murders in the United States. If that’s true, then why do they tell me I don’t need to be able to protect myself from that gun violence? The cops don’t arrive instantly, and even a “good” 7-minute response time is 7 minutes too slow for a murder, rape or robbery. I don’t have a problem with people who choose to use 911 only, but I feel it’s a little optimistic to be putting our trust into the government for our protection. With all the issues of corruption, scandals, incompetence and under-funding that we hear about at all levels, from local to federal, this isn’t a group of people who I want being my primary line of defense against the possible death of myself or my family. I am a free citizen, responsible for myself, my family and my own protection, and I should be allowed to defend myself as such.

People who carry concealed in GA do it after passing a state and federal background check and submitting their fingerprints to the FBI. Any prior criminal history, any prior drug use, any prior mental illness, a dishonorable discharge from the military, and a host of other things can disqualify someone. There’s also a processing fee involved and a delay between when you apply and when you are handed the license. Crooks, thieves and rapists aren’t going to bother getting a GFL just so they can legally carry into a store, then break the law by robbing it - or murdering someone. That’s ridiculous. The detractors to this law clearly haven’t taken the time to read what it says, or even to realize it’s already legal to carry into eating establishments, to malls, on the streets and to other places. The gun control lobby is using the most disgusting kind of disinformation and fear-mongering to kill this bill, and it’s disgusting.

Is it really that bad in this country that our politicians no longer feel safe presiding over an armed citizenry? What does that say about the level of trust our government has in us? Maybe we should stop putting our trust into people who don’t return the favor.

I for one fully support HB89 and the members of the General Assembly who worked for its passage.

I am not a member of the NRA and only speak for myself, not any organization or “gun lobby.”

By b8fish

April 30, 2008 11:54 PM | Link to this

Mr. Mayor - when you have no facts I suppose it is only natural that you resort to hypothetical arguments and innuendo sucj as “but more than likely will escalate the frequency of armed confrontation between police and persons traveling armed” - that happens in no other state with similar laws to to HB89. Do you think the citizens of Woodstock are all maniacs? Bad question - they did put you in office.. hmmm.

By GFLinMarietta

May 1, 2008 12:05 AM | Link to this

It’s ironic that the AJC will go after a city council for violating the state’s Open Meetings rules, but applaud Woodstock for doing the same thing. This vote wasn’t on the agenda, and was announced and made after the floor was closed for public comments.

By Ben G.

May 1, 2008 7:21 AM | Link to this

Mayor Henriques, the City Council, Mr. Gleason & Chief Moss:

My name is Ben G. You may remember my name as it was I that brought to the City’s attention its illegal ordinances banning the carry of firearms within the City back in 2007. I was encouraged and pleasantly surprised by the City’s willing cooperation and apparent pro-rights and pro-defense attitude.

Thus, it was with great disappointment that I read the letter sent by the Mayor on behalf of the City Council to Gov. Perdue regarding HB89.

As the letter failed to address any particular clause of HB89 it amounts to nothing more than a treatise against the basic human right of its citizens to defend themselves.

None of the changes in HB89 are new. All of them are currently law in a majority of the other states in our nation. Again, since the letter addressed none of the specific points of HB89, I conclude that the City of Woodstock has officially declared that it generally does not trust its citizens.

As one of over 300,000 Georgia Firearms License (GFL) holders, the State of Alabama trusts me to carry my weapon with me while I eat at Pizza Hut or Applebee’s. The City of Woodstock has gone on record that it does not. As a GFL holder, the State of Tennessee trusts me to carry a weapon with me on a public bus or train. Woodstock does not. As a GFL holder, the State of Oklahoma trusts me to carry a weapon in their state parks or historic areas. Woodstock does not.

Since there are more than a few members of Woodstock’s city administration that are also GFL holders, I find it both odd and very disappointing that the City does not trust its own leaders and administrators, let alone the citizens they have sworn to serve, to protect themselves and their families responsibly.

Sincerely, Ben G.

By Mafuta54

May 1, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this

Stop the tyranny and let us defend ourselves, sign HB89!

By Ben G.

May 1, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this

It’s also worth noting that the mayor of Holly Springs (a city adjacent to Woodstock, also in Sen. Rogers’ district) has come out in public support of HB 89.

His letter to the editor of The Cherokee Ledger News can be found here:

http://www.ledgernews.com/letters.html

By GA Resident

May 1, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this

I’m still waiting for a defensible, quantified argument from the anti0liberty set. Every argument is either baseless fear-mongering absent of any and all facts, or caustic name-calling attacks on supporters of the 2nd Amendment.

There is no reason to continue the failure chain Georgia has started. Restore the rights of those who have done —and continue to do— no harm. Sign HB 89 for GFL holders everywhere.

And then re-evaluate the rest of Georgia’s disjointed weapons laws.

By Churchill

May 1, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

I am an ardent supporter of the 2nd amendment, but I was talking about this with a college buddy (big lib/Democrat) and he made a good point. “Do you want the Rev. Wright, in all his craziness packing heat?” He did not sway me, but he makes a good point. Peace.

By Prince von Ahole

May 1, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

Church you don’t have any friends and nobody cares what you think, I’m not gonna sit here and take a lesson on obnoxious tomfoolery from some punk who spies on his neighbors and is to weak to push a terd. Good day sir. Operation chaos is launching go sequence, dockers with collard shirts everyone mega- dittos.

By Larry

May 1, 2008 2:22 PM | Link to this

What is a “gun nut”? I’ve read two blogs where that term was tossed around “liberally” and I wonder if I am one.

BTW, I know that the second amendment guarantees the unalienable right to keep and bear arms, but unlike davidharrison suggests, I’m well versed on the rest of the Constitution as well.

By Joe Mama

May 1, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this

Hey Prince von Ahole - pull up them droopy pants boy.

By Churchill

May 1, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

Prince, you’re an Ahole. Seriously, with the spying on the neighbors?? I tell one story about my idiot neighbor, the Ru Paul supporter, illegally burning trash in his yard, next to his new Bmw 750 and charring the side of it, and you call me a spy. The idiot did it in his front yard. It was hard not to notice it. The pictures I took were for proof. I tell my friends, all the time, about the stupid things this guy does and says. Some of it is so idiotic that they doubt me. The photos are proof of his stupidity. Plus, it is one helluva funny story. Peace.

By Gun Nut

May 1, 2008 2:37 PM | Link to this

Someone who thinks their capable of a shoot-out with anyone anytime they will kill the evil doers, save the damsel in distress, they fear blacks, hispanics, or anyone different from them. Similar to a draft-dodger like GW who romances war to those serving today while conveniently not serving in Vietnam. Someone who sends other’s to fight their battles, like neocons or chicken-hawks or republicans.

By Rarl Kove

May 1, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this

Larry

If you support the 2nd Amendment you are a gun nut.

By jrm

May 1, 2008 2:56 PM | Link to this

The mayor does not actually criticize a single word in HB 89, yet he urges its veto. Apparently, he is just anti-gun and does not care what HB 89 does or does not do. Mayor Church of Kennesaw lost his reelection bid when he came out anti-gun, too.

By GFLinMarietta

May 1, 2008 4:19 PM | Link to this

I’m a 1st Amendment supporter too, so I guess I’m a “free speech nut”

By Dave

May 1, 2008 6:12 PM | Link to this

Re: Church…

I am an ardent supporter of the 2nd amendment, but I was talking about this with a college buddy (big lib/Democrat) and he made a good point. “Do you want the Rev. Wright, in all his craziness packing heat?” He did not sway me, but he makes a good point. Peace.<<<<

First of all: Who are we to judge who should and should not be allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights? Are we to judge based off their opinions and how they think? The Rev. Wright has some far-out ideas and we may call him a lunatic, but he’s well within his 1st Amendment rights. Would you want others telling you that you shouldn’t be allowed to carry a firearm just because of the way you think? (Mental illness not included - that’s a different topic)

And punishing the rest of us because one or two crazies MIGHT murder someone is like banning swimming pools because a child MIGHT run around unsupervised and drown. Besides, if I’m armed, I can defend myself from those lunatics - whereas if I’m not, what choice do I have but to cower under a table and wait for them to stab me or shoot me to death? I’m a free man, a responsible adult and citizen of the greatest free nation on earth. I should be trusted with my own self defense, don’t you think? And if you don’t think that, then what does that say about how you view your fellow Americans and the level of trust you have in them? Personally, I will always put my trust into the American people, as they are the ones who always end up solving our problems and overcoming our greatest challenges. Government, on the other hand, typically ends up proving it’s continued incompetence.

Second of all, under current GA law, you can already carry a gun into an eating establishment, to a mall, or out on the streets - legally. People carry all the time to shopping centers and fast food places in GA. If you go walking for exercise chances are someone is packing heat out there, too. The only thing HB89 does is expand the list of places we can carry weapons to when properly licensed by the state. Yet nobody has ever railed against the current carry laws by claiming there’s mass shootings by GFL holders. That’s because there are not mass shootings by GFL holders - the facts, in this case, clearly don’t back up the anti-HB89’ers, yet they continue to press for a veto.

The lack of facts by the gun control crowd is ridiculous. It’s more fear mongering and disinformation, and they should be ashamed - not only for how they are presenting their side of the story but for insulting the citizens of Georgia with their implications that we are untrustworthy and irresponsible. And the way they’re doing it is a further insult to anyone who knows and understands the Constitution and what our country is all about.

By Churchill

May 1, 2008 6:30 PM | Link to this

I said he did not sway me. But the thought of an armed Rev Wright is pretty scary. No?

By Dave

May 1, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

You make the assumption that the passing of this bill will somehow put a gun into the hands of someone like him. That isn’t true. Someone like him can already own a gun, and also carry a gun around in public in the state of GA (assuming he lived here and had a valid GFL).

So if you’re scared of folks like Wright packing heat in public, then you may as well be asking your senators to repeal all pro-gun laws and enact a DC-wide gun ban across the state. HB89 isn’t going to put guns into the hands of lunatics and criminals. They are going to have guns whether we do or not, and carry them anywhere they like, whether it’s lawful to or not. (And they probably would continue to do so even under a federal gun ban; just look how well our “Drug ban” has worked.)

Or you could do what I and a lot of others do, and that’s not rely on government, “gun free zones” and CCTV cameras to protect you from muggers, rapists, thieves and mass murdering whackjobs - and get a gun, a GFL and some range time. I like to know that my personal protection is in the hands of the only person I can truly trust, and that’s me.

By happyandlovinlife

May 2, 2008 9:45 AM | Link to this

I’ve never read such ignorant comments. Statistics show that people who have legally obtained a weapons permit are not going to shoot up the place and that most criminals have obtained their weapons illegally. I am a woman that is 5 feet tall and I don’t think it is fair for me to walk afraid in a park because a bunch of liberals want to ban guns altogether or they know there kid is a trouble maker and they might get shot by me because I don’t want to be raped, robbed, or killed. You raise your kids right then you don’t have to worry about people like me. I love life and I want to be alive to enjoy the next day. God should be the only one to say when it is time for me to go.

By Shamalama

May 2, 2008 11:38 AM | Link to this

Forty states, comprising the majority of the American population, are “right-to-carry” states. Statistics show that in these states the crime rate fell (or did not rise) after the right-to carry law became active (as of July, 2006). Nine states deny or restrict the right to carry.

Crime rates involving gun owners with carry permits have consistently been about 0.02% of all carry permit holders since Florida’s right-to-carry law started in 1988.

After passing their concealed carry law, Florida’s homicide rate fell from 36% above the national average to 4% below, and remains it below the national average.

The serious crime rate in Texas fell 50% faster than the national average after Texas passed a concealed carry law in 1995.

People with concealed carry permits are: (1) 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent offenses than the general public, (2) 13.5 times less likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than the general public. In Texas, citizens with concealed carry permits are 14 times less likely to commit a crime.

The fear over HB 89 is grossly misplaced. History has repeatedly shown that law-abiding citizens that carry their legally-obtained guns are actually safer in terms of crime that the general public, and certainly safer than the criminals that are already carrying guns on MARTA and into restaurants.