Wasn't it some town in Ga. that passed some ordinance requiring the carrying of firearms a few years back... the idea comes to IN.
IIRC, you don't have to carry, just have to own. I can't recall the town name, though.
Wasn't it some town in Ga. that passed some ordinance requiring the carrying of firearms a few years back... the idea comes to IN.
Kennesaw, GA has an ordinance that says everyone own a gun I believe.
IIRC, you don't have to carry, just have to own. I can't recall the town name, though.
IIRC, you don't have to carry, just have to own. I can't recall the town name, though.
ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL
Sec. 34-1. Heads of households to maintain firearms.
(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefor.
(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
(Code 1986, § 4-3-10)
Sec. 34-2. Use of firearms.
No person shall fire a gun, pistol or other firearm in the city, except in the defense of person or property, and except peace officers or military forces of this state or the United States, in the discharge of official duties.
(Code 1986, § 11-1-4)
As others have said, it's Kennesaw, GA, and the ordinance was passed in 1986 in response to the handgun ban passed in Morton Grove, IL. Kennesaw has grown exponentially in population and their violent crime rate does remain lower than it was 22 years ago when the law passed.
All of this information is spoken of frequently, but what I never saw until a few minutes ago was the actual text of the ordinance. I went looking and found it at http://www.municode.com/resources/gateway.asp?sid=10&pid=12813.
The ordinance reads:
It should be noted here that the above ordinance has no "teeth"; there is no punishment for violating it. However, just the idea that firearm ownership is strongly encouraged by it's presence is enough to help cut the crime rate of a community that, at the time of passage, exceeded the national average.
This all boils down to the simple fact that guns save lives, when held by those who would use them only in their own defense.
Blessings,
B
Now with irrefutable proof like that, why on earth do people still argue that lawful gun ownership doesn't have a positive impact on crime?
How many roads must a man walk down?
Now with irrefutable proof like that, why on earth do people still argue that lawful gun ownership doesn't have a positive impact on crime?