“On Thursday, the day the Georgia bill was passed, a fight broke out in a gray, windowless shack called Milo’s Bar in Marietta, an Atlanta suburb. As the brawl spilled into the parking lot, at least three guns were drawn. Shots were fired, and a bystander was wounded. It is not clear whether the new law would have changed anything. Milo’s already had ‘No Weapons’ signs posted. Anyone there with a gun was already violating existing law as well as the bar’s policy.” – Herbert Buchsbaum in Amid Wave of Pro-Gun Legislation, Georgia Proposes Sweeping Law [via nytimes.com]
They just need someone to hold their hands while they make the leap to our side. All together now, “criminals will still get guns!”
But But…It’s against the law. How could they have possibly resisted the omnipotent power of a gun free zone.
In other words, law-abiding citizens who left their firearms in their vehicles, would have been unable to defend themselves against the criminals who brought in guns.
Any law abiding citizen who walked into that place has already left his common sense in the car.
Antis reading this article are like “Anyone there with a gun was already violating existing law as well as the bar’s policy…What? I don’t see how that possible. Ow..Ow…My brain hurts”
If they already had the sign posted “No Weapons” because it was an issue sounds like a place where the clientele isn’t exactly upstanding in the first place.
Yep’ “Gray windowless shack”, suggests a bikers bar, or something along those lines; think the bar scene in Terminator II. I did like the lever action shot gun.
Yea I think Id rather be in the bar in T2 honestly.
The article suggests that 70% of the population disagrees with the bill. If that were the case, I suppose we’ll be seeing heated calls for recall of the legislators that voted in favor.
*crickets*
Thought so.
While reading the article it became clear to me that much of it is about those “authorized” to carry firearms. In other words, more about privilege and not-so-much about rights. At least the kiddos in Florida don’t need licenses to shape their toaster pastries into delicious firearm art. 😉
I’m pleased that more are able to legally carry their firearms into places that they shouldn’t have been prevented by law from so doing in the first place. However, please take heed, POTG, and remember not to allow all of these changes to only be effective for privileges in the end. More and more I’m becoming concerned that politicians are playing a shell game in which the proper right to keep and bear arms is being swapped for the government privilege to carry. The Devil is in the details…
I think the big problem is that the Liberals have so many irons in the fire/things that offend them that their strategies are all starting to gel together and conflict with each other.
A few weeks ago there was a story about a coffee shop where the girls wear bikinis to make and serve the coffee to the happy male customers. This is a very empowering move according to the local feminists.
However some fat girls down the street at another coffee shop got all upset because they have lost business and they are accusing the bikini girls of fat-shaming them. Another meme that the feminists are behind.
I am sure somehow there are similar internal inconsistencies in the latest drive to demonize CCW meanwhile laud the positive net effects of signage at deterring crime.
However since I don’t have the mind-numbing bendiness of a Liberal brain I can’t quite wrap my head around it.
So the signs didnt stop 3 people from entering while armed? Hmm, learn something new everyday.
See now, you just don’t understand — your suppose to hold up those signs like a shield because words on a piece of paper or sign have magical powers — or so people in far left leaning newspapers believe they are magical anyway. They believe that words trump human behavior in some magical way.
“Magickal Powers” like Restraining Orders are supposed to have but don’t, much to the dismay of battered wives and more recently, store owners.
I have yet to see a piece of paper that will stop a bullet.
That’s because you haven’t seen a REALLY OFFICIAL no-guns sign, endorsed by Bloomberg and the “Moms”. They will stop an RPG round!
WTF how can that be possible. they had a sign.
It would be nice if the NYT would develop the ability to distinguish between law abiding concealed weapons permit holders and methed out thugs. But I’m not holding my breath on that one.
Easy mistake to make. After all, the NYT was writing about “bitter-clinging cousin-humping rednecks” several states away rather than local witty urbane socialites…
Don’t forget Bible thumping.
I considered “Bible-thumping” but I couldn’t make the alliteration work.
It just didn’t floooooow…
In real life, it’s usually easy to tell by their behavior.
You can usually tell by the way they’re dressed.
You can usually tell by how many teeth they have and what sort of condition they are in.
ew
Yea, with meth that is a dead give away.
It’s right next to a pawn shop and directly down the street from the Confederate Memorial Cemetery. On top of that it’s in a dying part of town with what used to be an industrial section. On another note is it just me or do lounges seem shady and often make news in a negative connotation? Oh and then there’s this awesome gem when you search Milo’s. Bryco, Hi-point, and Jennings should be the name of that bar.
A picture is worth a thousand words; a bikers bar or a bar for those that live and die by the “Gangsta” creed.
Same type of thing just happened in Connecticut…and you know about that state’s gun laws:
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/3-Shot-in-Large-Scale-Waterbury-Gun-Battle-251781421.html
After reading the article I demand an explanation. It says they found 29 she’ll casings but that one man fired most of the rounds. Most of means half or more and magazines that hold greater than ten are totally not kosher. How could he accomplish such a Herculean feat? With a banned magazine clip? Or by reloading?
The happy signs and laws have fixed nothing.
I think, since alcohol can lead to poor decision making, we propose a law that ugly women be barred from, ummm, bars… It’s for the (potential) children!… And while we are proposing ways to prevent alcohol infused accidents… How about one where you have to park your car at least 2 miles from the bar so you walk it off before you drive off? A 2 mile no parking zone around every bar… I mean drunk driving is more prevalent than drunk shootings?!?… I hate politicians… I would say i hate stupid laws but we have to snip them at the source…
Careful there, eugenics is a cornerstone of progressive policy. Can’t make a glorious utopia for the elite while the breeders pop out babies all willy nilly.
“Can’t make a glorious utopia for the elite while the breeders pop out babies all willy nilly.”
You got that exactly back-asswards. The glorious utopia for the elite depends on a continuous supply of breeders, the dumber the better, both to vote and to serve as cannon fodder in their perpetual wars.
My thought exactly, they have to breed the future koolaid drinkers.
I am a Georgia resident; just as an FYI – signs hold zero legal weight in our State. You must be asked by the owner or acting agent of the owner to leave the property while armed before you can be cited for tresspass or even come close to breaking any laws.
And unless the owner or his agent is holding a shotgun while asking, what are the odds anyone has the balls to do it? I mean, if you are afraid of the guy because he is armed, what chance is there you will just walk up and politely ask him to leave? Zero.
Actually, it happens in Ohio. It doesn’t make sense but there you have it.
Great. You should read the comments. The NYT has three tabs, All, NYT picks, and readers picks. Just went through all 33 of the NYT picks, not ONE pro comment, all along the lines of ‘what are they thinking?” and “GA won’t get any of MY money.” went through a few of the readers picks and, again, could not find a ‘pro’ comment anywhere. Shows the constituency that reads that rag.
My guess is that it shows the consistency of New York Times censorship.
Gunfight outside of a windowless dive near Hot’ Lanta…
Drugs. Or gang war.
Probably one of those places you don’t touch anything in the bathroom.
If you don’t touch anything in the bathroom, could explain why it’s such a mess (and smells like pee).
Note the lack of glass containers in the video. Should be they are worried enough about their customers having any potential weapons. Must be a nice place. Of course the nyt would have checked….
Stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things.
Didn’t even bother to ask if any of these guys got there guns illegally or if they have rap sheet a mile long. This is why print media is dying everyday.
Let’s not confuse the issue here. The Second Amendment was to put in the hands of the citizens, themselves, the power to protect against invading foreign armies, corrupt and treasonous bankers and politicians from invading our system of government, and to push the burden of actual local enforcement issues back onto the locales where the people lived.
What the statists, NWO maggots, and otherwise corrupt parasitic globalists have manage to do is pervert the system so that all those citizens, who should have been busy rejoicing in their ability to defend their country together with their brethren on the street, are now having to defend themselves from the same people they should be uniting with.
This is the typical Hegelian globalist mindset; twist the existing system into a problem and then come up with the solution, which, by the way, happens to include taking the guns away because the people no longer understand who the real enemy is.
I can’t say that I disagree with you. Shell games, smoke and mirrors, IMHO.
Criminals get into fights too. I guess it’s only the Libtard mindset that criminals are just misunderstood people forced and provoked into their criminal lifestyle by society and circumstance; the real bad guys are the law-abiding citizens who seek armament to defend themselves from misunderstood criminals.
Stupid places? Check
Stupid people? Check
Stupid things? Check
“’You can bet those politicians who voted for it knew what their constituents wanted.’ What they wanted, in this case, would be a veritable gun-lobby shopping list.”
That type of wording always irks me. A shopping list, really? I get the idea that these measures have been sought for some time, but shopping list? The struggle is to regain freedoms which have been infringed. The activity here is one a restoring what’s already ours, not acquiring something new which we’re not already entitled to.
It’s like when politicians resist tax cuts by saying we can’t pay for them. Uh…..the money is already mine. They couch it in these terms to strip away the notion of private ownership and replace it with a default state ownership mentality. Likewise with firearms freedom, they’re trying to recast it in terms of some special luxury or privilege bestowed by them at their pleasure, and deny that the right exists within us.
“The struggle is to regain freedoms which have been infringed. The activity here is one a restoring what’s already ours, not acquiring something new which we’re not already entitled to.”
I don’t always agree with you, but this time you’re entirely right.
So much truth…
Why do even some of our own people not get the basic premise of the fight?
It seems crystal clear that a new law wouldn’t have changed anything.
Because criminals don’t follow laws. That’s why they’re called criminals.
So I went to the ny times article and read thru the comments. Very disturbing at first. Pages of virulent anti-gun comments. Then I noticed that by default you start out in the “ny times picks” tab. Once I went to “all comments” life was good once again. Tons of pro-gun comments. Once again those bastards show how sneaky they can be.
Thank you for the clarification.
I would advise not looking at the commentors top picks, they aren’t much better than the NYTs.
Comments are closed.