Come on down my way. It looks like maybe not only will we be required to have them, we'll be mak'in em too!

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2013/apr/18/alderman-to-propose-mandatory-firearms-ownership/

Joe

We need more of this!

But I don't think it will fly, and I really don't think it should. If the issue is freedom, I don't see how a person could support this.

The 2A is a right, not a requirement. It is also one issue, not two.

The man proposing this cites his time in Switzerland. In the first place, if he likes it so much, he should move there. In the second, isn't it our side that is continually reminding the other that the 2A has nothing to do with being in the 'militia'?

These silly proposals come up all the time, and they usually make our side look like a bunch of hypocrites or fools. IMO, this one is no exception.

If you want people to leave your guns alone, I think you have to let others make their own choices, not stuff yours down their throats.

--

it's done under a local community ordinance type thing but not under a guise of the 2A. I agree with you about rights versus requirements. However local communities can organize local statutes like this and I see nothing wrong or unconstitutional about it, especially if they allow one to opt out so as not to force something on them against their will.

You have to have gun, but you don't? What's that?

This is a fine example of why these things make no sense to me: They simply don't.

Even as political statements, they pretty much fall flat on their faces.

--

I hope it passes and gets extensive nationwide press coverage. Hopefully, everyone out there will find it as offensive as you do, and quit moving here.

I can assure you, if the town's citzenry don't want it, it won't happen, and as it should be, this is a local ORDINANCE, that affects only the citezenry of the town, and no one else. As the article states it will be voluntary.

Farragut is one of the more unique places I've ever lived. The town is administerd by a Board of Mayor and Alderman, comprised of a mayor, and four alderman, elected by the town's citzenry. They are paid a SMALL stipend, they all have other full time jobs. Every other board, council or what have you, i.e. the board of zoning, building codes, parks, is run by volunteers (we take that motto "Volunteer STATE" very seriously). Any person can volunteer for any board or committee, all that is required is that they reside within the town's urban boundry. There is a small paid admistrative staff. There is no police force, no fire department, fire and ambulance services are paid for by each citizen through yearly subscription. Consequently, there's no property tax. We survive on our share of county sales tax, and we have a surplus each year. If you ask me, it's "government for the people, of the people, and by the people" in it's most purest forms, or as close as any place I've ever lived.

It's also one of the more diverse places I've lived, and I've lived in quite a few. My neighber to the west of me is from Korea, my neighbor to the south of me is from India, my neighbor to east is from Colorado, and my neighbor to the north is from Austria. There are a number of mixed race families in my neighborhood also. Not the typical community one thinks of when they think of "Appalachia."

In the last ten years our population has grown from 12 to 18 thousand, it was 8 thousand when I moved here. We have great parks, a brand new library, heck we even have an indoor ice skating rink, if you can believe that! All without property taxes, so maybe this ordinance is foolish, but there's so many people desiring to move here, we must be doing something right.

I also honestly believe these things typically work against our side with the public at large.

They look 'stupid' to a large number of people who would otherwise be on our side, and the other side picks that up and runs with it.

Whether it influences the town's rate of population growth seems of significantly less consequence, at least to me.

--

And the great thing about where I live is that, if you lived here, you'd be more than welcome to voice your opposition at the next monthly meeting of the Mayor and Board of Alderman.

Raising 'side issues' in an attempt to get at the main one.

The main one here is gun control, right?

Whether your community wishes to keep its eye on the ball or just play the game is your choice, too.

I suppose I'd make a better General than Lawyer, and I sure am no Politician.

--

crime rate has been: about zip...not BAD FOR A SUBURB OF ATLANTA. A suburb about the same size as Morton grove, ILL, a suburb of Chicago, that banned all guns the same year, and has bee a nightmare ever since. The reason for the opt out clause is they don't want to force folks against their will...strange idea in Government I know.

--
Of the Troops & For the Troops

I don't really understand what you mean there, but it seems to me what this ordinance is really about, is a recognition of people's inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as they see fit, nothing more, nothing less. I guess I'll leave all the "general'in" to you.

Kennesaw, GA. also has a procedure that if a head of house hold does not have a firearm, but wants one, they will issue a suitable handgun to that person.
They have guns which have been turned in, and so on. Kind of nice. If you cannot afford one they will fix you up. ATB

Most PD's have confiscated firearms that will eventually get auctioned or destroyed. Most are crap, but there are some decent ones in there. Why not let a head of household who can not afford a decent weapon have one if they can demonstrate financial need.