It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
O.C.G.A. 16-8-41 (2010)
16-8-41. Armed robbery; robbery by intimidation; taking controlled substance from pharmacy in course of committing offense
(a) A person commits the offense of armed robbery when, with intent to commit theft, he or she takes property of another from the person or the immediate presence of another by use of an offensive weapon, or any replica, article, or device having the appearance of such weapon. The offense of robbery by intimidation shall be a lesser included offense in the offense of armed robbery.
originally posted by: chris_stibrany
Everyone should be required to have a training class before purchasing a weapon, or proof of police or military service.
originally posted by: namehere
nowhere in the bill of rights or the Constitution does it say you can create a militia to force the government to address peoples grievances, this group is using the existence of lawful militias as an excuse to arm themselves for revolution. many militia's have been dismantled for such behavior in the past, they are abusing the second amendment and promoting sedition.
originally posted by: JIMC5499
I've been to The People's Republic of Portland before. He's right.
originally posted by: network dude
I'm concerned at all those who are against this, but pro 2a and pro constitution.
originally posted by: namehere
huh? how is it thought police? they stated exactly what they are trying to do, use force to make the government do what they want, any other militia that says that kinda stuff would be dismantled and have every member arrested on terrorism, sedition and promoting violence charges, probably other charges too, along with no longer being able to own a gun afterwards.
are they somehow special? exempt from the law? what basis do you feel they are doing nothing wrong?
originally posted by: chris_stibrany
No one is infringing on your rights or stopping you from practising them just by requiring some damn classes.
You have to take a class to drive right? what's more deadly and no I don't mean statistically. I mean by design.
originally posted by: network dude
I'm concerned at all those who are against this, but pro 2a and pro constitution. These people have all the same rights as any other group. They expressed non violence, and as long as that's the case, there should not be a problem.
In the picture of the OP, it looked like good trigger control.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
You shouldn't try to cite the law since you're pretty ignorant in that regard. Armed robbery in Georgia requires theft, nothing was stolen. I'm sure in your typical fashion you'll misstate the situation again but I don't mind, I like proving you wrong.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: yuppa
Still not 'attempted armed robbery'. Keep going, eventually you'll figure out that doesn't exist.