A late Saturday afternoon argument over food at an Atlanta location that aids the homeless with meals, medical services, and additional help give new meaning to the term “food fight.” Events spun quickly out of control when one man involved in the dispute tried to stick it to the other guy, literally, according to several news reports out of the area.
An un-named 32-year-old man became so angered during the argument at the Gateway Center, he retrieved a large stick apparently lying nearby and began beating another man. The other guy may not have had a home, but he did have a gun.
WSB-TV reports the victim “pulled out a handgun and shot the 32-year-old man in self-defense.” When police arrived, they discovered the formerly stick-wielding attacker had gunshots in both arms.
Both men were taken to a hospital and treated for non-life-threatening injuries.
“Police said the victim shot the suspect out of self-defense and will not face any charges,” 11 Alive News reports. The Atlanta Police Department is still investigating the altercation, and the 32-year-old man could still face charges.
![Pinterest](https://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/personal-defense-just-because-youre-homeless-doesnt-mean-you-dont-have-gun-rights/&media=https://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/bigstock-A-Woman-Holds-A-Gun-In-Her-Han-276192790-1.jpg&description=A late Saturday afternoon argument over food at an Atlanta location that aids the homeless with meals gave new meaning to the term “food fight."){kind=link}
A stick is no match to a gun. Imagine his arms are going to be sore for a spell.
In CA we have to be able to prove a permanent residence before we can purchase a firearm.
Which means that the dems, who are forever claiming they’re the champions of the poor and downtrodden, have taken concrete steps to take civil rights away from the poorest amongst us.
Go a couple hundred miles north from Georgia and cross the Mason-Dixon line and things will be quite different. Unless you have a conventional home where you can leave your gun behind when going around on foot or in a vehicle (even a big motor “home” or large live-on boat which are not considered “homes” and instead are just “vehicles.”) -and you are without your gun rights when in those vehicles or on foot.
That is, unless you have a difficult to obtain license for out of state non-resident transient people which is often the case for people who don’t own or rent conventional homes. Bruen has not yet been settled fully in the lower courts for outside the “home” like Heller did for inside it.
The Mason-Dixon (actually closer to 600 miles north of GA) is just the border between Maryland and Pennsylvania and Maryland and Delaware (W VA – Maryland was added after the Civil War)… Actually, you’ll find more restrictive gun laws in Maryland (South of the Mason-Dixon) than in either Delaware or Pennsylvania… Both PA and DE have reciprocity agreements with FL where I live, MD does not… Carrying in a vehicle is not a problem in most states if you are in compliance with the laws of that state… Some states (such as PA) require that even private sales must be done through an FFL which would also require proof of identity with a current permanent address… A bit farther North in NJ, NY, DC, and several of those New England states is where you begin to run into problems with transporting firearms, but it is not “illegal” anywhere in the 48 contiguous United States to transport a “legally” owned firearm as long as it is done within the limits of state and local laws…
Crossing from.VA into MD is like a light switch being thrown on your 2A rights. Carrying in a vehicle within Maryland very much is an issue unless one “travelling through” and that exception is very limited. You better have a start and end point where it is legal.to.posess and not stop for anything but perhaps fuel while in the state.
MD is still less of an issue than NJ or NY for east coast travel but yeah is a pain in the ass before the Virginias
Felons now being turned loose on the public due to Bruen Decision decided by the bizarre and incompetent Supreme Court
Within 48 hours after the Bruen decision, Lex Coleman, a federal public defender in West Virginia, was on the phone with clients, including Randy Price, an Ohio man caught possessing a pistol with an obliterated serial number in violation of federal law.
Coleman told Price they needed to file motions contesting the constitutionality of the charges against him. “The world has changed, and we need to go for this and see what happens,” he said he told Price.
He got the indictment on that charge overturned after prosecutors struggled to identify a historical statute similar to the prohibition on unmarked guns. “We’re being forced under this decision to look back in time…quite frankly I find it really hard,” prosecutor Negar Kordestani told the judge.
In dismissing the gun charge, the judge found it “undisputed that serial numbers were not required, or even in common use, in 1791.”
Facts suck don’t they?
Turds gonna turd.
That’s “tards”. But I digress🙄
If we want to limit things to 1791, then it’s time to require all firearms be single shot and hand loaded
not at all. go and learn about the Girandoni rifle.
Your turn. It was available to anyine wishing to purchase one and will blow all your fake excuses right out of the water.
The only people turning felons loose on the public is Soros funded prosecutors. Bruen has nothing to do with that.
Good to hear. Serial numbers on firearms are an unnecessary restriction on 2nd Amendment Rights.
there are millions of lawfully owned firearms in existence thoughout this land that do not have and never did have “serioal numbers” yet are nothing to be afraid of. Further, there are tens of millions more that HAVE serial numbers but there is no record that exists anywhere linking that number to any individual, yet are still fully legal to use and possess, ad yet more firearms that have serial numbers that would link those guns to someone who hasno connexion with that gun and has not had for decades. And ALL this is fully legal
What they are on about is a simple means to build a registry that connects every individual with all the firerams he owns, and every firearm to an individual who owns/is responsible for it.
In fact, serial numbers were not federally required until 1968, although some manufacturers did use them before then.
Due to Bruen you say? Do tell me how Bruen ended cash bail, released 60% of our prison population, and discouraged prosecution of teenage gang members and offenders of color for the sake of equity for years before Bruen which we saw about 3 months of usable benefits before going back to pending court decisions.
I have to say this, dacian. If, and that’s a mighty big If, you are a product of higher education then the educational system in the US is broken beyond repair and needs to be scrapped and rebuilt.
You are living proof that the system cannot be patched. We must start over.
quote————–I have to say this, dacian. If, and that’s a mighty big If, you are a product of higher education then the educational system in the US is broken beyond repair and needs to be scrapped and rebuilt.————-quote
Jethro the Janitor, who dropped out of high school and spent his life sweeping floors.
I am sure that job was a real challenge for you. The school must have felt sorry for the mentally handicapped
Okay, if we’re playing the education card… I earned a PhD in pharmacology and I agree with everybody else – you’re the one who says dumb stuff.
To Dan
quote————-– you’re the one who says dumb stuff.—–quote
Ok self-anointed genius you are welcome to debate me any time and then we will see which one of us makes “dumb” comments.
“Wednesday’s ruling was a partial victory for an Ohio man, Randy Price, who had felony offenses of involuntary manslaughter and aggravated robbery. Goodwin upheld the federal rules barring felons from possessing firearms.” — https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/serial-numbers-second-amendment/index.html
The question is not about taking guns rights away from the homeless or even maintaining such rights. The question is ‘why they are homeless’. The answer to THAT is the answer to all the rest.
Grifters, lunatics and drug addicts.
Grifters… ugh why isn’t that mentioned MORE?
An entire group of “people” who figured out they could avoid work by taking advantage of friends, family, everyone and everything around them… until they finally said ENOUGH and put them on the street where they belong.
so that government funded bleeding hawrt outfits can waste even more public money coddling, housing, feeding, medicating, drugging, and sometimes even warehousing them so they can exist whilst contributing NOTHING to the “general good”
Awright! A bum with a gun. Is that analogues to a Hobo with a Shotgun©???🙄
the last pork chop.
Most of the homeless that I delt with had mental health and/or drug addiction issues, both of which preclude firearms ownership. So there’s that.
Most will be as that is often a contributing factor leading towards homelessness. With that said have a few hundred newly homeless (section 8) that were evicted to make room for illegals or migrants or whatever the news is calling them lately as the hotel owners make more per person on them than poor Americans. Remember the rumors of vets getting kicked out in NYC yeah totally just rumors.
There are a few hundred thousand (or more since the recent COVID dropouts were added to this number) of retirees and work-from-anywhere gypsies living in vans, RVs, and boats who travel around the US wandering all over as they please and perhaps migrating as snowbirds with the seasons to enjoy clement weather year-round. Without owning or renting a conventional house, apartment, or condo they are also technically “homeless.”
I worked as an electrician for a large Mn. city and had frequent
interesting ” conversations with the homeless and the meth-heads… in twenty plus years of interactions, I don’t know of a single one of them that I would have felt comfortable around if I thought they were carrying.
There are lots of people out there who make me feel uncomfortable being around -despicable Fudds who don’t believe the 2nd Amendment applies to everyone are pretty high on that list.
Spoken like someone who doesn’t have to live with the consequences of his high ideals.
When it is evident that they are homeless and/or a meth head, it is too late. There are many people that are scruffy(could be homeless and/or a meth head), there are others that just haven’t morphed into the obvious yet.
I have know daily hard drug users that have carried on for 30+ years and you could not tell. Others fall into it and it marks them in a couple of months as habitual users.
Spoken like someone who doesn’t believe “shall not be Infringed” means what it means.
Just Because You’re Homeless Doesn’t Mean You Don’t Have Gun Rights
It absolutely does. Try to purchase a firearm from a FFL without a valid ID and current physical address. This is a HUGE problem for me as I live on a sailboat which moves. And if my actual physical address isn’t exactly what is on my DL and I sign away it’s a felony.
Georgia does not require private sales to be done through an FFL so, no background check, proof of ID or proof of permanent residence is required…
We are in the same.boat as you -or actually a different boat since I don’t see you here in ours right now. Our gun rights get pretty dicey when we hit the Chesapeake and cross into Maryland going North for the summer.
Oh such people HAVE the right to arms, but it is often illegally denied.
I personally faced foreclosure though to choice/action of my own, and wondered how I could legaly conti ue to possess firearms.. and my vehicles. Vehicle registration requires a fixed physical address that meets certain requirements. So does your driving license and, if you have one or more Mother May I Cards to carry concealed. Had I lost my home I’d essentially have become an unlawful possessor of firearms and vehicles. Fixed physical address is a precondition of both. Can’t use a PO box, nor a PMB. Best, and often used, is a trussted friend who can claim you live there and get mail there, even though ou live in your van, sailboat, shack in the woods……
Thanfully things worked out to stop theforeclosure so I still have my house.. for now.
The State That Wants to Force All Lawful Gun Owners to Incriminate Themselves.
Not to mention the constitutional prohibition against Ex Post Facto laws… possession of those classes of weapons has been lawful for decades. Afer these stupid laws get “emacted” what I could lawfully possess and use last month is now unlawful for me to possess and use. THAT is ex post facto. New York’s AWB seriously tread upin that one, as does Illinois’ new “law”.
I am also convinced that the Washingtin law is seriously flawed n its face because this guy has not yet been CONVICTED of thecrime for which heis accused. The court must move to convict, then he can be stripped of his right. Innocent UNTIL PROVEN guilty, right?
Local law enforcement still appears to have a common sense approach to these types of issues.
The federal law enforcement is so corrupted that you will never know if you are going to be treated fairly or not. Communities need to start setting up Home Guard Self Defense organizations to protect themselves and neighbors from illegal and unconstitutional searches and seizures that we have seen going on with the Federal Government. There seems to be no civility left at the Federal Level as they exceed the terms of warrants and often show up with an armed contingent even for the smallest of issues. You have to wonder if the warrants are legal since they have been caught not providing proper information as well to the Judges who approve them. People better wake up soon as your future may involve being a slave to the government and/or winding up in a gulag just because you disagreed with them or made a minor error in paperwork. Of course they never do that nor are they ever punished for their error only the American Public.
The latest data show that people use guns for self-defense only rarely. According to a Harvard University analysis of figures from the National Crime Victimization Survey, people defended themselves with a gun in nearly 0.9 percent of crimes from 2007 to 2011.
Another problem is that there is no consensus on the definition of defensive gun use. Some incidents could involve illegal carrying or possession, or they could amount to aggravated assault, the Rand Corp. writes:
Perceptions about the incident and an individual’s role are important because much of the literature relies on self-reports: The respondent must have perceived there to have been a crime (or, in some surveys, a suspected or averted crime) and must consider himself or herself a victim rather than a mutual combatant. Even such stringent definitions, however, may not be sufficient to determine whether the event was lawful, legitimate, or desirable from a social perspective.
https://www.npr.org/2018/04/13/602143823/how-often-do-people-use-guns-in-self-defense
Weak bullshit. But what else can we expect from a fascist thug.
Comments are closed.