The 2nd Amendment 2.0. If Georgia ordinance passes it would no longer be your 'right" to bear arms, instead it would be your "responsibility" to do so.

Courtesy of Mediaite:  

Could not exercising the right to bear arms mean breaking the law? 

In the north Georgia city of Nelson, that may be the case if a proposed ordinance, requiring every “head of household to own and maintain a firearm,” is passed. The city councilman, Duane Cronic, argued that relying on sheriffs isn’t sufficient. 

“It’s a deterrent ordinance,” he said. “It tells the potential intruder you better think twice.” ]

The proposal is similar to a 1982 law passed in Kennesaw. Supporters of the ordinance cited the city’s location, straddling two counties, arguing that leads to slower response times from officials. 

One police officer patrols Nelson, Georgia for eight hours during the day. That leaves 16 hours overnight when the city is basically unguarded. “When he’s not here we rely on county sheriffs–however it takes a while for them to get here,” said Nelson City Councilman Duane Cronic.

Do these people NOT understand the concept of "freedom?" 

You would think that if the Teabaggers found the idea of laws that restrict the kinds of guns one can own, and that demand those gun owners not be criminals or mentally ill, invasive that they would certainly not want to support laws that would make it illegal not to own one either.

That is your Right Wing logic at work for ya there folks.

By the way let me tell you what results from demanding an increase in the number of weapons in your city. It does NOT reduce the number of burglaries, instead it increases them, because now that the thieves know that easily fenced handguns are in EVERY single home, they know that every break in results in a jackpot for them.

Unless these gun owners are supposed to sit in a chair on their front porch brandishing their weapons 24 hours a day, seven days a week, the thieves only have to bide their time. You have to go to work, and school, and out to eat sometime.

However a good dog, and an alarm system backed up by a reputable company, would make their house one of the least likely to fall prey to the criminal element. Of course it would also be wrong to legally mandate either of those, in case anybody was wondering.