The City of Nelson is being sued over its Home and Family Protection ordinance. The ordinance was passed on April first and requires all heads of households to own a firearm and corresponding ammunition. However, the ordinance also exempts anyone who opposes gun ownership, felons, and those mentally or physically unable to handle a firearm. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence filed the suit yesterday, saying the Nelson law is unconstitutional, even though the ordinance is rooted in Second Amendment rights. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The Brady Center is joined in the suit by the firms of Covington & Burling LLP and Dow Lohnes PLLC. They argue the Nelson ordinance violates citizens’ First, Second, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. According to yesterday’s press release, the suit was filed on behalf of membership of the Brady Center who faces a $1,000 fine for non-compliance.

“In this lawsuit we seek to establish that the government does not have the authority to compel Americans to buy guns or bring them into their homes,”

Legal Action Director Jonathan Lowy said, adding

“In fact, while the Second Amendment gives law-abiding Americans the right to own a gun if they decide that’s the best way to ensure the safety of their homes and their families, the majority of Americans choose to protect their families by keeping guns out. This ordinance denies the people of Nelson that freedom.”

Conversely, though, the ordinance actually grants that freedom. First, the law is not enforced. Second, the ordinance explicitly exempts any citizen who does not wish to own a gun. Later, Lowy in the press release attacks capitalism.

“Forcing residents to buy guns they do not want or need won’t make the City of Nelson or its people any safer, and only serves to increase gun sales and gun industry profits,”

he said. Notably, Nelson has only one police officer. So, home protection may be more crucial that Lowy perceives. Last month Nelson Police Chief commended council for its decision.

“I think you all are showing people that you are in full support of the Constitution,”

Mitchell said. He went on to explain that when Kennesaw passed a similar ordinance in 1982 the crime rate immediately decreased. Also, since the passage of the law Kennesaw he said there has been no increase in gun violence or accidental house shootings. Mitchell said he has received numerous phone-calls from residents in the past few weeks, especially after the school shooting in Connecticut, concerned about federal confiscation of guns. The ordinance protects this right.

Although council members were unable to comment on the suit, one member said Nelson resident Lamar Kellet, working through the Brady Center, is responsible for bringing the suit against Nelson. Kellet vehemently opposed the ordinance from the time it was first presented.

“The ordinance is redundant,”

he said at the April meeting,

“We already have castle laws, which allow you to protect your property. And you don’t have to fear pulling out your gun on your own property, (or fear) that you will be indicted for pulling a gun on somebody.”

Kellet went on to say the verbiage of the law is ambiguous and has no meaning.

See the ordinance below as approved in its first reading by Nelson City Council:

Home Protection Ordinance

Heads of households to maintain firearms.
(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and
further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and
general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of
household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a
firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of
households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would
prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the
effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers
or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of
beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.

In the first paragraph the law says every head of household in Nelson is required to maintain a firearm with corresponding ammunition. But more important, the preface states the reason for the law is to protect the general welfare of the city and its inhabitants. Yes. This paragraph does require gun ownership. However, the ordinance has a second paragraph, which exempts individuals from the law who are physically and mentally incapable of owning and using firearms, in addition to heads of households who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms due to personal beliefs or religious doctrine.

Councilman Duane Cronic, who read the ordinance during the April meeting, called the measure a deterrent, likening it to putting an ADT Security sign on the front yard, suggesting home invaders would think twice before breaking in the home of a gun owner.

“It’s a protection that everyone should, have,”

he said,

“and they should feel that they have the right to protect themselves, their house, their property, (and) their family from an intruder without worrying about prosecution for protecting themselves.”

According to Nelson City Clerk Brandy Edwards the city has yet to be served.