PDA

View Full Version : Gun Rights Advocates Want To Carry Guns Into Airports


Alonzo
07-01-2008, 05:32 PM
A state representative decided not to carry a gun into the Atlanta airport in defiance of the firearms ban there, saying he'll let a gun-rights group fight the ban in court.

State Rep. Tim Bearden (R-Villa Rica), who sponsored a new law that that took effect Tuesday and allows licensed gun owners to carry in public places, had vowed to take a gun to Hartsfield-Jackson when picking up his father.

Airport officials said they would not relax the airport ban and promised to have Bearden arrested if caught with a gun, setting up a showdown that drew the national media's glare.

But Tuesday morning, Bearden said he reconsidered his strategy.

"That showdown will still happen, but it will take place in the courts not in an airport parking lot," Bearden said. "We will beat them in the proper venue."

His change-of-mind came after a group called Georgia Carry said it filed a lawsuit in federal court against the city of Atlanta, which owns and runs Hartsfield-Jackson, and Mayor Shirley Franklin and airport chief Ben DeCosta. Citing the new state law, it challenges the city's ability to maintain a gun-free zone at the airport.

An attorney for Georgia Carry showed up at a press conference by Franklin and DeCosta to hand them a copy of the suit. DeCosta took it, while Franklin walked away.

Franklin and DeCosta had called the press conference to say they will stick with their no-guns policy for parts of the airport outside federal jurisdiction, which include parking lots and main lobby and ticketing areas. Franklin said she will lobby Congress to authorize gun bans in any public facilities that get federal funds.

The new state law, which Bearden sponsored, permits licensed gun owners to carry concealed firearms in parks, on public transportation and in restaurants that serve liquor.

Firearms proponents hailed the law as a victory for the Second Amendment. They say law-abiding citizens with the appropriate permits should be allowed to carry firearms in formerly forbidden areas for self-protection.

Before the new law was passed, Georgia law banned guns from venues like public transportation and restaurants serving alcohol. More than 40 other states permit guns on public transportation, Bearden said, and 37 allow permit holders to carry weapons into restaurants.

"I was in law enforcement for 15 years," Bearden said as the bill awaited the governor's signature two months ago. "I never rode up on a shooting in progress. I don't like the idea of the police telling you, 'Get mugged, get raped, get murdered. We'll come by, take the report, or send flowers.' That's the wrong message."

Opponents, however, blasted the proposal, saying it has the potential to spark more violence than it stops. DeCosta wrote to Gov. Sonny Perdue asking him to veto the bill, and Franklin and MARTA officials publicly lambasted the idea. MARTA bus drivers gathered more than 1,000 signatures on petitions demanding bulletproof shields.

Federal law already bans guns past the security checkpoints at U.S. airports. The new state law, however, apparently would permit guns to be carried on the non-secure side of Hartsfield-Jackson by people who have gone through a background check and have been certified to carry a weapon. Licensed gun owners would be permitted to carry weapons on public transportation coming into the airport, its lobby and in restaurants outside the security checkpoints.

"We're going to make it clear that the law does not make any allowance for guns at the airport," DeCosta had said Monday. "Guns are not appropriate for any airport in Georgia."

Bearden maintains the new law clearly permits guns in some areas of the airport.

"They are not appropriate once you go past security," he had said Monday. "But in parking lots or restaurants or public transportation, they are OK."

The state lawmaker said the city does not have the authority to defy a state law.

DeCosta said city officials will not back down from their position on the new law and again vowed to have Bearden or anyone else carrying a gun on airport property arrested.

"He can then have all the NRA [National Rifle Association] lawyers say why it's OK for him to bring a gun to the airport," DeCosta said.

MARTA, meanwhile, released a statement late Monday noting that state law prohibits firearms on public transit unless the carrier has a valid license to carry a gun.

"This license must be carried at any time that an individual is carrying a firearm on MARTA," the statement said.

http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2008/06/30/airport_gun_showdown.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_new stab

Guns in bars and airports. Thanks you gun people!

Though I had to laugh at

Republican Rep Tim Bearden: I'm gonna take my gun into that airport and no one can stop me!

Airport Officials: If you enter the airport with a gun we'll arrest you.

Bearden: Umm..... uh......uhhhh.....TO THE COURTS!

Buck Laser
07-01-2008, 05:40 PM
There's stupid, then there's incredible stupid.

AlanC
07-01-2008, 06:08 PM
From the SCOTUS ruling this past week, they don't stand a chance on this one. It was pretty clear that both private and governmental bans and restrictions on guns in specific locations will stand.

Nice to know people are spending their money in worthwhile causes.

davo
07-01-2008, 08:35 PM
Things are getting a tad ridiculous with guns rights in the USA. There are crazies who believe they're entitled to pack a gun with them absolutely everywhere, and there are those who want to nick everyone's guns and everything will be magically safe like in Britain. Each extreme fuels the other.

Why can't Americans come to agree on some common-sense principles regarding guns, such as there is a right to own guns, but 'right to carry' a loaded gun outside of your own property or shooting range or hunting area is a privilege enacted by a state, and not a right. They are perfectly entitled to legislate in that area.

PatrickHenry
07-01-2008, 09:05 PM
'right to carry' a loaded gun outside of your own property or shooting range or hunting area is a privilege enacted by a state, and not a right...
That's not what the Second Amendment says, my friend.

"The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

AlanC
07-01-2008, 09:08 PM
That's not what the Second Amendment says, my friend.

"The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."


Absolutely. Yes. Even though all the Supremes did was uphold the first of those, the right to keep arms. Their decision still left some holes in the whole bear arms thing.

firefox
07-02-2008, 05:06 AM
I say more people should do more to exercise their rights. Here's a youtube video about people open carrying in a police station in Manchester, NH: http://youtube.com/watch?v=zrhmhxDd1S4. Remember: If you don't take a stand, no one else will.

Alonzo
07-02-2008, 05:14 AM
I say more people should do more to exercise their rights. Here's a youtube video about people open carrying in a police station in Manchester, NH: http://youtube.com/watch?v=zrhmhxDd1S4. Remember: If you don't take a stand, no one else will.

Guarantee you if he hadn't called in advance, and complained about the enforcement of open carry laws, they would have reacted very differently. Some random guy they know nothing about would likely have been seen as a threat.

Osborn F. Enready
07-05-2008, 04:01 AM
Alan said:
Absolutely. Yes. Even though all the Supremes did was uphold the first of those, the right to keep arms. Their decision still left some holes in the whole bear arms thing.

Gun rights advocates such as myself point squarely to the completely bi-partisan court for those holes being left in there.

Both parties "interpret" the constitution to fit their agenda, and justice is usually not a result.