Georgia Representative Dares Atlanta to Arrest Him for Carrying A Concealed Fiream
- Thread starter RichardInFlorida
- Start date
- Status
HonorsDaddy
Member
TAB, can you read?
The property owners are doing what they wish with their property. The owners are the people of Georgia. Their legislature has decided what will be done with their property. DeCosta is nothing more than an employee charged with maintaining that property - he is NOT in exclusive charge of that property. He no more gets to tell the owners what they may do with it than your yard guy gets to decided that you shouldn't have those hedges or trees anymore.
If you think he has the authority to ignore this law, would you also say he has the authority to forbid all whites from flying out of that airport?
The property owners are doing what they wish with their property. The owners are the people of Georgia. Their legislature has decided what will be done with their property. DeCosta is nothing more than an employee charged with maintaining that property - he is NOT in exclusive charge of that property. He no more gets to tell the owners what they may do with it than your yard guy gets to decided that you shouldn't have those hedges or trees anymore.
If you think he has the authority to ignore this law, would you also say he has the authority to forbid all whites from flying out of that airport?
Last edited:
ctdonath
Member
He wrote the law, he got it passed, now he wants to exercise it.
He is not enforcing the law, but he is drawing law enforcement's attention to the problem.
He is - and he's doing it in a way that doesn't spring the issue on some unsuspecting law-abiding citizen exercising his newly-protected right.
Oh, he could "file papers", but he can't do that until the airport administrator actually violates this law - better that the author of the law be the one subject to the administrator's illegal activity, than some guy who just wants to do what he's plainly legally allowed to.
ctdonath
Member
The persons in charge of said property, the GA legislature, made the "you can carry at the airport lobby" rule.
The airport administrator is tasked with executing the laws pertaining to the airport, not making them up. His bosses told him "CCW is OK", he told his bosses "no it's not", and one of his bosses is now calling him on it.
Are you sure its not the people of atlanta?
He was placed in charge by "the people" so then the people should remove him.
The yard analogy is not a good one since you are restricted what you can and can not plant... by local, state and federal laws.
He was placed in charge by "the people" so then the people should remove him.
The yard analogy is not a good one since you are restricted what you can and can not plant... by local, state and federal laws.
Halo
Member
Sure, when it is within the bounds prescribed by law. According to your reasoning, he should just as easily be able to say no more black people will be allowed to come to the airport. After all, it's "his" property to do with as he pleases right?
Intune
Member
I'm with ya TAB!
Handicapped people, pregnant women, children under the age of 12 and the obese shall only be permitted to enter airport property from 1:00 to 4:00pm.
Numerous complaints about slow lines have reached my office and therefore I sign this decree on 7/1/08.
I have spoken,
King DeCosta
Lord of Cerebral Injuries.
rocinante
Member
Maybe Tab is right Bearden has a publicity motive and personal gain but so what? Bottom line he is helping to push Georgia into a more acceptable gun rights legal state and is not afraid of using whatever resources he has. If going nose to nose with a petty peon bureaucrat speeds that along I applaud him. Perfect person to push back in this instance.
Tab you are way wrong about said property in this case. If you had an overseer who did not follow your instructions about the care of your property would you have the same attitude? The owners of this property have spoken and he is insubordinate. He needs to go. I think he is a Bill Campbell crony appointee anyhow so that doesn't speak too highly of his credentials anyhow.
Tab you are way wrong about said property in this case. If you had an overseer who did not follow your instructions about the care of your property would you have the same attitude? The owners of this property have spoken and he is insubordinate. He needs to go. I think he is a Bill Campbell crony appointee anyhow so that doesn't speak too highly of his credentials anyhow.
HonorsDaddy
Member
No TAB, its not the people of Atlanta.
You're wrong. Face and accept it. GA, like many states, does not allow cities to preempt state law.
The yard analogy may not be perfect, but your reasoning there is also flawed. In fact, it illustrates MY point far more than yours. I'm not going to go into detail on why this is because that is not the point of this thread.
Bottom line: You and DeCosta are 100% in the wrong, and apparently just as capable of admitting a mistake in the face of overwhelming fact.
You're wrong. Face and accept it. GA, like many states, does not allow cities to preempt state law.
The yard analogy may not be perfect, but your reasoning there is also flawed. In fact, it illustrates MY point far more than yours. I'm not going to go into detail on why this is because that is not the point of this thread.
Bottom line: You and DeCosta are 100% in the wrong, and apparently just as capable of admitting a mistake in the face of overwhelming fact.
Quote: "I this guy just wants to get relected"
Well, everyone on THR, with exception of you, wants this guy to get elected/stay employed/continue to fight for what everyone here on THR fights for, with exception of you...evidently. Hopefully, his "grandstanding" will make his name and intentions known to other Georgia voters and they will help keep him working for "US".
Personally, I prefer he do all the dirty work so I don't have to spend a day in jail and miss work/lose my job. I believe this is actually the first time I have seen a politician of sorts actually doing the job well and to completion. Too bad he isn't running for the BIG office...I think he would be a better choice that the options we have.
Well, everyone on THR, with exception of you, wants this guy to get elected/stay employed/continue to fight for what everyone here on THR fights for, with exception of you...evidently. Hopefully, his "grandstanding" will make his name and intentions known to other Georgia voters and they will help keep him working for "US".
Personally, I prefer he do all the dirty work so I don't have to spend a day in jail and miss work/lose my job. I believe this is actually the first time I have seen a politician of sorts actually doing the job well and to completion. Too bad he isn't running for the BIG office...I think he would be a better choice that the options we have.
KingTiger
Member
Rep. Bearden is running unapposed for the upcoming term. TAB - any thing else you need to prove your ignorance of?
Here is the acid test...
if you replaced CCW with something else, lets just say pronagrphy( which is protected under the 1a) and he passed a law saying it was ok for him to openly display it and the airport didn't want him too, Would you still support him?
if you replaced CCW with something else, lets just say pronagrphy( which is protected under the 1a) and he passed a law saying it was ok for him to openly display it and the airport didn't want him too, Would you still support him?
rockinrussky
Member
re-elected
So, by TAB's argument, every time a politician goes the extra mile to pass or enforce a pro gun law then its just to get 'relected.' Not quite sure what that means, but if he wants to get 're-elected' then supporting a law that the constituency (and gun owners) support is a fine way to do it. Hell, its almost like a representative democracy, crazy idea if you ask me What next, are we going to expect the DC mayor to actually enforce the Supreme Court decision? Sheesh, the nerve of some people.
So, by TAB's argument, every time a politician goes the extra mile to pass or enforce a pro gun law then its just to get 'relected.' Not quite sure what that means, but if he wants to get 're-elected' then supporting a law that the constituency (and gun owners) support is a fine way to do it. Hell, its almost like a representative democracy, crazy idea if you ask me
What next, are we going to expect the DC mayor to actually enforce the Supreme Court decision? Sheesh, the nerve of some people.HonorsDaddy
Member
TAB
Lets clear your analogy up:
If a law was passed saying the PEOPLE could publicly read pornography, and the airport said "No they cant", then yes, i would support the legislatures position just as strongly.
As asked of you - if you feel DeCosta is correct in this, then how would you feel if he said no white people could use the Hartsfield terminal?
Lets clear your analogy up:
If a law was passed saying the PEOPLE could publicly read pornography, and the airport said "No they cant", then yes, i would support the legislatures position just as strongly.
As asked of you - if you feel DeCosta is correct in this, then how would you feel if he said no white people could use the Hartsfield terminal?
Intune
Member
Whoa doggie!
Where did "he" get all this power & can I have some of it?New decree- None shall wield more power than Me!
7/1/08
King DeCosta
Lord of Cerebral Injuries
P.S. TAB, thank you for your support & donation.
Correct. And the new law defends that choice. DeCosta vows to defy the law. Right/wrong, plain as day, black/white, couldn't be any clearer.
HonorsDaddy
Member
Yes, you WERE supporting DeCosta
Whether or not someone can choose or not to be armed is irrelevant. It is an INDIVIDUAL right, protected by the 2nd Amendment, and further protected and expanded upon by the GA legislature.
YOU, and others like you, had better accept that and get it through your heads just as the racists of the 50's had to accept the equality of minorities. If you choose not to, be prepared for penalties ranging from social shunning to legal prosecution.
Whether or not someone can choose or not to be armed is irrelevant. It is an INDIVIDUAL right, protected by the 2nd Amendment, and further protected and expanded upon by the GA legislature.
YOU, and others like you, had better accept that and get it through your heads just as the racists of the 50's had to accept the equality of minorities. If you choose not to, be prepared for penalties ranging from social shunning to legal prosecution.
CajunBass
Member
Sorry, while I think TAB is so wrong on this that's it's not funny, he should have the right to state his opinion here, as long as he doesn't violate the rules of the forum, which as far as I can tell he hasn't done.
Intune
Member
Well said. I applaud his tenacity.
HonorsDaddy
Member
Cajun
Sure, he's got the right to express his opinion, and I have the right to express mine. In my opinion, people who support authoritarian dictatorships and the absolute authority of government functionaries to make up law as they go along would be happier if they got out of the United States, what with our oppressive ideas of freedom and limited government power and all that.
Rights of expression go both ways Cajun. I do NOT have to silently tolerate the views of those who would take away my rights.
Sure, he's got the right to express his opinion, and I have the right to express mine. In my opinion, people who support authoritarian dictatorships and the absolute authority of government functionaries to make up law as they go along would be happier if they got out of the United States, what with our oppressive ideas of freedom and limited government power and all that.
Rights of expression go both ways Cajun. I do NOT have to silently tolerate the views of those who would take away my rights.
Intune
Member
True. But you DO choose to live in Houston and I, as a surviver of living in Sugarland and commuting on a motorcycle for two years, shall always be leery of each and every one of your posts. No matter how accurate or logical they appear to be on the surface.
brighamr
Member
Just think, if there were one or two legislators like this one in each state... I don't think any states would have an AWB or be "May Issue".
This guy is really doing something, which is more than I can say for 95% of elected officials.
This guy is really doing something, which is more than I can say for 95% of elected officials.
brighamr
Member
"I also beleave that property owners( or person in charge of said property, even if its owned by the the public) have the right to restrict what happends on said property."
Yet another thread derailed to "private property owner's rights". Even though this entire thread is about PUBLIC property..
Yet another thread derailed to "private property owner's rights". Even though this entire thread is about PUBLIC property..
xjchief
Member
Mute point now, appears he decided not to push the issue with the airport. I'm disappointed.
- Status
