Gun fight in the Georgia legislature

Status
Not open for further replies.

DJAteOhAte

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
225
Location
Acworth, GA
http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/2008/04/02/254/

We thought you would be interested in reading two news items just released.

(1) Another gunfight may be brewing in the Senate

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/sh...008/04/02/another_gunfight_may_be_brewin.html

Alice Johnson, the lobbyist representing Georgians for Gun Safety, smells a gunfight in the air.

She notes this morning that the Senate Rules Committee has put H.B. 257 on today’s calendar.

The bill adds constables to the list of law enforcement and judicial personnel permitted to pack heat in public buildings.

“The bill opens up the ‘public gathering’ section of the Georgia firearms code, and is a likely vehicle for language previously proposed by Rep. Tim Bearden in H.B. 89 and H.B. 915,” Johnson reports.

Sen. Mitch Seabaugh (R-Sharpsburg) asked for the bill last night, which makes it likely he would act as floor director for any amendments.

Parks have been the main target for those looking to lengthen the list of places where permitted owners can carry concealed.

The question is whether the National Rifle Association has any voice left in the Senate willing to re-start the fight over the right of employees to keep weapons in their cars parked on company lots.

GCO says anything that has Alice upset must be good for GCO.

(2) Giving Gunowners the Right to Carry Concealed on MARTA

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/index.html

Today’s coming gunfight in the Senate could get interesting.

We’re hearing the deal that’s been cut on amendments to H.B. 257 would allow those with the proper permits to carry concealed in restaurants — even those that serve alcohol — and on MARTA.

One scenario theorizes that, once the bill is sent back to the House for its decision on whether to agree or disagree, the NRA-backed portion to allow employees to keep guns in cars parked on company lots will again be added.

But we’re hearing that one Senate Democrat, J.B. Powell of Blythe, will offer an amendment to that effect on the Senate floor, to ensure that the fireworks start that much earlier.

Remember the MARTA bus stop robbery and shooting Monday morning? Why have a law that does not effect crime but disarms GCO members? GCO expects this to be good news for 2008!
 
Next to the PG Statute,not being able to carry on public transit in GA is the most severe and senseless limitation.
Good luck Georgians, in getting these draconian laws fixed ASAP.
 
It seems to me that the main sticking point to getting carry laws changed in Georgia is the fact that there is no training required. Most people here who go to the trouble to get a permit are pretty knowledgable and I have no trouble with them carrying a gun. Since anyone who can pass a background check must be issued a permit, many in the legislature want to severely restrict where we can carry. Just curious, but would Georgians be willing to take a training class if that was what it takes for our carry permits to be useful?
 
From the latest GCO Update:

Today, Wednesday, was a rollercoaster day for the right to bear arms. The Senate took up HB 257, which is a bill to permit constables to carry firearms in publicly owned or operated buildings. GCO-supported amendments were added to HB 257 that would permit Georgians with firearms licenses to carry firearms on mass transit and in restaurants that serve alcohol, so long as the person with the firearm was not consuming alcohol. The motions passed overwhelmingly.

Then Sen. Vincent Forte, District 39, Atlanta, who was opposed to the amendments, attached a seemingly innocuous amendment relating to security plans at colleges. It was passed before anybody realized that the amendment violated Senate rules. A motion to reconsider received an objection because the Senate had already moved on to consideration of another matter. (The vote to reconsider did win, however). Because of the rules violation and the problem with the voite to reconsider, the entire bill with its amendments was tabled.

We are receiving assurances that the General Assembly will pass legislation pertaining to mass transit and restaurants, but we need you to follow the instructions in the prior email for contacting the leadership in the House and Senate to let them know that these issues are important to you.

Warning - things are sensitive right now. Please use the utmost tact in contacting legislators.
 
As long as it was free or cheap, I would have no problem with that. Heck, that would even help the CCW crowd, in my opinion...we could then say, "Not only have I passed an intensive background check and paid the fee, I have proven I know how to safely handle and operate a firearm."
 
Just curious, but would Georgians be willing to take a training class if that was what it takes for our carry permits to be useful

I'm not a Georgian,just a regular visitor to your great state.
But I have a problem with training.
Besides being a 2A infringement its abitrary in many states.
My home state of Florida requires a simple 2 hour course, going over FL law and the basics of safe firearms handling.Most instructors give no test(and even if they do its immaterial)and no range testing is required.
But if you have a DD214 or Honorable Discharge from 19-- (as far back in the day as you can imagine)no course is required and you skate through on your prints and FBI check.
Vermont and Alaska got it right:no permit,no checks ,no nada.
16 in Vermont,21 in Alaska ,strap it on and assert your 2A rights.
Seems to be working out very well in both states.
'course they do have demographics in their favor.But whose counting?
 
Just curious, but would Georgians be willing to take a training class if that was what it takes for our carry permits to be useful

I am a Georgian and you can absolutely believe I'd be very strongly opposed to any training requirement. We have a right to defend ourselves. This is not a right that should be infringed by introducing an arbitrary training system that leaves the requirements of passing the test as well as when and where the test is administered, and the required fees associated with it, in the hands of the government. It would establish a system that would be ripe for abuse. You will not see a single legislator who is currently opposed to loosening the shackles that bind Georgia gun owners suddenly become an ally of Georgia gun owners because of a "reasonable" training requirement. It is a trap.

In related news it appears that HB 257 has passed the Senate. Hopefully it will become law this year.
 
GCO update:

Dear GCO Member,

Today, Wednesday, was a rollercoaster day for the right to bear arms. The Senate took up HB 257, which is a bill to permit constables to carry firearms in publicly owned or operated buildings. GCO-supported amendments were added to HB 257 that would permit Georgians with firearms licenses to carry firearms on mass transit and in restaurants that serve alcohol, so long as the person with the firearm was not consuming alcohol. The motions passed overwhelmingly.

Then Sen. Vincent Forte, District 39, Atlanta, who was opposed to the amendments, attached a seemingly innocuous amendment relating to security plans at colleges. It was passed before anybody realized that the amendment violated Senate rules. A motion to reconsider received an objection because the Senate had already moved on to consideration of another matter. (The vote to reconsider did win, however). Because of the rules violation and the problem with the vote to reconsider, the entire bill with its amendments was tabled.
 
I agree, GA has some of the WORST laws in regards to CCW, in the south. What makes it even worse, is the limits the law places if you live in a major city like Atlanta. You basically cant carry amost anywhere, technically. I lived in Atlanta or 2 years, in East Point, then in the ghetto where they do "freak-nik", I forget the name of the major road I lived on then/there).Atlanta DOES have a lot going for it,but the ccw laws, and crime stinks bad.
 
I just don't know that poor marksmanship is much of a problem at the moment. As jmr40 said, most people we know who have firearms are knowledgeable in their use. Now, if you're talking about training as to "legal" training, as in learning when a situation warrants deadly force or not, well, maybe.

But, overall, I don't think that lack of training is a problem, and introducing mandatory training would simply create more bureaucratric red-tape hoops for us law-abiders to jump through.

Besides, I've never seen a criminal rob a convenience store clerk at gunpoint because he had no firearms training.
 
GCO Update:

We have two bits of good news to report.

(1) HB 257

The first item of good news is that HB 257, tabled this afternoon after an overwhelming vote to amend it to permit those in possession of a firearms license to carry in restaurants and on mass transit, was "untabled" and passed. Restaurants are probably the most common complaint voiced by GCO members, and mass transit laws currently have a 20 year penalty attached to them, so this is a significant victory, but your work is not done.

Georgia needs HB 257 and HB 89 to be approved tomorrow. Please keep up your polite contacts with the Senate and House, asking them to please pass both HB 257 and HB 89.

We will leave 2008 better than we found it!
 
Warning - things are sensitive right now. Please use the utmost tact in contacting legislators.
This is a problem I ran into with my Senator. HB89 looked to be inevitable, then the Senate refused to hear it and sent it back to committee.

Naturally, a great number of folks felt betrayed by this, and chose to write some pretty unpleasant things to their elected officials. My own Senator would not return my phone calls. When I got ahold of his secretary, she informed me that he, and several others, had received several "hostile and inappropriate" emails from people purporting to be supportive of HB89.

HB89 has languished in committee since, and we've got one day left to get it back on the floor. This is a crucial bill that rectifies a great number of onerous restrictions on our rights, but its chances for passage this year look very slim.

We're all adults, and we should present ourselves as such. Let the other side deal with hysterics and emotional appeals; we've got the facts.
 
would Georgians be willing to take a training class if that was what it takes for our carry permits to be useful
No.

"Innocent until proven guilty" and "shall not be infringed", remember?

The whole point of such restrictions is precisely to hinder the exercise of freedom, not to facilitate it.
We have plenty of relevant history & statistics showing that the lack of "training" classes is NOT a problem in other jurisdictions that do not require them.

The wording of the GA constitution is clear. Pity the GA Supreme Court ruled against its plain meaning.
 
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/polit...y_be_allowed_to.html

Why you soon may be allowed to carry concealed at Kennesaw Mountain
Thursday, April 3, 2008, 04:06 PM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Friday is about to become a very big payday for gun rights advocates.

Here’s the deal:

Two bills will move, not one. H.B. 257, which now permits those with concealed weapons permits to carry in restaurants and on rail and bus systems, is but one chunk.

H.B. 89 will also move. This measure will carry the watered-down, guns-in-parking-lots language that the Senate, National Rifle Association and the Georgia Chamber of Commerce have wrestled with for two sessions, plus other goodies for the NRA.

Right now, chances of passage for both must be rated very good. Opposition is scarce. Joe Fleming, lobbyist for the Georgia chamber, says his group will be focused H.B. 89, to make sure the parking lots language doesn’t change.

Whether restaurant groups, MARTA and other transit systems raise objections — and raise them quickly enough — will determine whether H.B. 257 has tough sledding.

When it leaves a House-Senate conference committee tomorrow, H.B. 89 will be significantly changed. The parking-lot language, stripped out by the House, will be restored.

The language redefining “public gatherings” where firearms remain prohibited has been abandoned. You will not be permitted to carry a concealed weapon into church.

But the bill will:

— Require expedited treatment for concealed weapons permits by the probate court judges who issue them;

— Relax state restrictions on where firearms can be stored in vehicles;

— Make “straw” purchases of firearms illegal — a way of prohibiting lawsuits of the type filed by New York against gun dealers in Georgia, alleging they are sources for weapons that flow into states where buying a gun is much more difficult or time-consuming.

— And it will allow licensed concealed weapons to be carried in state parks and historical sites.

This last part is important, and here’s why:

U.S. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne has said his department would suggest new regulations by the end of this month that would amount to the biggest relaxation of gun-toting rules in federal parks in more than a century.

Basically, he said that concealed weapons would be permitted — if the U.S. parks are located in states that permit carrying in their parks. So passage of H.B. 89 would insure that, someday soon, visitors to Kennesaw National Battlefield Park and the federal Chattahoochee River park would also be able to carry concealed.
 
http://www.insideradvantagegeorgia.com/

More Twists For Gun Bill Than A Spiraling Bullet

By Dick Pettys
InsiderAdvantage Georgia

(4/3/08) True to its extensive history, there was nothing easy about it Wednesday as a proxy for the gun bill made a new appearance in the Senate on the next-to-last working day of the session after laying dormant for weeks.

A House-passed bill authorizing constables to carry weapons was first amended by gun enthusiasts in the Senate to include expanded gun-carry provisions. Then opponents threw a monkey wrench into the works by attaching an amendment that was so long that it triggered a Senate rule forcing it back onto the general calendar and, thus, potentially killing it.

After a huge huddle at the podium around Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, the amendment was reconsidered and the bill was summarily laid on the table. Then, several hours later, it was removed from the table and passed - minus the crippling amendment.

The whole episode caused more than a little confusion during the initial debate.

You'll remember, this is an issue that's been fought for two years, much of the time involving a clash over gun rights vs. private property rights between the National Rifle Association and the Georgia Chamber of Commerce.

That got settled - more or less - earlier this session when the Senate essentially gutted the NRA-backed bill to the Chamber's satisfaction but left enough of it intact to allow the NRA to claim a partial victory.

Problem was, not all gun advocates were satisfied and instead of accepting the Senate's re-working of the bill - described by the Senate as a take-it-or-leave-it measure - the House took the measure and added a number of amendments to broaden carry rights. The NRA then sided with the House and turned its grassroots network loose against the Senate to create some pressure for the new House provisions.

That's been rocking along in the background for weeks with no progress until Wednesday, when gun enthusiasts sought to use HB 257 on Wednesday's Senate debate calendar as a way to get some of the House amendments to conference committee and ultimately to final passage.

Here's how it went down:

During the debate, the Senate voted without objection to add provisions which would allow those with carry permits to carry concealed weapons on public transportation, and which would allow them to carry weapons in restaurants through a carefully-crafted sentence that would stipulate those who were permitted to carry firearms "shall not consume alcoholic beverages in a restaurant or other eating establishment while carrying a firearm."

Problem was, the Senate also adopted an amendment offered from the floor by Sen. Vincent Fort, who opposed the bill, and which required Georgia colleges to develop emergency response plans for shooting incidents.

Because that amendment was more than half as long as the original bill, it triggered a Senate rule which would have required it to return to the general calendar on the last day of the session.

That touched off an extended huddle at the front of the chamber after Sen. Preston Smith moved to reconsider the amendment and others protested that he had missed the point at which that could be done.

Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle ultimately ruled the amendment could be reconsidered, and it was. But then the bill and its amendments were laid on the table, from which it could be recalled at any time.

"What happened?" a lobbyist waiting outside the chambers asked. And a senator who joined him later had the same question.

Senate Rules Chairman Don Balfour said Senate leaders wanted time to look at the bill and decide how to proceed.

After a dinner recess, the Senate pulled the bill off the table, killed Fort's amendment and one other and then sent the amended bill back to the House. It almost certainly will go to a conference committee, where it may pick up further changes.

And the bill that sparked it all - HB 89, the NRA-backed parking lot bill, currently in a dormant conference committee - may emerge from that conference committee, after all - just as the Senate passed it.

This is a bill that began last year as an effort to prohibit employers from barring workers from having guns in their cars, and has been a charged issue for a long time. It even brought the NRA's Wayne LaPierre to Atlanta late last year to lobby for the parking lots bill, which was vigorously opposed by the Chamber of Commerce.

What the NRA eventually got this year was a drastically scaled-back version of the parking lot ban, and it was viewed as a loss for the gun organization at the time, although it gave the group enough for it to claim a win.

The issue didn't get resolved then, however, because the House took the Senate bill and added the new, broadened carry provisions. The NRA, not really happy with its treatment at the hands of the Senate, then turned its forces loose to try to pass the House version of HB 89.
 
This update was just posted by Rep. Tim Bearden (R-68) (aka “Stonewall”), the author of HB 89 & HB915:

http://www.georgiapacking.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11948

GOOD NEWS...... HB89 has been signed by all Conference Members and it includes everything and the language from HB 257 (including Constable language). HB 257 will not be called since all language is now in the HB89 Conference Report. The report was turned in about 30 minutes ago and must be printed and layed on the desk for an hour.

We are on the edge of the best gun bill in Georgia's history

Great work guys and gals.
 
HB 89 just passed in the House and the Senate. This is a great victory for gun owners in GA.
 
So after all of the cutting and mending, what are we left with?

In other words, what is the most recent edition of what passed, and can it be posted here so others can read the exact wording?

I try to go to the legislature's website and look for either 915 or 89 but I get lost.
 
I don't have a link to it yet, but here are the nuts and bolts of it.

Bloomberg straw purchase ban
Park, historic site, recreational area permitted
No GFL required for carry anywhere in a car
Public Gathering no longer includes restaurants which derive more than 50% of revenue from food.
Constables may carry, except where there is a courthouse security plan
Park, historic site, recreational area, "including all publicly owned buildings located in such parks, historic sites, and recreational areas and ...
in Wildlife Management Areas
on public transportation
No drinking while carrying
Probate starts background check within 2 days of receipt "of application or request" (intended to address DeKalb's appointments?)
Law enforcement reports back to probate within 30 days
Issue license within 10 days of receiving report.
Report must be stamped with date received from law enforcement
NRA parking lot language is in. No searching employees without cause. Exemptions for gated lots and public utilities, DoD contractors. Edit: Does appear to exempt employers who own their land.
Some stuff from the original bill about limiting liability for non-profits for disaster aid.

We had to give up churches, sporting events, etc., but we are chipping away at the "Public Gathering" statute.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top