SCKimberFan
Member
No, but Marta going to ATL Airport is, and there is a MARTA station at ATL Airport. So it is ok to carry it on MARTA, but you have to get rid of it when you step into the Airport?!? Where?!??
Airport gun showdown moves to courts
- Thread starter Mikebnice
- Start date
- Status
moga
Member
I heard this morning on the radio that the City of Atlanta has twenty days to answer the subpoena. I'm unclear about what happens after that. I guess a trial date is set?
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
Fantastic! Go for it! Until then, obey the law.
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
.
Well, according to the Mayor they are "Weapons of Mass Destruction."
Don't ya know.
.
Well, according to the Mayor they are "Weapons of Mass Destruction."
Don't ya know.
.
moga
Member
Must see TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcnfZ2XlGbw
Peter Hamm expresses on national TV his disappointment that Tim Bearden was not arrested, because "We" were looking forward to a "broader national debate."
Wow. We are a nation of laws, until laws are passed that doesn't suit the anti agenda. At that point they can simply be ignored.
Peter Hamm expresses on national TV his disappointment that Tim Bearden was not arrested, because "We" were looking forward to a "broader national debate."
Wow. We are a nation of laws, until laws are passed that doesn't suit the anti agenda. At that point they can simply be ignored.
moga
Member
High noon at Hartsfield
By Ben Decosta, Tim Bearden
For the Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/06/08
PRO-CON: A media-hyped showdown between airport chief Ben DeCosta and state Rep. Tim Bearden failed to materialize last week after Bearden's camp decided to take DeCosta's camp to court instead. So today the two are dueling at 10 paces with word processors.
—-
Safety of traveling public, homeland security are vital
By BEN DeCOSTA
At Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, a top priority is the safety and security of each man, woman and child that enters our terminal. And for that reason alone, we are determined to maintain the airport's position as a gun-free zone.
Whether you are among the hundreds of thousands of travelers arriving or departing Hartsfield-Jackson, picking up or dropping off a business associate, friend or someone you love, or reporting to work here, you should not have to risk encountering a gun-wielding individual at the world's busiest airport.
It doesn't take much imagination to know that untrained people who carry guns, anywhere, but especially on airport property, have the potential to do great harm to innocent bystanders.
On average, 245,000 passengers each day travel through the airport. That, coupled with the more than 56,000 people who work here, makes it critical that we continue to prohibit firearms and other dangerous weapons.
My job is to ensure that Hartsfield-Jackson is not only an efficiently managed facility, but one that is also safe and secure. It is a crucial matter of public safety and homeland security.
I am not against the right of individuals to bear arms. That is our right as Americans. My father was a life member of the National Rifle Association. I have been a marksman myself. A crowded facility —- and especially a busy airport —- is no place for our guns.
Our nation's airports are still at security threat level "Orange," meaning that the federal government has declared our risk to be at a heightened level.
It is the city of Atlanta's legally supported position that Hartsfield-Jackson falls within the "public gathering" exception as defined in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated Section 16-11-127. The airport is a publicly owned and operated facility. Therefore, firearms are prohibited on airport property, including all employee parking areas. The city is on sound legal footing in interpreting the law.
We are asking citizens to practice common sense and leave their weapons at home. The airport is no place for a firearm unless it is appropriately encased and secured in checked luggage, as required by federal regulations.
Law enforcement is ample at the airport and crimes against persons are extremely rare. The Airport Security Division, the Transportation Security Administration, Atlanta Police Department, FBI, federal air marshals and other law enforcement officials provide the necessary level of protection and public safety for airport employees, tenants and passengers. We continue our commitment to keep the airport a safe and secure place, as part of America's air transportation system. We are bound to protect the right of all Americans to travel safely and securely.
Two of the United States' largest aviation industry organizations agree that airports should be gun-free places of safety and security.
Charles M. Barclay, president of the American Association of Airport Executives, and Randall H. Walker, chair of the Airports Council International-North America board of directors, both wrote recent letters of support.
"I am in full support of your work to prohibit members of the public from bearing firearms at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport," said Walker in his letter. "The members of ACI-NA agree with you that the continued security threat to airports and passengers justifies the need to ban weapons from public airports."
Protecting the security rights of all travelers is the only reasonable position to have on this matter.
> Ben DeCosta, general manager of Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, said he would have Tim Bearden arrested if Bearden carried a gun onto airport property last week.
—-
Atlanta ignores basic right and state law —- again
By TIM BEARDEN
Over the past few days there have been a lot of comments about expected "showdowns" at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport due to Atlanta's defiance of state law.
Let there be no doubt about it: There will be a showdown, but it will be in the proper venue, the courts. I fully intended to go to the airport on July 1 to pick up family members coming in for the holiday. I told a reporter that I would be legally armed, exercising the expanded rights that the General Assembly passed and the governor signed into law.
Then I was told that the city of Atlanta and the airport had decided to designate the airport a "gun-free zone" —- in blatant disregard of state law and individual rights guaranteed not only by this state but by the Supreme Court of the United States just weeks ago.
I spoke with attorneys from the organization GeorgiaCarry.org, of which I am a member, and they filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday. It's worth remembering that GeorgiaCarry.org, less than two months ago, beat the city of Atlanta on basically the same issue of the city ignoring the authority of state law.
The city at that time had in place an ordinance that would keep law-abiding citizens with firearms licenses from carrying in city parks. The city was handed a loss then and should be handed another court loss now. Apparently, the city of Atlanta has a pattern of believing it can disobey laws that don't fit Atlanta's criteria.
The new law allows law-abiding citizens, with a permit, the right to carry on public transportation and the terminal areas of public transportation. Let us review the new law, HB 89. Section 9 says, "All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this act are repealed."
So the public gathering law is in conflict to the extent that a terminal is a part of HB 89, which states, "(e) A person licensed or permitted to carry a firearm by this part shall be permitted to carry such firearm, subject to the limitations of this part, in ... public transportation notwithstanding Code Sections 16-12-122 through 16-12-127; provided, however, that a person shall not carry into a place prohibited by federal law."
The "federal law" section is something we at the General Assembly put into the law for the very purpose of making sure that nobody would misconstrue HB 89 as permitting firearms to be carried past the metal detectors at Georgia's airports.
In other words, the General Assembly fully considered the issue of lawfully carried firearms in Georgia airports when passing this law. There was no other reason to add a clause about places "prohibited by federal law" to the end of the public transportation section.
One of the statutes referenced in HB 89 defines as an "aircraft ... station, depot, any such transportation facility, or infrastructure relating thereto operated by a ... government entity," which is another way of saying "city airport."
The definition also includes designated stops for shuttles "operated by a ... government entity operating [an] aircraft ... transportation facility and parking lots or parking areas adjacent to a terminal."
So when the law is reviewed in its entirety, it is perfectly clear what the law means. It is also clear that what the city of Atlanta and the airport are doing is a blatant disregard of your rights.
The new law clearly permits legally carried firearms at transportation terminals, so long as the firearm is not carried into the areas that are "prohibited by federal law," which is the law in the vast majority of states.
Atlanta should not be permitted yet again to defy state law, even when it disagrees with the law. The city of Atlanta is not above the law.
> Tim Bearden is a Republican state representative from Villa Rica who sponsored the new law permitting licensed gun owners to carry concealed firearms in parks, on public transportation and in restaurants that serve liquor.
—-
The law says ...
Here is the key passage of House Bill 89, which became law July 1, that, its sponsor says, enables people to carry firearms in the nonsecure areas of airports:
A person licensed or permitted to carry a firearm by this part shall be permitted to carry such firearm, subject to the limitations of this part, in all parks, historic sites, and recreational areas, including all publicly owned buildings located in such parks, historic sites, and recreational areas and in wildlife management areas . . . and in public transportation notwithstanding provided, however, that a person shall not carry a firearm into a place prohibited by federal law.
A person licensed or permitted to carry a firearm by this part shall not consume alcoholic beverages in a restaurant or other eating establishment while carrying a firearm. Any person violating this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
*******************************************************************************************
I can almost pick out the words from Ben DeCosta's writing that were written by Alice Johnson of Georgians for Gun Safety (an anti organization that proclaims to be a pro-2A). It's one-person operation is a closely guarded secret by the AJC. In fact, Johnson is featured so prominently in any story that features Amendment II in Atlanta and is such a well established figure in any press conference given by Mayor Franklin that you would think that she is an accomplished expert witness or highly respected academian. There is really nothing in her background that qualifies her as a trained public policy analyst nor a firearm expert. As far as I can tell, she gets her funding through a joint cooperative between Atlanta/Fulton Commission on Children and Youth (?) and Boston University, School of Public Health, through a grant by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to the Boston University School of Public Health. That's it. I guess once you get a grant from BU it supplants the lack of any formal training in an area of public policy practice and green lights you to start any mayhem you desire way down in Georgia.
Let's see if I can pick out some of Alice's keystone words/phrases:
..risk encountering a gun-wielding individual at the world's busiest airport (dead giveaway)
...untrained people who carry guns, anywhere, but especially on airport property, have the potential to do great harm to innocent bystanders (GGS has been asked for proof to support this position several times to no avail, because there is none in GA)
...I am not against the right of individuals to bear arms. That is our right as Americans. My father was a life member of the National Rifle Association. (this is definitely a GGS text book move).
and on and on I could go. It just seems that Johnson is the brain child behind every scheme to deny Georgians of their 2A rights and equal protection under the law. America is a nation of laws and the people of Georgia, through their legislators and Governor, have loudly spoken. It's high time to end this little charade and give these folks the smack down in the courts that they so richly deserve.
See the lady in the red outfit standing in between the Chief of Atlanta PD and the Chief of Marta PD? That's Johnson. BTW, the footage is of John Monroe serving Ben DeCosta with his subpoena at the end of Mayor Franklin's press conference to declare Hartsfield a gun-free-zone. The press conference was held the day before HB89 became law (7/1/08).
By Ben Decosta, Tim Bearden
For the Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/06/08
PRO-CON: A media-hyped showdown between airport chief Ben DeCosta and state Rep. Tim Bearden failed to materialize last week after Bearden's camp decided to take DeCosta's camp to court instead. So today the two are dueling at 10 paces with word processors.
—-
Safety of traveling public, homeland security are vital
By BEN DeCOSTA
At Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, a top priority is the safety and security of each man, woman and child that enters our terminal. And for that reason alone, we are determined to maintain the airport's position as a gun-free zone.
Whether you are among the hundreds of thousands of travelers arriving or departing Hartsfield-Jackson, picking up or dropping off a business associate, friend or someone you love, or reporting to work here, you should not have to risk encountering a gun-wielding individual at the world's busiest airport.
It doesn't take much imagination to know that untrained people who carry guns, anywhere, but especially on airport property, have the potential to do great harm to innocent bystanders.
On average, 245,000 passengers each day travel through the airport. That, coupled with the more than 56,000 people who work here, makes it critical that we continue to prohibit firearms and other dangerous weapons.
My job is to ensure that Hartsfield-Jackson is not only an efficiently managed facility, but one that is also safe and secure. It is a crucial matter of public safety and homeland security.
I am not against the right of individuals to bear arms. That is our right as Americans. My father was a life member of the National Rifle Association. I have been a marksman myself. A crowded facility —- and especially a busy airport —- is no place for our guns.
Our nation's airports are still at security threat level "Orange," meaning that the federal government has declared our risk to be at a heightened level.
It is the city of Atlanta's legally supported position that Hartsfield-Jackson falls within the "public gathering" exception as defined in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated Section 16-11-127. The airport is a publicly owned and operated facility. Therefore, firearms are prohibited on airport property, including all employee parking areas. The city is on sound legal footing in interpreting the law.
We are asking citizens to practice common sense and leave their weapons at home. The airport is no place for a firearm unless it is appropriately encased and secured in checked luggage, as required by federal regulations.
Law enforcement is ample at the airport and crimes against persons are extremely rare. The Airport Security Division, the Transportation Security Administration, Atlanta Police Department, FBI, federal air marshals and other law enforcement officials provide the necessary level of protection and public safety for airport employees, tenants and passengers. We continue our commitment to keep the airport a safe and secure place, as part of America's air transportation system. We are bound to protect the right of all Americans to travel safely and securely.
Two of the United States' largest aviation industry organizations agree that airports should be gun-free places of safety and security.
Charles M. Barclay, president of the American Association of Airport Executives, and Randall H. Walker, chair of the Airports Council International-North America board of directors, both wrote recent letters of support.
"I am in full support of your work to prohibit members of the public from bearing firearms at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport," said Walker in his letter. "The members of ACI-NA agree with you that the continued security threat to airports and passengers justifies the need to ban weapons from public airports."
Protecting the security rights of all travelers is the only reasonable position to have on this matter.
> Ben DeCosta, general manager of Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, said he would have Tim Bearden arrested if Bearden carried a gun onto airport property last week.
—-
Atlanta ignores basic right and state law —- again
By TIM BEARDEN
Over the past few days there have been a lot of comments about expected "showdowns" at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport due to Atlanta's defiance of state law.
Let there be no doubt about it: There will be a showdown, but it will be in the proper venue, the courts. I fully intended to go to the airport on July 1 to pick up family members coming in for the holiday. I told a reporter that I would be legally armed, exercising the expanded rights that the General Assembly passed and the governor signed into law.
Then I was told that the city of Atlanta and the airport had decided to designate the airport a "gun-free zone" —- in blatant disregard of state law and individual rights guaranteed not only by this state but by the Supreme Court of the United States just weeks ago.
I spoke with attorneys from the organization GeorgiaCarry.org, of which I am a member, and they filed a federal lawsuit on Tuesday. It's worth remembering that GeorgiaCarry.org, less than two months ago, beat the city of Atlanta on basically the same issue of the city ignoring the authority of state law.
The city at that time had in place an ordinance that would keep law-abiding citizens with firearms licenses from carrying in city parks. The city was handed a loss then and should be handed another court loss now. Apparently, the city of Atlanta has a pattern of believing it can disobey laws that don't fit Atlanta's criteria.
The new law allows law-abiding citizens, with a permit, the right to carry on public transportation and the terminal areas of public transportation. Let us review the new law, HB 89. Section 9 says, "All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this act are repealed."
So the public gathering law is in conflict to the extent that a terminal is a part of HB 89, which states, "(e) A person licensed or permitted to carry a firearm by this part shall be permitted to carry such firearm, subject to the limitations of this part, in ... public transportation notwithstanding Code Sections 16-12-122 through 16-12-127; provided, however, that a person shall not carry into a place prohibited by federal law."
The "federal law" section is something we at the General Assembly put into the law for the very purpose of making sure that nobody would misconstrue HB 89 as permitting firearms to be carried past the metal detectors at Georgia's airports.
In other words, the General Assembly fully considered the issue of lawfully carried firearms in Georgia airports when passing this law. There was no other reason to add a clause about places "prohibited by federal law" to the end of the public transportation section.
One of the statutes referenced in HB 89 defines as an "aircraft ... station, depot, any such transportation facility, or infrastructure relating thereto operated by a ... government entity," which is another way of saying "city airport."
The definition also includes designated stops for shuttles "operated by a ... government entity operating [an] aircraft ... transportation facility and parking lots or parking areas adjacent to a terminal."
So when the law is reviewed in its entirety, it is perfectly clear what the law means. It is also clear that what the city of Atlanta and the airport are doing is a blatant disregard of your rights.
The new law clearly permits legally carried firearms at transportation terminals, so long as the firearm is not carried into the areas that are "prohibited by federal law," which is the law in the vast majority of states.
Atlanta should not be permitted yet again to defy state law, even when it disagrees with the law. The city of Atlanta is not above the law.
> Tim Bearden is a Republican state representative from Villa Rica who sponsored the new law permitting licensed gun owners to carry concealed firearms in parks, on public transportation and in restaurants that serve liquor.
—-
The law says ...
Here is the key passage of House Bill 89, which became law July 1, that, its sponsor says, enables people to carry firearms in the nonsecure areas of airports:
A person licensed or permitted to carry a firearm by this part shall be permitted to carry such firearm, subject to the limitations of this part, in all parks, historic sites, and recreational areas, including all publicly owned buildings located in such parks, historic sites, and recreational areas and in wildlife management areas . . . and in public transportation notwithstanding provided, however, that a person shall not carry a firearm into a place prohibited by federal law.
A person licensed or permitted to carry a firearm by this part shall not consume alcoholic beverages in a restaurant or other eating establishment while carrying a firearm. Any person violating this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
*******************************************************************************************
I can almost pick out the words from Ben DeCosta's writing that were written by Alice Johnson of Georgians for Gun Safety (an anti organization that proclaims to be a pro-2A). It's one-person operation is a closely guarded secret by the AJC. In fact, Johnson is featured so prominently in any story that features Amendment II in Atlanta and is such a well established figure in any press conference given by Mayor Franklin that you would think that she is an accomplished expert witness or highly respected academian. There is really nothing in her background that qualifies her as a trained public policy analyst nor a firearm expert. As far as I can tell, she gets her funding through a joint cooperative between Atlanta/Fulton Commission on Children and Youth (?) and Boston University, School of Public Health, through a grant by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to the Boston University School of Public Health. That's it. I guess once you get a grant from BU it supplants the lack of any formal training in an area of public policy practice and green lights you to start any mayhem you desire way down in Georgia.
Let's see if I can pick out some of Alice's keystone words/phrases:
..risk encountering a gun-wielding individual at the world's busiest airport (dead giveaway)
...untrained people who carry guns, anywhere, but especially on airport property, have the potential to do great harm to innocent bystanders (GGS has been asked for proof to support this position several times to no avail, because there is none in GA)
...I am not against the right of individuals to bear arms. That is our right as Americans. My father was a life member of the National Rifle Association. (this is definitely a GGS text book move).
and on and on I could go. It just seems that Johnson is the brain child behind every scheme to deny Georgians of their 2A rights and equal protection under the law. America is a nation of laws and the people of Georgia, through their legislators and Governor, have loudly spoken. It's high time to end this little charade and give these folks the smack down in the courts that they so richly deserve.
See the lady in the red outfit standing in between the Chief of Atlanta PD and the Chief of Marta PD? That's Johnson. BTW, the footage is of John Monroe serving Ben DeCosta with his subpoena at the end of Mayor Franklin's press conference to declare Hartsfield a gun-free-zone. The press conference was held the day before HB89 became law (7/1/08).
moga
Member
GA State Rep. Tim Bearden, the author of HB89, debated a Brady lawyer on national news who accused firearms license holders of "thousands" of homicides, and then states that a license holder is just a "terrorist who has not committed a crime yet."
Wow. Can you believe that? The Bradies and their ilk must be pretty desperate, because they're riding the fear bandwagon for every mile that they can get from it. But terrorists? Man. That's taking it a little too far.
And reasonable people actually support these idiots with financial contributions?
Video: http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video...d=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/foxfriends/
Also, it appears that the City of Atlanta has hired an outside law firm to represent them in the federal case. How they can afford this I don't know. Just last night, a news report stated that city officials are waiting by the phone for the next round of lay-offs from the city. This after Franklin laid off 1400 city workers in April, including police and fire, to the tune of a couple hundred, in order to control the city's deepening financial crisis.
But they have the cash to pay for the Atlanta law firm Alston & Byrd? Apparently five of their attorneys will work on the case. The first hearing in federal court is scheduled for July 18th.
I can't express the contempt I have for the Mayor, both as a resident of the city and as a license holder of the State of Georgia. She's just pathetic.
GCO filed a motion for a preliminary in junction against Hartsfield-Jackson Airport and the City of Atlanta, requesting that the defendants be enjoined from arresting people for lawfully carrying firearms in the Airport during the pendency of the case against them. The brief supporting the motion and other documents may be viewed here.
Wow. Can you believe that? The Bradies and their ilk must be pretty desperate, because they're riding the fear bandwagon for every mile that they can get from it. But terrorists? Man. That's taking it a little too far.
And reasonable people actually support these idiots with financial contributions?
Video: http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video...d=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/foxfriends/
Also, it appears that the City of Atlanta has hired an outside law firm to represent them in the federal case. How they can afford this I don't know. Just last night, a news report stated that city officials are waiting by the phone for the next round of lay-offs from the city. This after Franklin laid off 1400 city workers in April, including police and fire, to the tune of a couple hundred, in order to control the city's deepening financial crisis.
But they have the cash to pay for the Atlanta law firm Alston & Byrd? Apparently five of their attorneys will work on the case. The first hearing in federal court is scheduled for July 18th.
I can't express the contempt I have for the Mayor, both as a resident of the city and as a license holder of the State of Georgia. She's just pathetic.
GCO filed a motion for a preliminary in junction against Hartsfield-Jackson Airport and the City of Atlanta, requesting that the defendants be enjoined from arresting people for lawfully carrying firearms in the Airport during the pendency of the case against them. The brief supporting the motion and other documents may be viewed here.
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
.
The plot thickens.
Well, then there's thousands of "terrorists" in the US, I wonder why they haven't attacked yet?
.
The plot thickens.
Well, then there's thousands of "terrorists" in the US, I wonder why they haven't attacked yet?
.
ctdonath
Member
Continuance has been granted.
One word comes to mind: impeachment.
One word comes to mind: impeachment.
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
This guy's right, you really need to watch this:
Must see TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcnfZ2XlGbw
Laura Ingraham is really pro-gun and she sticks it to the Brady Campaign guy.
After the Brady guy says that you shouldn't have guns in airports after 9/11, she says, "Don't you wish you had someone licensed to have a gun on that plane to stop the terrorists when they were cutting people's throats with box cutters?"
The Brady guy also says that, "the airport is not part of state" thus the law doesn't apply to it.
Hmmmm.......
Must see TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcnfZ2XlGbw
Laura Ingraham is really pro-gun and she sticks it to the Brady Campaign guy.
After the Brady guy says that you shouldn't have guns in airports after 9/11, she says, "Don't you wish you had someone licensed to have a gun on that plane to stop the terrorists when they were cutting people's throats with box cutters?"
The Brady guy also says that, "the airport is not part of state" thus the law doesn't apply to it.
Hmmmm.......
RaspberrySurprise
Member
Man that women's got quite the bite (not saying it's a bad thing either).
Also didn't DC try that not a state shenanigan all ready?
Also didn't DC try that not a state shenanigan all ready?
moga
Member
Exactly what we have down here in Atlanta.
Sam Adams
Member
I, for one, would love to see the Rat-controlled Congress pass that one and then override Bush's veto. First of all, it would have enormous political repercussions. Second, I just don't think that Justice Scalia had enough fun slapping Stevens around in Heller - he needs another opportunity.
moga
Member
Governor Perdue: Guns should be OK at airport
Monday, July 14, 2008, 01:07 PM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/index.html
Gov. Sonny Perdue said Monday that he believes guns should be allowed in the non-secure areas of Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.
A new state law that went into effect July allows individuals who pass background checks to carry concealed weapons on public transportation, in state parks and restaurants that serve alcohol.
But the question of whether that extends to parts of the airport is the subject of a federal lawsuit. Perdue on Monday said he has not asked for a legal opinion on the issue, but that his “lay opinion” would be that guns would be allowed in the airport’s parking lots, atrium and all areas before the security gates. Guns would still not be allowed in the boarding gates or terminals, which require security screening, he said.
Asked whether it was his opinion that it was a good idea to allow guns at the airport, Perude said yes.
“If my wife wanted to carry a gun, if she was going from the parking lot, walking from one of those far parking lots to pick up a grandchild or something like that, I think that’s a good idea, yes,” he said.
The gun rights group GeorgiaCarry.org is suing the city of Atlanta and its airport over restrictions on firearms in the terminal. They’ve asked a federal judge for a temporary order stopping officials from arresting anyone caught with a weapon. A hearing is set for July 18.
The day the new gun law took effect, airport officials threatened to arrest a state legislator who had announced he planned to bring a handgun to the airport when he went there to pick up visitors. Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin and Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport General Manager Ben DeCosta said guns in the airport would violate another state law that bans firearms at “public gatherings, ” and said they would have police arrest anyone bringing a firearm to the airport.
In the request for a temporary restraining order, attorney John Monroe said state Rep. Tim Bearden’s Fourth Amendment protection from illegal searches and seizures would be violated if he were arrested for exercising his Second Amendment right to carry a gun inside nonsecured areas of the airport.
The motion for a temporary restraining order said Bearden, a Villa Rica Republican, would be harmed if the airport carried out its threat to arrest him while the airport would not suffer harm waiting until there is a decision on the suit.
More ominous signs that the City's leadership is inept: http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2008/07/11/atlanta_police_budget_cuts.html
AND
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2008/06/05/atlanta_cfo_quits.html
BUT at least there's money to prevent peaceable, law abiding citizens from exercising their IIA rights at HJAIA.
Monday, July 14, 2008, 01:07 PM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/index.html
Gov. Sonny Perdue said Monday that he believes guns should be allowed in the non-secure areas of Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.
A new state law that went into effect July allows individuals who pass background checks to carry concealed weapons on public transportation, in state parks and restaurants that serve alcohol.
But the question of whether that extends to parts of the airport is the subject of a federal lawsuit. Perdue on Monday said he has not asked for a legal opinion on the issue, but that his “lay opinion” would be that guns would be allowed in the airport’s parking lots, atrium and all areas before the security gates. Guns would still not be allowed in the boarding gates or terminals, which require security screening, he said.
Asked whether it was his opinion that it was a good idea to allow guns at the airport, Perude said yes.
“If my wife wanted to carry a gun, if she was going from the parking lot, walking from one of those far parking lots to pick up a grandchild or something like that, I think that’s a good idea, yes,” he said.
The gun rights group GeorgiaCarry.org is suing the city of Atlanta and its airport over restrictions on firearms in the terminal. They’ve asked a federal judge for a temporary order stopping officials from arresting anyone caught with a weapon. A hearing is set for July 18.
The day the new gun law took effect, airport officials threatened to arrest a state legislator who had announced he planned to bring a handgun to the airport when he went there to pick up visitors. Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin and Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport General Manager Ben DeCosta said guns in the airport would violate another state law that bans firearms at “public gatherings, ” and said they would have police arrest anyone bringing a firearm to the airport.
In the request for a temporary restraining order, attorney John Monroe said state Rep. Tim Bearden’s Fourth Amendment protection from illegal searches and seizures would be violated if he were arrested for exercising his Second Amendment right to carry a gun inside nonsecured areas of the airport.
The motion for a temporary restraining order said Bearden, a Villa Rica Republican, would be harmed if the airport carried out its threat to arrest him while the airport would not suffer harm waiting until there is a decision on the suit.
More ominous signs that the City's leadership is inept: http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2008/07/11/atlanta_police_budget_cuts.html
AND
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/atlanta/stories/2008/06/05/atlanta_cfo_quits.html
BUT at least there's money to prevent peaceable, law abiding citizens from exercising their IIA rights at HJAIA.
PershingRiflesC-7
Member
moga wrote:
Inept??? Such a polite turn of a word for such a band of thumb-my-nose-at-the-law politicians: "security for me and none for thee!"
:banghead:
Inept??? Such a polite turn of a word for such a band of thumb-my-nose-at-the-law politicians: "security for me and none for thee!"
:banghead:moga
Member
usmarine0352_2005
member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 2,796
I didn't realize what the fire station closure had to do with guns. But now I see how much of a budget crisis their in. Good their spending taxpayer dollars wisely.
:banghead:
moga
Member
The fact that the Mayor continues to give out walking papers to the people that provide essential services to Atlanta's residents, along with her penchant to creatively interpret the laws of the State to ultimately disarm licensed gun carriers, shows where the priorities lie under Franklin's administration. Emergency workers are not needed for city residents. Who needs fire houses and police officers in a city where random, violent crime is ridiculous and vacant houses are in frequent use by either dopers or copper thieves? Disarmament of peaceable citizens is a much higher priority. To that end, funnel the scarce tax dollars that are still somehow floating around to the big, expensive law firm in spite of the City not having a leg on which to stand in the case. Don't like the law that the Georgia Assembly passed and Governor Perdue signed? Just ignore it and pretend that Georgia Annotated reads differently than it actually does. Then put FD out to pasture to pay for the smucks to have a circus in Federal courts at my expense, both literally and figuratively.
/RANT
/RANT
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
