GA- Bill allows citizens to defend themselves

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lightsped

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
1,241
Location
Kennesaw, Georgia
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 03/03/06
Georgians would be able to use deadly force to defend themselves in public areas such as parking lots and sidewalks under a National Rifle Association bill that passed the state Senate on Thursday.

The measure expands state law which allows Georgians to use deadly force in their homes or vehicles. The Senate approved Senate Bill 396 by a vote of 40-13, and the measure now heads to the House.

"We already have a very strong law in the state of Georgia, but I felt a couple of pieces were missing from the puzzle," said state Sen. Greg Goggans (R-Douglas), the bill's sponsor. "This makes the law stronger for all the law-abiding citizens and victims in this state. This is about putting common sense into code."

Several Democrats, however, expressed concerns that the bill would open the door to more violence because Georgians would be freer to claim self-defense.

"This is a recipe for murder," state Sen. Regina Thomas (D-Savannah) said. "We are trying so hard in this state — especially in Chatham County — to reduce crimes of any nature." She also expressed concern that the measure could increase the number of hate crimes in Georgia. But Goggans argued there was no evidence that the bill would encourage an increase in such crimes.

The NRA has been pushing similar bills, called "castle doctrine" legislation, in several states.

"We believe this is good public policy," said Andrew Arulanandam, spokesman for the National Rifle Association. "It is designed to place the law in favor of the victim.

"Contrary to claims, all this bill does is provide victims an option ... to either stand their ground or not. When a crime occurs, victims don't have the luxury of time. With the passage of this measure, they will have more options available."

Goggans told colleagues the measure would change Georgia's current law in four key areas. The bill:

•Extends the ability of Georgians to use deadly force beyond their homes, vehicles, personal property and businesses into the public arena.

•Puts into Georgia code that law-abiding citizens have no duty to retreat if attacked, a matter upon which the law is currently silent.

•Grants immunity from criminal prosecution to those who justifiably use deadly force, unless they used an unlawful weapon in protecting themselves.

•Grants people who use deadly force immunity from civil actions.

Several groups, such as Georgians for Gun Safety, have argued in the past few months that the measure could lead to more violence and expressed disappointment with lawmakers following the vote.

"They didn't think or care about the danger that the public will face when people use deadly force to settle disputes in public places," said Alice Johnson, director of Georgians for Gun Safety. "The message is that you can use deadly force anywhere and there will be no repercussions."

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/0303legguns.html
 
Now if I was just allowed to carry a gun in the national forest. Still, one step closer.
 
Our concealed carry permit in Georgia has some major flaws... can't carry into restaurants serving alcohol, or at public gatherings. And it no longer exempts the NICS check.

Overall though, Georgia isnt too bad compared to other states, but it is not as good as Florida.
 
The not carrying in restaurants was addressed last year, but the Atlanta restaurant owners nixed it. Those idiots don't realize that the exposure isn't inside their restaurants, but getting to and from their restaurants.
 
I'd heard about this legislation and as usual the antis have it all wrong.

One thing everybody needs to remember is that for deadly force to have been in self defense, the threat must be real and not imagined. It must be serious enough that the defender was in fear for life and limb... as in the gravest extreme.

Puts into Georgia code that law-abiding citizens have no duty to retreat if attacked, a matter upon which the law is currently silent.

I've always said with my disability, I cannot run and hide in the event I were attacked. So now if I were, God forbid, attacked and in fear for my life, what common sense already said would be legally recognized and not at the whim of some district attorneys, and jury members. So, I consider it a good thing in part because "fight or flight" is not always easy to figure out and citizens of a civilized country shouldn't have to be scared by a two-legged predatory animal into running from a place they have every right to be.

Our concealed carry permit in Georgia has some major flaws... can't carry into restaurants serving alcohol, or at public gatherings. And it no longer exempts the NICS check.

To my mind, a bar can be the worst place to be without a weapon. Then there's the question of "what is a public gathering". Sporting events are self-explanatory, especially on school property, but in restraunts and such is a different story and subject to interpretation varying in different jurisdictions. I was put out by the part about it no longer exempting NICS as it casts doubt on my legal status while I posess my GFL (GA 'ccw'). They granted me legal recognition to CCW, yet they seem to doubt my character when I go to buy a gun. It's wierd.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 03/03/06
Georgians would be able to use deadly force to defend themselves in public areas such as parking lots and sidewalks under a National Rifle Association bill that passed the state Senate on Thursday

While I agree with the intent of the new law, I wonder why it was labeled
as a "National Rifle Association bill". Does the NRA have the authority to
introduce legislation in the Georgia State Senate? I doubt it. I feel sure the
AJ-C threw the "NRA" tag in to taint the bill.

I don't doubt for a minute that the NRA might be behind the bill, and
heavily promoted its passage. It just tics me off when some of the
press distort the workings of government to stick it to one of their
chosen enemies. And I know that a lot of the news media have chosen
to make the NRA their enemy. From what I have read, I think a lot of
those numbnuts believe the "Bill of Rights" should have stopped after
the First Amendment.

Walter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top