Posted on 02/17/2012 5:59:06 AM PST by marktwain
Georgians would be allowed to carry concealed weapons in bars, public schools, most government buildings, college campuses and other locations under a sweeping gun bill filed in the House.
In addition to banishing many current restrictions, House Bill 981 would prevent police or the National Guard from disarming people during states of emergency, and it would allow citizens to sue if that occurred.
Rep. Sean Jerguson, R-Woodstock, one of the bill's co-sponsors, said Thursday that it strikes a balance between the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to bear arms, and personal property rights. For instance, any church or business, such as a restaurant or bar, would be able to decide whether to allow concealed weapons, he said, and regulations that limit the right to carry, such as when consuming alcohol, are still in place.
Critics say it goes too far and could endanger the public.
Rep. Roger Bruce, D-Atlanta, introduced a bill this session that would require four hours of training for anyone who gets a permit to carry a concealed weapon. The bill, which he described as "common sense," has yet to have a hearing in a committee.
Bruce said he does not understand why gun rights supporters have filed so many bills in recent legislative sessions to loosen requirements for carrying deadly weapons and allowing them in places such as schools.
"I keep trying to figure out what they are preparing for?" he said. "Is there some war they have to be ready for? Is there something pending that the rest of us need to know about?"
It's too soon to gauge the success of HB 981. Legislative leaders have been moving with slow deliberation this year, saying they want to fix problems such as the crisis created by a state Supreme Court ruling striking down the state's ability to set up charter schools, and address other important issues such as the budget. There has been little appetite to move on less critical and hotly contested bills that would take up time in committees and floor debates.
Jerguson predicted hearty debate over the bill. Lawmakers previously tried to pass many of HB 981's proposed rules during previous legislative sessions. A bill passed in 2010 expanded where those with concealed carry permits could take their guns, but churches, colleges and schools were excluded from that law.
Some college students and others have advocated for guns to be allowed on campuses following recent attacks on or near Georgia Tech, Georgia State and the Atlanta University Center. While those incidents didn't prompt the legislation, some lawmakers said it explains why the bill is needed.
Only people older than 21 can get a concealed weapons permit, which would limit the number of college students eligible.
Twenty-two states currently ban carrying a concealed weapon on college campuses, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. At least 11 states, including Georgia, have bills that would in some way allow guns on campuses, the group says.
University System of Georgia officials have repeatedly supported maintaining the current law, which prohibits people from carrying guns on college campuses. Students can't keep weapons in dorms or classrooms, but they may keep them locked in their cars.
Georgia Tech and other colleges say campus security already works to keep students safe. Tech police recently purchased a mobile surveillance system to monitor locations around campus. The college has urged students to register for Jacket Guardian, a free mobile tool that enhances police response.
Robert Eagar, a junior at Georgia Tech, said being able to carry a gun will let students feel safe while walking home. Eagar, who leads Tech's chapter of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, said there have been no incidents at colleges where concealed carry is permitted.
"Individuals should have the same right to protect themselves on campus as they do off campus," he said.
Eager said he appreciated other changes promoted within the bill. Changes in the legislation include banning firearms registration, legalizing hunting with silencers and preventing state agencies from regulating gun shows.
Some students worry about allowing guns on campus considering problems already exist with underage drinking.
"This is ridiculous," said Alex Rowell, a University of Georgia freshman. "I don't think I'd feel any safer knowing another student was carrying a gun."
Jerguson said he has heard criticism in the past that there will be bad consequences from people carrying guns, but that has not happened since 2008, when a law allowed carrying weapons into restaurants where alcohol is served.
"The opposition used that clause ‘the Wild West,' " he said. "But you know how many incidents there have been since 2008? None."
"We will see some of that this time," Jerguson said. "I think there will be a good, healthy debate."
Carrying concealed weapons
House Bill 981 would allow people with concealed weapons permits to carry guns on almost all public properties. Exceptions include jail, courtrooms and nuclear facilities. Here are some places where guns would be permitted:
Public schools and colleges
Bars and restaurants
Places of worship
Polling places
Government buildings, including the state Capitol
Source: House Bill 981
That will do plenty in assuring FREEDOM FROM TYRRANY!
LIBERTY!
FREEDOM OF CHOICE!
I had understood there was a bill to eliminate CCW Permits and allow constitutional carry as well.
Rep. Roger Bruce, D-Atlanta, introduced a bill this session that would require four hours of training for anyone who gets a permit to carry a concealed weapon. The bill, which he described as "common sense," has yet to have a hearing in a committee.
Ah yes, the hackneyed "common sense" meaning anything from from what this moron proposes to complete bans. As in England's "common sense" gun regulations.
Bruce said ... "I keep trying to figure out what they are preparing for?" he said. "Is there some war they have to be ready for? Is there something pending that the rest of us need to know about?"
I guess this moron/democrat never heard of Columbine of Va Tech.
The sad and frightening thing is: HE REPRESENTS THE VIEWPOINS OF THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS IN HIS DISTRICT. We don't have just one enemy. We have thousands in his district alone.
Georgia Tech and other colleges say campus security already works to keep students safe.
And fine job they're doing of it too. < - sarcasm in case it wasn't obvious > For a while there were at least one student robbed a week on or in the immediate vicinity of the GA Tech campus. The robberies tapered off when the wether got colder.
The Urinal/Constipation is at least as anti-second amendment was the Wash Compost. And this slanted article is just another shot at presenting their baised view.
"I keep trying to figure out what they are preparing for?" he said. "Is there some war they have to be ready for? Is there something pending that the rest of us need to know about?"
No, Roger the people just do not trust the government.
The American public has never been in greater danger than it is right now--but from the Decadence that is destroying the United States with cultural and moral rot within--not from an armed populace capable of defending itself when government can not or will not and, in many cases, seeks to restrain people from defending themselves!
Never greater danger! Not during the Civil War! Not during the Great Depression! Not during World War II! Americans have never been in greater danger!
The danger today comes from Decadence, internal moral and cultural rot, a press that utterly fails in its duty to inform truthfully the public (note tagline), and a fifth column in powerful positions which seeks to destroy and/or severly weaken the United States.
Never before have Americans been in such danger!
And if government will not protect the people--or if government poses a danger to the people--it is the right of the people--and it is the DUTY of the people--to protect themselves and their families!
But, regulating private property owners, ie bar and restaurants are an issue...however, allowing use on 'public' buildings is common sense and right.
This is stupid.
More stupidity.
More stupid ritual that has no meaning.
California is full of such laws. And Californians spend a great deal of thier time figuring out ways around these laws. Leftists love to pass laws that have no meaning--clutter up the law with regulations that have no common sense value. Then they feel that they have done something whereas they have not. One reason Leftists love such laws is that it enables them to enforce them selectively.
What is anyone going to learn in 4 hours? Those who want to know how to work the damn thing will find out. Those who don't will go throught the motions and learn nothing.
Is this sentence a mandatory inclusion? Is it in the AP style book or something?
It is cowardice twice over: the authors slip in their personal views without claiming same and shift the sentiment to others - and don't worry, there are always others (i.e. the 'critics').
It's similar to stories about alcohol in which the authors run dutifully over to MADD or Alcoholics Anonymous for a tut-tut quote.
Hussein's thugs won't like that.
If things got that bad, I doubt there'd be anyone to sue.
I think most armed Georgians would respond a little more forcefully than with a tort case in the situation of someone, anyone attempting to deprive them of one of their constitutionally articulated rights at a time they needed it the most.
“For instance, any church or business, such as a restaurant or bar, would be able to decide whether to allow concealed weapons, he said, and regulations that limit the right to carry, such as when consuming alcohol, are still in place. “
The problem this presents is that the average person, going about their daily life and errands, finds that when a few places of business they frequent ban concealed carry, then the hassle factor makes carrying too much of a pain.
I would counter that concealed carry makes it just as much of a private matter as carrying HIV. We would not think of allowing a business the right to post a sign that forbids anyone carrying HIV from coming on to the premises. Nor would we allow a business to ban people who are wearing a certain style of underwear. Since it should be unlawful to allow a lawfully concealed weapon to be visible except in an exigent circumstance, whether or not a person is carrying is a totally private matter.
In Missouri, the law allows posting of a premises via legally defined signage (another important issue!), but the penalty for violating the sign is to make the permit holder liable for trespass, which in fact everyone is anyway.
see: 571.107 (2):
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c500-599/5710000107.htm
“Carrying of a concealed firearm in a location specified in subdivisions (1) to (17) of subsection 1 of this section by any individual who holds a concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 shall not be a criminal act but may subject the person to denial to the premises or removal from the premises. If such person refuses to leave the premises and a peace officer is summoned, such person may be issued a citation for an amount not to exceed one hundred dollars for the first offense.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.