A call for stronger gun control

By Rick Badie

State Rep. Paul Battles, of Cartersville, has proposed legislation that would allow school administrators to undergo annual state peace officer firearms training and be certified to carry weapons on campus. Though he supports HB 35, a guest columnist says state law already allows administrators to possess firearms on campuses. A retired pediatrician suggests addressing gun control in a multifaceted manner.

Existing law allows armed principals

By John Monroe

GeorgiaCarry.Org agrees with the general proposition ensconced in HB 35, that our schools would be safer if responsible citizens could be armed on campus. GeorgiaCarry also agrees that firearms training is a good idea for everyone, even those who do not own or carry firearms. The specifics of HB 35, however, make the bill difficult to incorporate into existing law.

HB 35 would permit school boards to designate certain school administrators to undergo state Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST) instruction and then be authorized to carry firearms in schools. The difficulty is that existing law already is more expansive than that. Under O.C.G.A. 16-11-127.1(c)(6), a “duly authorized official of the school” may authorize anyone (not just school administrators) to carry a firearm at a school. Presumably, a school principal is a duly authorized official and may therefore authorize anyone, including himself or herself, to carry a firearm. Existing law has no training requirement.

If enacted, HB 35 would create another avenue by which a school administrator could be armed at school, by permission of the school board. It seems highly unlikely, however, that the provisions of HB 35 ever would be utilized. Given that the school principal already has the power to arm herself, her staff, her teachers and even her students’ parents, going through the more cumbersome steps of seeking school board approval and paying for training in a course that has not yet been developed are not likely to be pursued.

In addition to existing avenues for school officials to authorize anyone to carry firearms at schools, existing law also permits those with weapons carry licenses to carry firearms in schools under certain circumstances, without the knowledge or consent of school officials. Under O.C.G.A. 16-11-127.1(c)(7), a person with a license may carry a firearm in a school “when such person carries or picks up a student.” Licensees also may have firearms in their cars in school parking lots. Many parents take advantage of these provisions today on a regular basis when they take their children to and from school.

Georgia has a vast, untapped resource available to it to help protect its schools. There are some 600,000 Georgians with weapons carry licenses who have undergone criminal and mental health background checks by state and federal law enforcement agencies. Many of them are administrators, staff, teachers and parents who regularly are present on school grounds. Modifying the law so that such people are not prohibited from carrying firearms in school buildings, even when not picking up or dropping off students, would immediately enhance the ability of Georgia schools to protect themselves against aggressive attacks.

John Monroe is vice president of GeorgiaCarry.Org.

Let us make our children safe

By Noel Preston

Georgia has 2,487 public schools. The last fatal school shooting was at Monticello in August 1999. It makes no sense to pay, train, equip and insure 2,487 school principals to patrol schools that have had no fatal shootings for 13 years.

Some of our school campuses are so large, the principal and the invader might be a quarter-mile from each other, and the invader could shoot dozens of children before being shot or captured. The principal might be at an off-campus meeting when the invader arrived. The principal could hardly be expected to maintain firearm proficiency by having only two days a year of shooting practice. Expecting a principal to risk his or her own life without receiving a substantial pay raise and necessary health insurance for hazardous duty seems unfair and unrealistic.

Many factors make it easy for invaders to shoot school children. A sensible approach to reduce school shootings must be multifaceted as well. Some shooters were victims of bullying; reducing bullying at school is an obvious first step. Children are not afraid of metal detectors at airports, and would not be afraid of them at school, either.

Claiming “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” is absurd. Too many small children accidentally kill their parents, siblings and other folk while playing with a gun that was supposedly locked up, unloaded and out of reach. Making it harder for anyone to get any firearm is critical. Requiring gun buyers to have criminal background checks and their drivers’ licenses screened for previous road rage or aggressive driving events, and addressing previous mental health concerns by providing prescription records for mind-altering drugs before being allowed to purchase a firearm, are all logical steps to curtail mass shootings. So is closing the loophole that waives the requirement for criminal background checks for purchasers of firearms sold at gun shows.

Gun control advocates claim the Second Amendment was written to protect the rights of farmers to have single-shot squirrel rifles, not to allow crazy people to have assault rifles. When the Second Amendment was written, the “government” didn’t have assault rifles, either.

Any attempt to bring about gun control must not interfere with the right of the citizenry to bear arms. The Second Amendment is one of the reasons America went to war against England in the first place. It’s not going away.

Now, while the images of freckle-faced little children, some of them missing their two front teeth, stare at us from the pages of newspapers and television screens, now, while their faces cry out to us for action, now, while we feel ashamed for failing to protect them, now we must act.

Get rid of the assault rifle. Get rid of armor-piercing bullets and anti-personnel ammunition. Only an outright ban on these machines of murder, these instruments of killing innocent young children who still dream of puppies and tooth fairies and Santa Claus, will do any good.

And let us make our children safe.

Noel Preston is a retired Atlanta pediatrician.

 

31 comments Add your comment

Truth

January 31st, 2013
2:13 pm

Mr Preston,

Assault rifles are illegal. They have been since 1934, before the invention of the assault rifle, when the national firearms act made the ownership of automatic weapons highly regulated. What you are whining about is a civilian firearm that has the cosmetic appearance of an assault rifle. It is no different in function than many hunting rifles.

Armor-piercing ammunition is illegal. It is classified as a “dangerous item” under the aforementioned National Firearms Act.

“Anti-personnel ammunition” is actually the most survivable and humane ammunition on the market. If these killers were using hunting ammo, there would be no wounded, only the dead. Hunting ammunition creates such horrific wounds that even being shot in the leg is highly fatal.

Please stop speaking from ignorance and stick to what you know. I DO hope your medical knowledge is broader than your obvious lack of knowledge on this subject.

TBone

January 31st, 2013
11:21 am

OK while this regime has created yet another crisis due to some deranged individuals, we can rest easy to know that the economy has been fixed because our skeet shooter in chief has put the sunset on his jobs council that never really met?!? I think the Burger King and Ronald McDonald were the only two members but they can go back to hawking burgers.

too little time

January 31st, 2013
11:05 am

Georgia has 2,487 public schools. The last fatal school shooting was at Monticello in August 1999. It makes no sense to pay, train, equip and insure 2,487 school principals to patrol schools that have had no fatal shootings for 13 years.

But it make more sense to ban semi automatic firearms from MILLIONS of Georgia households to prevent the fatal shootings that haven’t occurred for 13 years? Seriously… that’s your argument?

ClydeFr0g

January 31st, 2013
11:01 am

USC, way to go with the cherry-picking reply! Care to respond to the rest of my posted response to your nonsense or are you just conceding that I was correct and everything else you said that I responded to was idiotic garbage?

Specifically;

* Your “paranoid psychosis” that you can’t function without peeing your pants out of the fear that no matter where you go there will be a psycho with an AR ready to gun you down, despite the FACT that the OVERWHELMING majority of gun owners are peaceful, freedom-loving, productive citizens.

* You don’t understand what a traitor is and that you and your militant socialist liberal pals are exactly traitors to the Constitution which is the law of the land whether you like it or not. The harder idiots like you push to erode the rights of American citizens, the harder freedom-loving citizens will hold onto those rights.

* Your irrational and fantasy-land beliefs that cities like Chicago with the strictest gun control and among the highest murder rates are a freaking liberal utopia and cities like Kennesaw where guns are mandatory by law and have very low crime and murder rates need to ditch what they are doing right and “try something new”.

Care to respond? Your silence is your acknowledgement that you have no clue what you are talking about.

As for your new diversionary;

Why do you think it matters that Wayne LaPierre has a “nervous condition”? In your mind that means someone shouldn’t be able to exercise their Second Amendment RIGHT? How about someone with dyslexia? I already know, in your mind the mere virtue of wanting to exercise your Second Amendment right makes a citizen crazy and therefore ineligible to exercise their Second Amendment right!

I know very well what “well regulated” means, and AS I STATED IN MY PREVIOUS POST, it had a different meaning when the Constitution was written. If you bother to look the word up yourself you will see what I mean. But I don’t want you to have to abandon your fantasy that the Second Amendment only pertains to the military’s right to bear arms! Too bad for you the Supreme Court agrees with me and has on more than one occasion.

And what about my background check? I know you and your militant liberal pals don’t believe in the citizens right to privacy and think you have the right to know everything about everybody, but unfortunately for you I have a right to privacy so I can tell morons like you to go to hell. So go to hell!

USC, I am convinced idiots like you will not be satisfied until the Constitution is in shreds, padding the floor of a hamster cage. I don’t know who you expect to do this for you. The military and the police have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, not your backwards militant liberal ideals. There are plenty of other countries in the world where you can go that you don’t have to cry yourself to sleep at night worrying about the boogie man coming for you with an AR. If you hate America, our laws, and our traditions so much I suggest you go find someplace else to live. And please take a few of your lying crybaby liberal snots with you.

markie mark

January 31st, 2013
9:30 am

Dear Mr Preston – regarding this statement – “So is closing the loophole that waives the requirement for criminal background checks for purchasers of firearms sold at gun shows.:

Please do some research and educate yourself before you comment again. There is NO gun show loophole. Go to any gun show, to any licensed dealers table, and you will have to have a background check. The only instance where no background checks are required is when I sell MY gun on a personal sale. What next? What is the next piece of commerce you wish to interject yourself and the government into? Land? Cars? Vehicles kill more people in a month than guns ever do. Are you going to require background checks on private sales of cars? This is the proverbial slippery slope that you hear about. And the object of your attention is something specifically protected by the US Constitution.

While I feel terrible for the tragedies caused by deranged people with guns, they are statistically very small compared to everyday occurrences that cause death in our country. While sympathetic, I am not going to stand idly by and not argue in support of the right to own a weapon, large capacity clip and all, as the liberal democrats continue their agenda of incrementally chipping away at this right. Things we thought would not happen in a million years in our society only 25 years ago are commonplace today. If we do not fight for this, 25 years from now gun ownership may be only a memory of how things used to be.

Raisin Toast Fanatic

January 31st, 2013
9:11 am

Now, while the images of freckle-faced little children, some of them missing their two front teeth, stare at us from the pages of newspapers and television screens, now, while their faces cry out to us for action, now, while we feel ashamed for failing to protect them, now we must act.

Here we go again with an emotion-based post, just more of the same in which rationality is less important that a feel-good knee-jerk reaction.

I just get so tired of it.

USC

January 31st, 2013
6:35 am

Now we know why the N.R.A. has reversed it’s position on background checks. It turns out (not a well kept secret) that Wayne LaPierre, the C.E.O., has a ‘nervous condition’. Like the Arizona shooter, he was rejected by the U.S. Army.

Clyde – you may not know what WELL REGULATED means but most of us do. Look it up if you need help. What about your background check?

ClydeFr0g

January 30th, 2013
9:08 pm

Actually USC,at the time of the writing of the Constitution (and even today to a lesser degree) “regulated” meant practiced, efficient, equipped. It’s not as simple as your “well regulated means well regulated” comment.

Talk about “paranoid psychosis”…let’s talk about that for a minute. You are more likely to get killed by lightening than by a crazy person with an assault rifle in a “mass shooting”. The OVERWHELMING majority of guns are not used in crime, and the OVERWHELMING majority of legal gun owners never commit murder. So what are YOU paranoid of that you want to take away a RIGHT of those 80 million Americans protected by the Constitution? Sounds like YOU are the one with the “paranoid psychosis”!

“Traitors” are people that wish to usurp the authority granted to THE PEOPLE by the Constitution which are clearly folks like YOU that want to wipe your @$$ with the Constitution.

Want to talk about proposals that clearly haven’t ever worked? Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country and one of the highest murder rates in the country. How well are those draconian gun control laws working out up there? Kennesaw has a law that all households MUST have a gun and they have a very low crime rate. How do you figure that happens USC?

You are too dense to get it I know, still, I’m going to make it simple:

CRIMINALS DON’T FOLLOW THE LAW. They don’t care about magazine restrictions or “assault weapon” bans. CRIMINALS will still have these things. You think passing a law prohibiting these things is going to make all the criminals decide to be good boys all of a sudden? Or you think banning guns will make them unavailable, you know, just like banning heroin, cocaine, crack, meth, etc. makes those things unavailable?

Can you REALLY be that stupid?

Don Edwards

January 30th, 2013
8:57 pm

If ANYONE can craft a law that will keep evil people from doing evil things, I promise to grind every firearm I own into very fine dust. I would do so on national TV, and while shaking the hand of the author. It can not be done.

The Constitution has always meant very much to the service members, law enforcement officers, firemen, and others who have taken the oath to “preserve and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. Why then do we think it’s necessary to discount the hundreds of thousands of lives lost, in defense of the Constitution? To do so is akin to leaving a comrade on the battlefield. NEVER!

Wilbur

January 30th, 2013
8:33 pm

Breathless liberals have decided to demonize 80 million americans who own guns as crazy terrorists. I think its the stalinist democrats who are the crazies.