The politics of packing heat in public places
This summer, Georgiacarry.org gathered up several Republican candidates for governor, to quiz them on their attitudes toward firearms.
The gun group is a recent entry into the annual confrontations in the Legislature over where and when licensed Georgians can carry firearms.
But its members are among the state’s most ardent believers in the Second Amendment. Many of them think that, when it comes to defending the right to keep and bear arms, the National Rifle Association has been a tad wimpish.
Georgiacarry’s top priority is the abolition of the state’s ban on weaponry at church assemblies, athletic events, political rallies, on college and school campuses, and in public buildings.
One of August’s great ironies was U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey’s defense of those who carried firearms to fiery town hall meetings where health care reform was debated. In the Marietta congressman’s home state, the practice is illegal.
The politics of packing heat in public places is difficult for Georgia Republicans. While the base is often gung-ho, many strategists worry that the idea of hidden pistols at PTA meetings and prayer services is a middle-class turn-off.
Last week, Georgiacarry kindly provided the audio from that summer panel discussion.
One of the participants was state Rep. Sean Jerguson (R-Holly Springs), a Georgiacarry member, who said he believes so strongly in gun ownership that, when his daughter turned 4 years old, he gave her a “pink .22.” His son was about to turn the same age, and would get a blue one, the lawmaker said.
But the focus was on three candidates for governor: State Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine, state Rep. Austin Scott of Tifton, and Ray McBerry of McDonough. A stand-in appeared for Secretary of State Karen Handel. Libertarian candidate John Mond also attended.
Oxendine told the gun crowd that he thought licensed carriers should be allowed to pack heat “virtually” anywhere – except for courtrooms, prisons and jails.
“I wouldn’t feel bad at all if someone wanted to carry a gun in the Governor’s Mansion. We may go out on the back porch and shoot a few wine bottles or something,” he said.
But drinking while carrying a concealed firearm is a no-no. “Commissioner Oxendine, you’d have to change the no-alcohol policy first,” Scott interjected.
“That will be done the day I’m sworn in, don’t worry,” Oxendine said.
The spokesman for Handel declared that the secretary of state was likewise a strong believer in H.B. 615, sponsored by state Rep. Tim Bearden (R-Villa Rica), which would do away with Georgia’s public assembly restrictions.
The only Republican to disappoint Georgiacarry was Scott, who declared himself a gun enthusiast, but said he couldn’t support a wholesale dismantling of the state’s public assembly law. “I wouldn’t be honest with you if I told you that as governor I was going to let you carry firearms into a high school football game,” Scott said.
Last week, U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal said he could support an end to restrictions on firearms at public gatherings. But Eric Johnson, the former senator from Savannah, was more careful. “It is not something the campaign senses is a principle concern of Georgia voters,” said campaign manager Ben Fry. Jobs and the economy are greater worries.
That kind of division indicates that the issue of gun rights could play a significant role in the Republican primary.
(Among Democratic candidates for governor, DuBose Porter and David Poythress oppose any changes to the state’s rules on public packing. “A family should be able to go to the circus on a Friday night at Phillips Arena and feel confident that their children aren’t sitting next to someone with a loaded .357,” Poythress said. Thurbert Baker and Roy Barnes are more fuzzy.)
Georgiacarry would prefer that the public assembly debate also become a focus of the Legislature when it convenes in January. But this is less likely.
At about the same time that lawmakers gather in Atlanta, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on a Chicago case that could very well determine what restrictions cities and states can place on an individual’s right to carry weaponry.
That will cause many to argue for a postponement of any changes to Georgia’s public assembly laws.
Then there’s the matter of the man who’s no longer running for governor. With his ambition postponed, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, the Republican leader of the Senate, is under no immediate obligation to cater to gun interests.
Last week, at its fall retreat, the Senate GOP caucus agreed to back S.B. 291, a bill sponsored by state Sen. David Shafer of Duluth. The measure would assert the gun-toting rights of motorists driving up to drop-off/pick-up areas of Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport .
But otherwise, the bill would not tinker with restrictions on firearms in public spaces.
A 2008 bill, passed into law and backed by Georgiacarry, allowed concealed weaponry on MARTA and other forms of public transportation. But a federal judge ruled this spring that Hartsfield would remain off-limits to armed commuters.
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
183 comments Add your comment
Naomi
October 17th, 2009
4:38 pm
Why aren’t there any quotes from Ray McBerry? If he was one of the candidates that was being focused on, why no quotes from him?
Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis
October 17th, 2009
5:17 pm
Those having to mince words concerning the Second Amendment, other than on Judicial, Penal, or Law Enforcement campuses where civil common sense suggests only officials of the People’s servant, the State, sworn and with badges, should be “carrying,” reveal a want of awareness as to just what “America” means: Alien culture has imposed itself in our midst.
The G-dless “fox with no tail,” ignorant of, or opposed to, the concept of vigilant, righteous, prepared Citizen Sovereign fully apprised of The Founders’ bequest and G-d’s holy Covenant, tries to convince good and decent Georgians and Americans to “cut off” the Divine “Brush” we each can and should “sport” from American Birth.
They are worms and a cancer upon us.
If law school draft-dodger Barnes now wishes to dither on being as stupid as NG “proptop lawyer” Poythress, Georgians need merely recall who made firecrackers illegal in the state which has provided, disproportionate to the other states, more young men and women to Our Armed Forces’ schools to further develop munitions and ballistics “craft.”
However, giving a four-year-old a .22 falls into the same category as illegally turning on the sirens and lights of a state-issued car to pass the citizenry in traffic, running late for a date, and lying about it: “Moron/False American/False Man, First Class.”
Keith
October 17th, 2009
5:19 pm
Ray McBerry? Get over it… he ain’t happening
Not Kasim
October 17th, 2009
5:44 pm
http://www.notkasim.blogspot.com
Ray
October 17th, 2009
6:53 pm
At my church we often pray for God to left the fear the engulfs those who feel the need to carry a gun. After all, God’s love is happiness and freedom. Without a doubt, those who sport a firearm are too scared to ever experience real freedom. How sad.
Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis
October 17th, 2009
7:09 pm
Read History, foreigner.
Carl from Chicago
October 17th, 2009
7:09 pm
Will Jones:
What on earth are you talking about, and what does it have to do with our right to carry defensive arms in public?
MLeake
October 17th, 2009
7:31 pm
No alcohol policy change? It’s already unlawful to consume alcohol while exercising concealed carry rights; I believe a misdemeanor charge attaches, with good odds of loss of permit.
Kathy
October 17th, 2009
7:36 pm
It is disappointing, but not suprising that the author failed to mention the overwhelming applause that Ray McBerry received when he spoke at the GeorgiaCarry event when he declared that any federal agent who tried to disarm a law-abiding Georgia citizen (as was done during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina), would find himself in a Georgia jail. To date McBerry is the only republican candidate to take this bold of a position in defense of Georgia’s citizens. I have recently met several GeorgiaCarry members in the Augusta area and they all support McBerry.
mrzip
October 17th, 2009
8:01 pm
its is always better to have a weapon with you and NOT need it,its even WORSE to not have one and NEED IT,always remember this//////////////
Peter
October 17th, 2009
8:28 pm
When the legislature allows firearms in their building, I’ll accept the consequences in other public places. Don’t let the cowards maintain a double standard.
john
October 17th, 2009
8:38 pm
I wish all the pansy azzes that whine about other people exercising their 2nd amendment rights would put signs in their front yard saying loud and clear “Because of our pansy azzed beliefs, there are no guns in this household”. This way the criminals would know where they can ply their craft with impunity.
Shananeeeee Fananeeeeeee
October 17th, 2009
8:52 pm
“From my cold, dead hands.” – Charlton Heston. By the way Anita Dunn who works for Obama and is smearing Fox News said one of her favorite two philosophers EVER is Mao Tse Tung. That’s right, a man who is responsible for millions and millions of deaths of his own people. So Mao is good and Fox is bad? Fox bad, Mao good? Something doesn’t add up here. Well these are the type of people the administration admire, Mao Tse Tung and Fidel Castro. Men who were evil dictators and opressed their people. These men were a disgrace and this administration is a disgrace.
godless heathen
October 17th, 2009
9:37 pm
“A family should be able to go to the circus on a Friday night at Phillips Arena and feel confident that their children aren’t sitting next to someone with a loaded .357,” Poythress said.
Like a cop?
Brian
October 17th, 2009
10:02 pm
“At my church we often pray for God to left the fear the engulfs those who feel the need to carry a gun. After all, God’s love is happiness and freedom. Without a doubt, those who sport a firearm are too scared to ever experience real freedom. How sad.”
First of all not all, people who carry weapons do it for protection from crime. Some of us simply enjoy the sport of shooting. Secondly, it’s not necessarily fear that leads one to arm himself. However it is almost ALWAYS fear that prevents the victim from fighting back against his assailant. One of God’s greatest gifts to man is the freedom to choose. I my friend, choose to fight back. To believe that we live in a society that is all love and happiness is to be very, very naïve. It would be nice if that were the case, but everyone here knows that it is just not to be.
P.S. I don’t identify as a conservative or a republican.
AWJ
October 17th, 2009
11:16 pm
I want to know why a family could not enjoy going to the circus if someone next to them was legally carrying a concealed weapon? What is the big deal?
Ray
October 17th, 2009
11:59 pm
For every criminal stopped by a law abiding gun carrier, there are twenty accidental/suicide deaths in households with firearms.
May God forgive those who choose firearms over His Grace.
Eric P.
October 18th, 2009
12:35 am
Brian: What do you “identify” as?
Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis
October 18th, 2009
12:40 am
Its grace gave America the Second Amendment, by G-d.
Eric P.
October 18th, 2009
12:44 am
Yeah, that’s what I thought. Asleep at the wheel. Just when your idealogy needs you most! If you want to shoot it out in public with everyone, at least respect the fact that some of us dont trust you to decide that for yourself. How do we know you’re not just some nut-job who used to work for the post office? Get real man, if you really believe you’re John Wayne, why dont you go act in movies?
Will Jones - Atlanta Jeffersonian Exegesis
October 18th, 2009
12:52 am
For a novel approach: try being an American man yourself.
Eric P.
October 18th, 2009
12:56 am
Will Jones 4 mayor/governor!!!
Eric P.
October 18th, 2009
12:57 am
Max Cleland is the bomb! Except for the recent book.
clyde
October 18th, 2009
5:27 am
There is a disconnect between the term law abiding and concealed carry permit by the public.For some reason many cannot comprehend that we’re talking about law abiding citizens when we advocate concealed carry.Permit holders are people that are highly unlikely to commit a crime of any kind,let alone a gun crime.This is a group of people that the public does not need to be concerned about.
There is a group of people out there that carries concealed weapons without bothering to get a permit.This is where the public needs to concentrate it’s efforts.On this group.They are not law abiding.They intend to commit crimes with their concealed weapons.They are the ones who may be sitting next to you at the circus with the loaded .357 magnum and you are right to be concerned about that.
There are many murders commited in Atlanta with guns.The people who commit these murders are not law abiding permit holders,but rather they are lawless thugs.The public needs to concentrate it’s efforts squarely on this group of hoods and make any crime committed with a gun very unpleasant to them.Like a 20 year sentence for committing gun crimes for starters.That will deter some and remove the rest from the street for at least 20 years.
I know,.I’ve heard all the arguments why a mandatory long sentence is a bad idea,and to that I say,”bullcuckey”.It is long past the time to do this.I want John Q. Public to get away from the idea that I and my carry permit are a problem and start going after the real problem.You know,the one who are shooting old ladies and leaving them on the steps.
dmac
October 18th, 2009
7:37 am
Is this really an issue?
Unemployment and foreclosure rates are doing great damage to our country. Politicians should be focused on jobs, jobs, jobs!
Is it really patriotic for Georgia Carry to cry about not being able to carry guns in to a High School football game when our neighbor’s are losing their jobs and houses?
larora
October 18th, 2009
7:50 am
It only takes a second for a person to go from a so-called law abiding citizen to a murderer. How do you know if that person sitting next to you didnt just have his wife leave him with his children and he has no hope to live. So he takes out his concealed weapon and takes it out on you and your family. And then he kills himself. We need a well-REGULATED millitia.
Road Scholar
October 18th, 2009
8:18 am
Peter, I agree completely.
Brian: “First of all not all, people who carry weapons do it for protection from crime.” So, the thugs and murders are ok to pack heat? Maybe you just shouldn’t go to high crime areas.
To be able to carry a gun anywhere, can’t we also increase the penalties for improper use or accidental discharge?
clyde
October 18th, 2009
8:26 am
larora,
Using your reasoning,it would only take you a short time to walk across the street and beat your neighbor to death with a baseball bat.Should he worry about this?Is it worth passing a law banning baseball bats?
Cindy
October 18th, 2009
8:34 am
Will Jones you need to be institutionalized. You need help guy.
clyde
October 18th, 2009
8:39 am
Road Scholar,
You could talk to Plaxo Burress about the penalty for accidental discharge of a non permitted weapon.In about twenty months.When he gets out.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
8:40 am
No Will Jones you dumbazz. By the grace of God we have the 4th amendment which obviously a great many of you 2nd amendment lunatics seem to want to turn right over to the authorities. But once the 4th gets trashed we will all needs a gun. You guys can’t see the forest for the trees 99% of the time.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
8:45 am
Clyde you can’t very easily hide a baseball bat.
Ace of Spades
October 18th, 2009
9:02 am
I would be interested to see how folks will react when they realize more Black folks on the whole are carrying concealed weapons – Like ME :O)
clyde
October 18th, 2009
9:06 am
GWB,
Carry it in a guitar case.
MH Brown
October 18th, 2009
9:09 am
Let’s get a couple of things straight. First, to all you gun-toting, vigilantes who want to carry a gun for defense: get real. It takes nerves of steel to point a gun at another person and pull the trigger. You think you’ve got what it takes? You talk big, but the most likely scenario is this: even if you have the presence of mind to get your gun out in time you will pause. You will think, “is this person really trying to harm me?” In that instant you will be cut down like a cornstalk in October. Be certain that the thug does not have any uncertainty as to what he’s doing. To summarize: few people have the guts to pull trigger nor the ability to evaluate the situation quick enough. Your own gun will be your downfall. Next, to the folk who insist that the USA was founded on the word of God: the exact opposite was true. The founders of the US explicitly rejected the divine right of kings and put forth the radical idea that men could rule themselves without God’s involvement. They were Age of Enlightenment disciples, free-masons and other truly inspired thinkers and philosophers. We are very lucky that those men held those beliefs at that time so that our country’s “noble experiment” could emerge. Lastly, regardless of what you think about guns, the Second Amendment is clearly about defending the country against foreign aggression. The way kings and governments raised armies in that day was to put the call out to citizens. Additionally, they had just defeated the British by having a population with rifles and other small arms. There was no Federal army outside of the Marines and a tiny navy until after the Civil War. The Second Amendment, therefore, by its very careful wording as to limit arms to militia, makes it clear that the founders wanted firearms to be controlled and owned only for the purpose of hunting and national defense. Neither of these concern keeping a pistol in one’s pocket at all times.
jconservative
October 18th, 2009
9:12 am
Will Jones
“Its grace gave America the Second Amendment, by G-d.”
In fact, James Madison wrote the 2nd Amendment. This is the same James Madison who put all the restrictions on religious testing in the Constitution. G-d had nothing to do with it.
But you can believe what you want to believe, and if there are no reasons to believe what you want, you can make up reasons as you have done.
clyde
October 18th, 2009
9:14 am
Doesn’t it note somewhere in the 2nd Amendment,even in conjunction with militias, that the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?
Johnd
October 18th, 2009
9:16 am
Enter your comments here
jconservative
October 18th, 2009
9:20 am
Jim, the McDonald v. Chicago case is not yet scheduled for oral arguments.
But the legislature should really postpone any action on gun legislation until the Court rules. Scalia apparently wants to extend the 2nd Am to the states (based on his Heller decision). But to do so he has to use one of two judicial tests that he does not approve, or come up with something entirely new. In short, legislate from the bench.
Here is a clue on his thinking from the Heller decision:
“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:”
GWB
October 18th, 2009
9:21 am
So why not just hit them with the guitar case Clyde. By the time you get the bat out it’s way to late. Some of the logic you wannabe gunslingers use is a true reflection of your room temperature IQs.
clyde
October 18th, 2009
9:37 am
Dear GWB,
Here’s a short history lesson for dummies.A group of men wrested this country away from England because they didn’t like England’s oppressive laws.Another group that was here at the time,calling themselves Loyalists,either went home to England or went to what was to become Canada.Since then,the ancestors of group one,the Wresters,Have managed to keep oppressive laws in this country at bay,even though the ancestors of group two,the Loyalists,which includes people like you,have managed to infiltrate back into the country and are trying to take it back.
Now it’s probably true that I can’t match your amazing IQ,but at least I use mine.
LADILOVELY
October 18th, 2009
9:42 am
Georgia is going to turn into the movies Clint Eastood played in. Where every body carried a gun and their was always guns fights. Who is going to draw first? You will not be satified until one of your children or family member is killed in the crossfired. I PRAY THAT THAT DAY NEVER COME.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
9:42 am
No you don’t Clyde. You sound like a total moron. You are just a chicken sh%t coward that is scared of anything that walks. Grow a set and that gun won’t be so important anymore.
Ace of Spades
October 18th, 2009
9:49 am
@GWB
Gimme your wallet and get on the ground!!
(You just $–t AND p-$$-d your pants. LOL)
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
9:50 am
Listen, as a gun owner, AND, as a gun bearer, I bring my pistol EVERYWHERE I legally can do so. Parks, Malls, Supermarkets, Banks, ….everywhere I am REGULATED by the permit in my wallet. So who ever mentioned REGULATED needs to know how to use that word, and realize all permit holders are already regulated….wow, the level of intelligence of some readers is amazing LOL.
All you zealous pansies crying fear of me sitting next to you child, let something tragic occur…guess who will be there to DEFEND you and your child: me. Don’t cry for a cop, when cop means Citizen On Patrol.
WE THE PEOPLE was a phrase used by the founding fathers right? You think it excluded (well it did for my fellow natives and Africans) “people” and meant only “government officials/people” ? LOL Stop, you are killiiiiiiing me morons. It meant ALL “people” in general belonging to that time. AND finally ALL people up to this time.
If all people were legally armed, and legally carried arms everywhere other than in a jail or courthouse, how much you wanna bet virtually NO CRIME would occur???? Criminals would think not once about doing a crime with knowledge that anyone in their circumference could legally make a Citizens arrest. I agree it is better to be armed and not use a gun than to not have a gun and be in a situation where you need one. Chivalry is not dead, otherwise the many brave women and men who elect to become cops/deputies/etc wouldn’t have picked up that occupation. If we solely depend on “law enforcement” to fend off criminal activities, guess what, crime will get worse!
Want some DISTURBING NEWS mr/miss anti-gunner? READ AND GASP:
Police aren’t required to protect you. In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981 ), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, “official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection. . . a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services , such as police protection, to any particular citizen.” In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, “[T] here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.”
Now, since I just created a mud hole in your whining, wise up and support the Constitution that encourages self sufficiency. If you don’t demand and exercise ANY of our rights, zealot haters will cause them to be encroached upon. “If you don’t use it, you loose it” applies to sex, and gun rights! LOL
Now I dare anyone to defy that court ruling; WE THE PEOPLE are responsible for WE the people. With a murders on the rise in ATL, students being robbed BECAUSE THEY KNOW GUNS ARENT ALLOWED BY STUDENTS, racists plotting, terrorists plotting, thugs plotting, gangs plotting…you need to plot you @$$es to the nearest gun store and be ready to defend your self, your childrem, your spouse, family, our city, our state, and our country with a well-regulated permit in your pocket.
Now run tell that.
OOOOOORRRRAAAAAAH!
GWB
October 18th, 2009
9:51 am
Ace of Spades most of these gun nuts are whites that are scared to death of anything that doesn’t look just like them. They are scared of blacks. They are scared of Latinos. They are scared of their own shadows. I am white. I hear what they say when only whites are present. But none of them have the guts to give their real reason. That’s why you have guys like Clyde sounding like the idiots they are talking about all these government conspiracies. The real issue with these rednecks is their fear of anything darker than they are.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
9:57 am
Straight to the Point it’s not so much “anti gun” as it is pro common sense. Most of you lack that.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
10:03 am
Ace of Spades it is more likely that Straight to the Point and Clyde would be your groveling victims after you took their guns from their shaking hands and shot them with it.
clyde
October 18th, 2009
10:05 am
gwb,
I didn’t put you in caps this time because you’ve been so mean.At last count you’ve called me a gunslinger with a room temperature IQ,a total moron,a chickens#&t coward,a government conspiracy idiot and an almost racist.[I stuck that last in to sort of compensate for the words you've attributed to me that I never said].
Taking into consideration all of your comments I can only conclude that you’re a liberal,and where I hail from thats akin to being called a skunk.You are a dog,sir,and a cur sir, and I don’t think I like you.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
10:18 am
Thank you GWB for not addressing the court rulings and facts i presented….it only makes my facts shine! You are in denial. I am not a conservative, i am not a liberal. I am a common sense advocate of which you bear not. Those court rulings put egg on your face, because it wasnt decisions on peoples OPINIONS, but on the facts that the government and its deputies/cops/etc are NOT liable for public safety as you morons would like people to believe. You are perpetuating suicide of a people by denying that WE all are responsible for ourselves. With conservatives i agree on that: self sufficiency is not for lazy @ss people, because they want the government to do everything for them.
Thanks to all the haters, so that facts prevail and cowards expose themselves.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
10:18 am
Did I say you have made racist comments Clyde? Reading comprehension is not your forte either huh?
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
10:19 am
Police aren’t required to protect you. In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981 ), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, “official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection. . . a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services , such as police protection, to any particular citizen.” In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, “[T] here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.”
William
October 18th, 2009
10:20 am
If you will give up rights to privacy or some speech rights, I will leave my gun at home. What say your Ray and others? After all you really do not need privacy right because you have nothing to hide right?
GWB
October 18th, 2009
10:21 am
The only cowards I know Straight to the Point are the ones that have to have a gun in their pockets all the time. What are you so afraid of Straight to the Point?
William
October 18th, 2009
10:27 am
LADILOVELY
October 18th, 2009
9:42 am
My family has served in every war since the war between the states. What is the difference? Dying is dying. Have your liberal a77 family done anything except live off the freedom provided by others?
Tailgunner
October 18th, 2009
10:27 am
It’s amazing. Praying for what you perceive to be “wackos” who want to defend themselves and their loved ones? Apparently you haven’t read the book of Luke: “He that hath no sword let him sell his garment, and buy one.” — Luke 22.36
You can be a gun owner or be a victim. I refuse to be a victim, and I refuse to believe that the Bill of Rights is void where prohibited by law.
I have no issue with someone stopping in to Applebees or the local bar and grill and having a burger and a beer. After all – we allow them to take a deadly weapon afterward – their vehicle, and drive away as long as they are under the legal blood alcohol content limit. Why not the same criterion for concealed carry?
Add to that the fact that what do you do with your gun if you want to have a bite to eat and a bottle of beer? Leave it in your car? What a fabulously handy resource for criminals who need to steal a gun – just check out the cars at their local neighborhood bar and grill because there’s a really good chance they’ll find one stashed in someone’s glove compartment or under the seat! That’s so much easier and safer for criminals than breaking into someone’s home, a pawnshop, or a gun shop!
The problem is not, nor has it ever been, LEGAL gun owners – the problem is criminals with illegal guns. Sorry – I will “cling to my guns and my bible” (much to the dismay of Emperor Obozo) and defend myself and my loved ones as needed. There are just too many people out there in this world who could care less about what they do to someone else and just consider you and me as collateral damage, as long as they get a few bucks from you for a burger or some crack.
I REFUSE to die that way. But go ahead and make your own choice about legally owning a gun. Only YOU know and get to decide if you and your family are worth defending. When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
William
October 18th, 2009
10:28 am
GWB
October 18th, 2009
10:21 am
You sound like a wimp!!
GWB
October 18th, 2009
10:40 am
What is hilarious are all you gun nuts that think everyone that doesn’t see it your way is a “liberal”. That word doesn’t even hold water anymore since the term “conservative” got hijacked by a bunch of lunatics that are anything but conservative.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
10:42 am
No William. I don’t have to have a gun in my pocket to give me all that false courage. You William are the wimp and coward. Otherwise you wouldn’t be substituting your gun for a set of cojenes.
Daedalus
October 18th, 2009
10:43 am
Guns aren’t the problem. Its the people that carry them. Such as most of the people posting here in support of carrying guns everywhere.
If y’all are representative of the type of folks that want to carry guns to public events, then clearly allowing guns at public events is a bad idea. Someone cuts in line in front of you? Meet Mr. Smith and Wesson. What a great idea.
Rhonda Atlanta
October 18th, 2009
11:18 am
Why would you feel like you should carry a gun in church? Sound like a contradiction as well as you may be in the wrong church. I do feel like any establishment should post a gun policy and if you violate it license or not you face the consequences.That is pretty simple.
Tailgunner
October 18th, 2009
11:19 am
Daedalus, I have a concealed carry permit. To get that, I have been completely checked out by the FBI, the GBI, and a county judge. Yet you imagine you have some magic crystal ball that tells you I am some kind of a nut case and that you mystically know better than all of them. Right. We ALL believe you.
Go ahead. Be a victim. I have probably passed you on the street, stood next to you in a store while we checked out, driven down your street, and more. Along with thousands of other CCW holders. So how come none of us just pulled our weapon to empty it into you and everyone around us? Because it DOESN’T HAPPEN with legal, responsible gun owners, that’s why. You just refuse to get it through your head that the vast majority of people in Georgia and in America are decent, responsible people who have the right to protect themselves and their families and possessions.
The Bill of Rights is NOT void where prohibited by law. “The right of the people, to keep and gear arms, shall not be infringed”. You don’t have to arm yourself – that is your right. Neither can you disarm me. Get it now?
Tailgunner
October 18th, 2009
11:22 am
Rhonda Atlanta – banned by anyone, anywhere? The Constitution reads “We the people” – not we the mall, we the convenience store, we the car dealership…..
The 2nd amendment is not something that any individual or business or government can strip from anyone. Nor are the other 9 in the Bill of Rights.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:26 am
GWB…..maybe you didnt read, heck, i know you didnt read my post entirely… I said OOOOOORRAAAAAAAAH.
Do you know what that yell means? Where it comes from? i will tell you coward; it comes from the yell of those of WE THE PEOPLE who went thru boot camp in the USMC and the US NAVY, and my Coast Guard buddies too (lol). So unless you are calling us cowards for having guns in the military, and the rest of WE THE PEOPLE who protected your coward @$$ in the military, you need to collect your cowardliness and walk away from this debate.
I fear no man. Not even you coward.
I fear the unnecessary subjugation of being a victim of an act of violence that I did not, nor my loved ones for that matter, ask for and not being able to defend ourselves against criminals who have no respect for life, liberty, and happiness; nor to the right of privacy, personal property, and personal space. I have sworn an Oath to defend the Constitution, and to defeat all enemies both foreign AND DOMESTIC. This oath is a lifetime oath. Do you know who are our domestic enemies? Some of them sound just like you.
I fear leaving this earth prematurely leaving behind infants who need their father around till I at least get old and gray.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:28 am
Rhonda Atlanta….. RESEARCH BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH
Man shoots pastor in church near St. Louis
By The Associated Press
Sunday, March 8, 2009 1:42 PM CDT
E-mail Story Printer-friendly
MARYVILLE — (AP) A gunman walked down the aisle of a suburban St. Louis church during Sunday services and shot the pastor to death with a handgun before stabbing himself and two others as parishioners wrestled him to the ground, authorities said.
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2009/03/08/man_shoots_pastor_in_church_near_st_louis
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:35 am
(CNN) — Dr. George Tiller, whose Kansas women’s clinic frequently took center stage in the U.S. debate over abortion, was shot and killed while serving as an usher at his Wichita church Sunday morning, police said.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/05/31/kansas.doctor.killed/index.html
SHALL I PROVE YOU WRONG FURTHER?????????
Rhonda Atlanta
October 18th, 2009
11:35 am
Always some idiot that will find an exception to try to drive home the point we need Bradley Fighting vehicles in church.. LOL
Dont people get shot in a billion other locations? Would you feel better Archie if they were stabbed?
Why should we have an license at all. Have establishments both public and private control their own environments. If that policy is broken THEN the state prosecutes.
Hey STP, keep your behind at home Einstein if you are that scared, Anyone in a church full of guns could have shot the preacher. Geeezz Morons on the Internet!
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:37 am
AND WHOA!!!!! CHECK THIS OUT!!!
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/sep/29/health/chi-ap-mi-detroitpastor-sho
Man shot by pastor during church burglary charged
Associated Press
September 29, 2009
DETROIT -
A 41-year-old man shot by a pastor during a weekend burglary at a Detroit church has been charged with breaking and entering.
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy says in a release Tuesday that Tyrone O. Badey was confronted by pastor Lawrence Adams as Badey was leaving Westside Bible Church Sunday evening with a bag of stolen items.
Worthy says Badey allegedly struggled with Adams, a retired Detroit police lieutenant. Adams then shot Badey once in the abdomen. Police said Monday that Adams was licensed to carry the gun.
Iris Adams says her husband went to the church after a security company reported an alarm had been triggered. She says her husband identified himself as a retired police officer before the shooting.
Badey is recovering at a local hospital.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:40 am
RHONDA….. you too are in denial. LMMFAO… You lost the debate, your point was made moot, and I didnt even have to give an opinion. YOU mentioned church. YOU made your bed, so lay in it.
Rhonda Atlanta
October 18th, 2009
11:41 am
Split the little pill in half.
Post another news story. You had no debate.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:42 am
RHONDA SAYS:
“Why should we have an license at all. Have establishments both public and private control their own environments. If that policy is broken THEN the state prosecutes.”
Its already that way dear…READ:
Police aren’t required to protect you. In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981 ), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, “official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection. . . a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services , such as police protection, to any particular citizen.” In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, “[T] here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.”
Rhonda Atlanta
October 18th, 2009
11:45 am
One thing else Gomer, if you had read what I wrote or perhaps you could get the druggist down at the corner drug store to read it to you there in Hooterville, my point was that of an constitutionalists in being “why should we have gun licenses at all”? Let establishments post their policy on gun entry.
Look before I leap
October 18th, 2009
11:45 am
With rights, come responsibility. If this state truly wants to go down the road of having its citizens walking around armed like the gunslingers of the old west, then the state needs to take some steps to ensure that the general populace is protected.
To that end, I would only support such a bill if the following were attached:
1. MANDATORY 160 hours training by certified arms training experts. This would mean that the gun-toters would be able to hit what they aim at. More importantly, it would train them to know WHEN it is appropriate to draw a weapon. In addition, continual (every 6 months) re-evaluation and re-certification. We require our LEOs to undergo similar training and on-going evaluation before thay can walk the streets with a gun strapped to their hips. It is not unreasonable to expect the same of John Q Public.
2. Mandatory liability insurance coverage in excess of $5,000,000. Because when one of you adrenaline fueled bozos starts blasting away in the salad aisle of the neighborhood Kroger and you pick off my wife or kid, know that I will sue your cowboy *ss for every phreakin nickel you have ever or WILL ever earn.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:47 am
RHONDA….if YOU were one of the TWO innocent bystanders in that church, who were killed for NO REASON, I bet your bottom dollar that your family and friends would have wished that a legally armed citizen would’ve blown that murderer away BEFORE getting a chance to shoot OTHER non-party/innocent bystanders. Get real sister.
Tailgunner
October 18th, 2009
11:48 am
Rhonda Atlanta:
I suppose, by your definition and assertions:
I, or any business for example, can forbid you from attending the church of your choice, make you not voice you opinion, or sue the government if they screw you over (Amendment I)
I or anyone else can make you put up soldiers in your home any old time (Amendment III)
I or anyone else can demand to see anything you own, at any time, and use it against you in court and force you to answer any questions, even if you incriminate yourself (Amendments IV and V)
And I guess your Miranda rights and the right to a speedy trial by a jury of your peers, and the right to face your accusers, is gone – on my say-so or anyone else’s say-so. (Amendment VI)
And surely you must believe that you can be jailed and held on a trillion dollars bail for a traffic ticket, and beaten for your crimes with a whip. (Amendment VIII)
The list goes on – and this is apparently all OK with you. You do not get to pick and chose which part(s) of the Constitution apply or where they apply. They all apply to all of us, equally, and everywhere, or it is a meaningless piece of parchment. Is that what you are advocating?
One more time here. sports fans. The problem is not legal gun owners. Yesterday, over 80 million LEGAL gun owners in the US murdered no one and committed no crimes. It is criminals with illegal guns that are the problem. It is CRIMINALS with ILLEGAL guns that are the problem.
In every single state in the US where the decent, law abiding citizens have had their rights restored to keep (which means to own) and bear (which means to carry on or about your person) crime has dropped or increased at a much slower pace than places where it is illegal to have a gun – like NY City, Washington DC, and Chicago.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
11:50 am
Rhonda im not sure if you are talking to me, but 1. I dont live in the woods, or rural areas. 2. I live in the ATL area, and 3. you say, and i quote :
“Let establishments post their policy on gun entry.”
Alot of establishments do smarty. They place stickers on their glass doors….since you havent noticed.
Rhonda Atlanta
October 18th, 2009
11:52 am
Listen Pastemaster, what did that have to do with there being no gun license to responsible citizens verses a privately owned or public establishment setting their own gun policy? Explain in your words or maybe you could use crayons. LOL
It is simple, you dont regulate firearms by licensing them to responsible citizens. I think our constitution addresses that. However you do give the right to private property owners to regulate. You appear to being standing up for your rights but not the rights of others.
Ray
October 18th, 2009
11:53 am
There is no place in God’s grace for the gleeful embrace of death on here. Rationalizing a reason to ‘need’ a gun is nothing short of sin. Know that those of you who claim second amendment rights own a portion of every accidental handgun death of a child.
Rhonda Atlanta
October 18th, 2009
11:54 am
I said you make it against state law to violate a private property owners gun policy. I dont care about a sticker Einstein. Geezz you are dense.
Rhonda Atlanta
October 18th, 2009
11:56 am
Roy I think you did too much LSD. What about everyone with a steak knife. Should we feel as bad. Or everyone that drank a beer?
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
12:01 pm
RHONDA and anyone that agrees with cowardly views:
Its not so much that YOU have to own/bear arms, its the fact that other choose to. Its about CHOICE. I choose to defend my person, and those who I love. That would include YOU if i were in that church and saw him going after you sister. I would have blown his @$$ away. Yes I was trained to do so, but anyone can get firearms training; some states MANDATE you get that before even getting a permit.
I am pro-life…….BUT i am not hatin’ on pro-choicers because i am pro people having control over their lives and their affairs.
The Constitution isnt for you, or some people? Then thats fine, but its for alot more people than just you. If you dont like guns, dont buy one. If you dont like being around them, tough beans. WE are all around you, looking out for you, looking out to protect ourselves, and criminals and cowards need not see us bearing arms since we conceal our guns, so you are safe, and they are not.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
12:13 pm
Rhonda, responsible parties HAVE to have a permit to bear CONCEALED, or to bear openly on grounds other than their home/vehicle.
So you are not making sense girl genius LOL.
You dont need a permit to buy a gun either.
The right to bear arms has been REGULATED by the states to exclude felons. So we have no choice to be screened for backgrounds for permit applicants, and for non-permit gun purchasers.
ALSO…. you say “I said you make it against state law to violate a private property owners gun policy.”
LMAO wow are you seriously in the dark here????? If an establishment (and I know an actual case smarty,) has a no gun policy, and a patron is mysteriously seen with X-Ray vision to be carrying arms, they can be asked to leave; if they do not leave babbling about their permit/rights they can be arrested/charged with trespassing silly. At law, one can not convert a right into a crime. That is a matter of private entities and the patron; it becomes a crime upon refusal to leave or put gun in vehicle, So what you are asking, any lawyer can answer easily. I used to be a para-legal, and you are really asking for a moot law.
Jim
October 18th, 2009
12:23 pm
Actually Rhonda’s idea is more that of an constitutionalists and protects individuals rights.. All that have challenged her are those with “if’s” and irrelevant scenarios.
sunkawakan
October 18th, 2009
12:26 pm
I believe that Sean Jerguson is a gun dealer. He’s got a conflict of interest here. And if he encourages giving guns to children, he should be arrested for child endangerment.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
12:32 pm
JIM you are incorrect w/ respects to me. I have provided case law, articles, and experience.
Jim
October 18th, 2009
12:39 pm
I agree that it should no be up to the state to tell a responsible citizen where to take a gun. Just like it is not up to tell them where to smoke. I also agree that a person that owns an establishment has that right to do so. That is what Rhonda was saying. Sounds pretty simple. I do not really care about other existing laws that restrict our rights or examples there of.. .
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
12:53 pm
JIM: “I agree that it should no be up to the state to tell a responsible citizen where to take a gun. Just like it is not up to tell them where to smoke. I also agree that a person that owns an establishment has that right to do so.”
Agreed.
Have Gun...Will Travel
October 18th, 2009
1:12 pm
What all of the “Sheeple” should realize, is that Georgia is the only state in the Union, with a “public gathering restriction”. Does that make us the only state that has it right? I think not. The majority of the other 49 states, are open carry states, without a permit. Georgia gun laws are racist in origin, and the public gathering restriction was written to disarm blacks after they marched on Camilla, many decades ago.
The public gathering restriction should be an embarrassment to everyone. Everybody would do well to read the research, and Google an article entitled “The Racist Roots of Georgia Gun Laws”.
For the record, service members, serving either the state or the nation, may carry anywhere, including the Capitol, on their ID card alone. There are already more armed, amongst the “Sheeple”, than they would ever want to know.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
1:13 pm
Obviously Justice Scalia disagreed with you in Heller vs D.C. Jim and Staight to the point.
At the same time, the Court recognized that the government can regulate gun rights. The Court said its decision should not be interpreted to question the right of government to: prohibit felons and the mentally ill from owning weapons, prohibit guns in schools or public buildings, ban certain categories of guns not commonly used for self-defense, and to establish certain other conditions on gun ownership.
Darren
October 18th, 2009
1:18 pm
“A Stockbridge man answered a knock on his door Sunday morning and was greeted by a gunman who fired several times, hitting the man at least once, Henry County police said.”
Just out of curiosity, how many of you handgun owners have it on your person when you answer a knock at your door?
GWB
October 18th, 2009
1:21 pm
All of them Darren. They are scared not to. That gun is their security blanket.
Tailgunner
October 18th, 2009
1:26 pm
OK, Rhonda Atlanta – let’s assume (only for the moment) any business can make up their own laws and trash the Constitution and the bill of rights.
The I guess they have the right to not allow any Negroes or Jews or people in wheelchairs in either, right? Like you say – it’s their place and the Bill of Rights and indeed the entire Constitution stops at their doorway. Right?
And FYI, since you obviously have done no research, the state of Vermont requires no concealed carry permit. If you are a citizen of Vermont, you are free to carry concealed, and they recognize ALL other concealed carry permits from any other state. So I beg to ask you – why aren’t the corpses stacked 10 deep in the streets of Vermont? Why does Vermont have one of the lowest crime rates of anywhere in the nation – even in their cities?
Why do Universities – as is the case in Utah – where students with a CCW can carry their weapon on campus, in classrooms, and anywhere on campus not all like Columbine or Virginia Tech? Because decent responsible citizens are just that – decent responsible citizens, and the criminals all know that “gun free zones” (as you propose) are easy pickings because the decent people – the only ones who obey gun laws – have no way to protect themselves.
Criminals are not afraid of the police, or of any gun laws. That’s just one more law to break. What they are afraid of is people who can fight back.
Tailgunner
October 18th, 2009
1:30 pm
Darren – I never answer my door unarmed. In this day and age it is stupidity to answer the door unprotected.
I have 3 pistols in the house – in 3 different locations. If someone tries to force entry, no matter which direction I head I am headed toward a loaded and ready to fire weapon. When I leave the house I always take one of them with me, and if my fiancee stays home, I always tell her which one I am taking so she knows where the 2 remaining loaded weapons are in the house.
Darren
October 18th, 2009
1:41 pm
Tailgunner,
Thanks for the post. In what part of town do you live?
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
1:52 pm
Just because a justice dissents makes no difference. All judges dont always agree on everything. Hello?
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
1:56 pm
GEUDA SPRINGS, Kansas, Nov. 7 – An entire Kansas town will soon be armed after a new law has been passed in Geuda Springs. The city law mandates “every head of household” in Geuda Springs must own a gun.
ALSO
Gun Ownership Mandatory In Kennesaw, Georgia
Crime Rate Plummets
by Chuck Baldwin
The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia’s ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.
The city’s population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.
And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.
With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn’t. The fact is I can’t remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?
The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.
The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city’s crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn’t force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don’t have a death wish.
There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired.
GWB
October 18th, 2009
1:59 pm
Well Straight to the point, seeing as how that is Justice Scalia, a judge on the highest court in this land makes all the difference in the world. And that was Scalia speaking for the majority opinion. I would think that it clues you in that lower court opinions differing with the SCOTUS will die a quick and dirty death. DUHHHHH!!! Sorry that the SCOTUS is in such contrast to all those cherry picked cases you nutters come up with.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
2:04 pm
Your opinion on an opinion is moot. You are simply sore that your views are emphatically flawed. The Supreme Court ruled WE have aright to bear arms. The states have sovereignty over issuance of permits, NOT the feds with regards to public places IN the several states. Not even a nice try, but just a try. LOL
Carl Hatton
October 18th, 2009
2:04 pm
It seems rather obvious that Heller vs D.C. pretty much decided that the states can regulate a multitude of firearms cans and can’ts. Only the dimmest bulbs in the pack seem not to get it.
Straight to the point
October 18th, 2009
2:05 pm
To end your madness, guns are here to stay; get over it. LOL