·11250 Waples Mill Road · Fairfax, Virginia 22030 ·800-392-8683
Posted on 05/14/2008 11:44:12 PM PDT by neverdem
| Georgia: Governor Perdue Signs Monumental Right-to-Carry Reform Bill! |
| Wednesday, May 14, 2008 |
|
Please Thank Governor Perdue Today! Today, Wednesday, May 14, Governor Sonny Perdue (R) signed House Bill 89 into law. This NRA supported measure makes numerous improvements to Georgia’s Right-to-Carry laws and represents the most comprehensive pro-gun reform measure to be enacted in nearly 20 years. This critical Right-to-Carry Reform legislation will strengthen Georgia’s current laws by:
Thank you to all of the NRA members who answered the call in support of HB89. Your action played a pivotal role in the enactment of this much-needed legislation. Without you this victory would have been impossible. |
oh, its another terrible horrible Pub ......gee, reading some around here makes me think that Pubs can’t do a thing right....well, it seems like one did a good thing here....
Perdue in 2012!!!!
(What, it’s not that early to start thinking to the future...)
hoooray!
Correction: These things expand some privileges-to-carry. Only Vermont and Alaska recognize a right-to-carry, a right being the sovereignty to act without permission from others.
But don’t both Vermont and Alaska allow local jurisdictions to enact stricter measures?
Damn good start.
I thought these three links are pertinent to the politics of food and energy - donkeys create problems and prevent solutions - UTOPIAN NITWITS!
The Bum Rap on Biofuels MUST READ!
Don’t Freak Out - Bjørn Lomborg speaks climate sense to nonsense.
Prayers for Jim Robinson (Updates at #279, #436) Say a prayer, please.
Alaska went from privileges-to-carry rights. I'll take baby steps for the time being. Let the prohibitionts challenge it. IICR, Wyoming tried passing a similar bill.
“oh, its another terrible horrible Pub ......gee, reading some around here makes me think that Pubs can’t do a thing right....well, it seems like one did a good thing here....”
Individual Republicans do *very* good things from time to time. It’s the political party and related infrastructure that is often inept, corrupt, and useless.
I'm not so sure I would go that far. Perdue clearly waited until the last moment to sign this bill and only did so with moistened finger thrust skyward for one final reading of the political winds. It would have become law without his signature at midnight last night, unless he vetoed it. I wouldn't exactly call that strong support for the measure. There are a host of other issues for which Perdue should raise serious eyebrows regarding his first term, his handling of the water situation, for incidence.....
Yesterday the local radio was breathlessly reporting that he would have to veto it that day or it would pass into law. Today, I didn't hear it mentioned at all. Funny about that. The TV news reported he signed it last night, but they hastened to reassure all of us that it would be challenged in court.
Perdue was a lifelong democrat prior to his switching parties in 1998(?) to take advantage of the Republican popularity at the time.
The best defense is a good offense, and this is an excellent example. Rather than waiting for the next leftist anti-gun effort to defend against, Georgia gun rights activists have taken the fight to the leftists by pushing these concealed weapons expansion efforts.
Wasn’t swayed by the urinalconstipation editorial yesterday that said there is zero evidence that more guns on the street deters crime.
Perdue knows (as do most people with more than a room temperature IQ) that the media lies outright when they're not just distorting the facts on the gun issue. What he took into account was the declining popularity of their lies. The Urinal's circulation is in a steady decline, and, outside of their core urban black readership that reads it for the race baiting, achievement bashing, and incessant urging for larger more socialist government, the voters of Ga largely dispise the fishwrapper.
well alrighty!
Congrats! Our libtard Gov. “Eyebrows” Kaine vetoed our restaurant carry bill. One day, I dream of conservative government.....
Hoss
I don’t know. First I’ve heard of that.
In any case, if you need to apply to The State for a permit, especially when there is a fee involved, we aren’t talking about a right but rather a privilege. I applaud the Governor’s legislature and governor for this, but the NRA and everyone else should be accurate and call it what it is, which is an expansion of privileges for those who are licensed to exercise them.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed freepmail me or post a message here.
Right you are.
Translated - "I hope that this really doesn't mean that restrictions are lifted on concealed carry holders." Sorry Jack it means just exactly what it says. Restaurant owners aren't allowed to discriminate based on race, and now they aren't allowed to discriminated based on concealed carry holders. The 2nd amendment comes before the 4th.
Tell me, just our=t of curiosity, do you think that restaurant owners should be able to exclude cops?
But like in post 20 this isn'r really a right, but just an expansion of privilege.
They can’t kick you out for [merely] having a Bible, right? or for your skin color? or a host of other pointless/rude/stupid/offensive/bigoted reasons to “not want X in their restraunts”? No, there isn’t such a provision.
...although, that’s probably what Sonny referred to when he said he expected the bill would prompt lawsuits regardless of whether he signed it or not.
Do remember: it’s a sovereign right of the individual.
Congrats to GA. I’d always heard people on various gun forums complaining about how crappy GA carry laws were. Hopefully this law corrects a lot of the problems.
usually with these kind of bills, it is also okay for the owner of an establishment to ask that person to leave. I think it just makes it legal for the gun owner to carry. In other words, the owner of the establishment cannot sick the cops on the gun owner and have them arrested.
The NRA fought us on this for two years because they wanted their stupid guns-in-parking-lots deal instead and were willing to burn bridges in a futile attempt to get it. They jumped on board at the last minute because the carry bill that was passed got tacked onto the gutted, toothless version of the parking lot bill that survived the legislature.
Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful for the NRA's last-minute support, but this bill could have been passed a while ago, in even stronger form, if not for their antics.
To correct a common misperception: it’s long been legal for Georgians with carry permits to carry into restaurants, except those that serve alcohol. This law has no effect on the 80% of restaurants in Georgia that don’t serve alcohol.
For those that do, this bill is an expansion of property rights. It’s not “respecting private property” to forbid a restaurant owner from being armed inside his own property. If a restaurant owner doesn’t want someone with a gun in his restaurant, he can ask that person to leave. His private property rights don’t include sending that person to jail (unless they refuse to leave).
Bah...I just reread the article and realized the NRA didn’t even describe the bill accurately. Not only did they get the part about carrying in restaurants wrong (the bill allows carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, as long as total food sales are at least 50% of business and as long as the permit holder doesn’t drink - carry in restaurants that don’t serve is already legal) but they also keep talking about “concealed carry permits” when no such document is issued in Georgia.
Okay, while I do see some very good points in the bill, there’s some bad points as well - for instance, someone without a license to carry has been stripped of their Paragraph VIII right to armed self-defense while in a motor vehicle.
“Prescribing the manner in which arms may be borne” does not extend, as I see it, to rendering it NOT an “arm” by mandating that it be useless for self-defense. An unloaded firearm enclosed in a case and separated from its ammunition is not an “arm,” it’s a chunk of metal in a box.
When you open a business by applying for a license from the state, and invite the public into it, you can't then turn around and claim the absolute private property rights that you can rightfully claim for your home.
c) This Code section shall not permit, outside of his or her home, motor vehicle, or place of business, the concealed carrying of a pistol, revolver, or concealable firearm by any person unless that person has on his or her person a valid license issued under ...To continue and even expand the motor vehicle provisions as before. However, as one poster pointed out this is still just an expansion of privilege. This isn't really a right.This Code section shall not forbid any person who is not among those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129 from transporting a loaded firearm in any private passenger motor vehicle...
The bill expands the ability of those without licenses to carry in their vehicles by removing the restrictions on where someone without a license may keep a loaded firearm in their vehicle. Currently, without a license, you have to keep a loaded gun in the glovebox, center console, or “fully exposed to view” (basically impossible to comply with). Now, as of July 1st, you can keep that loaded gun anywhere in your car without a permit assuming you’re legal to have the gun in the first place.
Did he really? Since when should ANY American have to ask permission of government to exercise a GOD-given right? And that is what Georgia has done... converted an absolute, God-given RIGHT into a government-granted PRIVILEGE. Because now when people accept that government has the legitimate authority to do this, some other governor/legislature can come along and take it away and it’ll all be accepted as right and proper. And it’s NOT. Not in either case.
Oh, I see - I missed where (d) went into (e) on the HTML version at http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2007_08/fulltext/hb89.htm -
(d) This Code section shall not forbid the transportation of any firearm by a person who is not among those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129, provided the firearm is enclosed in a case, unloaded, and separated from its ammunition.
(e) This Code section shall not forbid any person who is not among those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129 from transporting a loaded firearm in any private passenger motor vehicle.
I was thinking that the “transporting” in (d) extended to “transporting” in a motor vehicle.
With this new law, it’s easier to carry without a license in Georgia than it is in New Hampshire - you can carry in your car without a license, which you can’t do in New Hampshire.
Note post #28
Which, I suppose, is a step in the right direction.
The main thrust of the bill was to be the protection of employees with concealed carry permits in company parking lots. IIRC, the Weyerhauser Corp. burned six employees who had long guns in their vehicles on the opening day of deer season a few years ago. They were fired. The NRA quickly realized that all of their work for shall issue concealed carry privileges would be for almost naught if employers could extend their private property privilege into their employees vehicles, negating what Second Amendment rights and privileges the employees had. The rest was a secondary gain.
That “secondary gain”, as you call it, was what the people of Georgia actually wanted, and what will actually make the biggest difference in the most people’s lives. The NRA, in their arrogance, refused to listen to what we wanted in Georgia for close to two years, instead demanding that the legislature pass the same bill that they wanted every state to pass and refusing to support pro-carry legislation that was created in Georgia by Georgians. Their threats put off a lot of legislators and prevented any gun bills from being passed last year, not to mention severely damaging their effectiveness as a lobby in Georgia.
This year, after the legislature had basically told the NRA that private property rights were going to win out, the NRA finally accepted a compromise that let employees have their guns in public parking lots while still letting employers control their own property. This bill let the NRA claim victory while still leaving alone the property rights of employers. Once that happened, the NRA finally supported our gun bill at the 11th hour, and because of how our legislature works, the parts of our pro-carry bill that were likely to survive a veto this year were grafted onto the NRA bill so the legislature could vote on a single bill.
Contrary to what the NRA is pushing, the improved carry provisions were the important part of this bill and the part that was wanted the most and took the most work by Georgians. The fact that the NRA got a watered-down version of what they wanted is a reflection of the fact that they finally decided to play ball and not that their parking-lot bill was a particular priority to those of us who actually live here and work for gun rights on a state level.
And this is why I hang out here at FR. The answers to all of America’s questions are right here! :)
(FWIW, I am curious how Perdue handled the water/drought problem in GA...well, other than praying.)
I don't believe in carry permits and I'm not interested in signing a contract with the state pledging my acceptance of it's alleged power to require one.
It would be nice to have a state where there were no gun laws at all, no ‘permits’ needed, no ‘waiting times’, no courses neccesary or carry laws...
I believe Alaska and Vermont fit that description.
For most people, that sign should be shocking and offensive, and a shameful reminder of the mind-bogglingly vast injustice this nation visited upon its people in the past.
When you are a business which invites the public into your establishment in order to do business with you, you cede some of your autonomy. As the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire put it, in 1784:
When men enter into a state of society, they surrender up some of their natural rights to that society, in order to ensure the protection of others; and, without such an equivalent, the surrender is void.
We have a much larger tyranny to worry about as gun owners than the fear that we might be "tyrannizing" bigoted business owners who wish to discriminate against us, and punish us, and sic the police on us for exercising our natural right to defense of ourselves and our families.
I carry a sidearm for the same reason that a business has a fire extinguisher - to manage a very bad situation as well as possible until help arrives. Businesses are required by law to have working fire extinguishers at hand in their premises. Add that up.
well we will have to disagree on this issue, IMO if an establishment doesn’t want to cater to a race of people from whatever which way, it is no business, IMO, of governments. It is also my right not to give that establishment any business as a customer. Nor is it any business of government to ensure a fire extinguisher is in every building. I think this kind of central planning has unintended effects and may even accomplish the opposite of their intentions.
But i do agree that ‘tyranny of gun owners’ is pretty much non existant and not even worth mentioning considering what we are objected to. I was addressing it more as an intellectual exercise.
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.