·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. |
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
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.