Political Insider

By fire eater

January 4, 2008 4:07 AM | Link to this

To punish the Chamber of Commerce for its attack against the rights of self-defense of employees, many who are forced to travel through dangerous areas like Clayton and Dekalb counties, a separate bill should be enacted that places strict liability on any business having a “no guns” policy when one of its employees is harmed by a criminal predator.

My elderly father recently retired from retail store management locally. His employer had a “no guns” policy but it was not enforced. Thank God. During the week of his retirement, a gentleman with a hoodie pulled over his head entered the store waving a 9mm pistol and acting crazy, demanding money and threatening a young female customer. My father reacted appropriately to the menace, reaching for,HIS gun when the thug suddenly bolted from the store, apparently thinking that he was about to be blown out of his Air Jordans. Unfortunately (or fortunately) he had misplaced his .38 when moving equipment around earlier.

Some business people actually worry more about being sued by a criminal injured by an employee defending theirself than harm incurred to that employee in the course of a criminal assault.

By Ben

January 4, 2008 7:24 AM | Link to this

HB89 is a direct attack on private property rights.

I am an enthusiastic advocate for our right to bear arms. However, I am also an enthusiastic advocate for individual (and by extension, corporate) property rights.

I carry a firearm to protect myself where ever I am legally able to do so. If a business does not wish for me to bring my weapon onto their premises, I honor their wishes by taking my hard-earned money elsewhere. If employees do not like a particular company’s policies, they are free to seek employment elsewhere.

This is the nature of a free, capitalistic society. Individuals (and by extension, corporations) should be free to engage in business with each other under whatever terms the parties find acceptable.

The NRA would do much better to lend its full support to the recently filed HB 915, the Second Amendment Protection Act of 2008. This bill, written by Rep. Tim Bearden (R-68), expressly protects private property rights. It also provides for desperately needed and comprehensive reforms to almost every aspect of GA’s confusing, restrictive and anachronistic gun laws.

I hope the NRA will do the right thing this time around. They certainly showed their ability to do the wrong thing by derailing good legislation in the last session.

By Ben

January 4, 2008 7:34 AM | Link to this

I should clarify my first statement in my above comment.

When I said, “HB89 is a direct attack on private property rights,” I should have said, “HB89 was a good bill that provided a needed reform to GA’s gun laws until the NRA got it’s panties in a knot and tried to tack it’s failed SB43 onto it at the last minute.”

By Ed Stone

January 4, 2008 8:16 AM | Link to this

The parking lots bill is not all that is out there for Georgia in 2008. HB 915, introduced by Rep. Timothy Bearden, Dist. 68, is an alternative gun bill for people who want to protect and expand the right to bear arms without trampling on other people’s private property rights. Ironically, Georgia has more criminal restrictions on where law abiding, licensed citizens can carry firearms than any state in the nation that has a firearms license or permits carry without a licence. The NRA’s parking lots bill will not remove a single one of these criminal restrictions. The NRA needs to support a bill that will bring real Second Amendment protections to Georgia. Mr. LaPierre, I am an NRA member (I am the NRA), and I ask that you support the Second Amendment Protection Act of 2008 - HB 915!!! Unlike the parking lots bill, HB 915 has drawn no opposition from business interests or any groups other than the usual anti-gun suspects. NRA - Support HB 915.

By Ga Resident

January 4, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

The NRA’s SB 43 (now labeled HB 89) has been a loser since its inception and is not what Georgia needs. The Virginia-based NRA needs to drop the pretense of acting on behalf of Georgia citizens, because in this instance they are not. The NRA needs to get behind HB 915 instead. HB 915 makes right 100 years of disjointed, racist, Jim Crow Georgia legislation and gives all peaceable citizens in Georgia their rights back. SB 43/HB 89 takes rights away from Georgia land owners and is not what we need or want. Please call or e-mail the NRA, today, at ila-contact@nrahq.org and tell them to stop this foolishness with SB 43/HB 89. Tell them HB 915 is empowering, and SB 43 is just the opposite.

By Ben

January 4, 2008 8:55 AM | Link to this

Here is HB915

By Jerry

January 4, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

I own my house. I don’t permit visitors to smoke, consume alcohol, or brandish firearms. Now I fear that with the right lobbyists and enough money, the tobacco, alcohol, and gun interests could pay their politicians to overrule my decisions concerning behavior on my own property. Ain’t America grand?

By Van

January 4, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

I think the lefties need to take a break. This proposed law only says that in your private vehicle, the owner of the parking lot has no jurisdiction over what you may or may not have in it.

If they really did, those out there with illegal drugs would be seating bullets, pun intended.

Like your private residence, it should not be searched without consent or search warrant.

Anyway, without cause, who will search your car? The renta-cops? Your boss?

By George Hills

January 4, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this

Ga. Corporations are created by the General Assembly. As such, they only have privileges granted to them by the legislature, not rights like people have under the state & federal constitutions. Any talk of the rights of corporations occurs out of ignorance or public policy fraud. Corporations, however, have a shield limiting shareholder liability to facilate raising capital for economic development.

By Brian Ott

January 4, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

I think the NRA’s time would be better spent supporting Representative Tim Beardon’s Second Amendment Protection Act (H.B.915) that greatly improves Georgia’s highly restrictive and ambiguous firearm laws, which has it’s roots in racist policies following the Civil War, and still respects the rights of the private property owner. I call upon all NRA members to contact the NRA and ask them to support H.B. 915 as written.

By mike silver

January 4, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this

The time has come for those Legislators who claim to support the Second Amendment and the NRA to do something for the Second Amendment.

I’m infinitely more likely to be busted for violating Public Gatherings than my boss going into my car and firing me. Plus, the government imposed penalties are infinitely more severe than losing my job. Wake up NRA …. We got huge problems here and now a bill that will fix them.

If HB 915 doesn’t pass, then we’ll know who to blame … the NRA and the politicians that sided with them against the interest of Georgians.

By Chad Slater

January 4, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Is the NRA working for itself, or is it working for Georgians?

If it’s working for Georgians, it will drop its ill-advised tampering with and support of H.B. 89, and line up behind Rep. Beardon’s Second Amendment Protection Act of 2008 (H.B. 915). I should not risk being charged with a felony because I walked past a bus stop.

If the NRA can’t support me, then I cannot support the NRA.

By albie

January 4, 2008 11:34 AM | Link to this

An armed person does not deprive you of your property in anyway. You still possess the same things you did before they came on your property. By disarming them you are depriving them of their property ie. their firearm and the best means of self defense. Gun free zones make no one except criminals safer. No one should ever be disarmed unless they are commiting a crime. The property rights excuse is just another form of gun control.

By Jerry

January 4, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this

Similarly, a drunk driver does not deprive me of my property in any way. However, like a drunk behind the wheel of a car, nuts carrying loaded weapons greatly enhance the probability of innocent people dying. BTW, I have carried and used weapons in combat. Trust me on this: killing isn’t theoretical, and it’s irreversable.

By Mark McCullough

January 4, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

While current Georgia law states that a firearms license should be issued in 60 days, it is taking 4 to 6 months in many counties, and many people have waited for over a year. At least one person waited 2.5 years (Fulton County). These delays are unconscionable, especially considering that the General Assembly added instantaneous background checks to the system in 2006. Known as the NICS check, this is an electronic check of federal and state criminal, mental health, and other records, and it generally takes about 90 seconds to run.

Yet the NRA is coming to Georgia wearing their mule’s blinders and disregarding the wishes of so many lifetime Georgia gun owners, singly focusing on their own agenda.

By Wendy Weinbaum

January 4, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this

What a cowardly editorial. Joe Fleming should probably try to get a job in San Francisco. As a Jewess in the US, I call on all REAL Americans to put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!!!!

By Eric

January 4, 2008 2:58 PM | Link to this

I’m a cop in Dekalb. With all the crime we have all over this county I fully support a law abiding citizens right to carry and the public gathering law needs to go. Anyone who knows the history of the public gathering law knows that it was created by racists Georgia democrats to make sure blacks wouldn’t march becuase they couldn’t protect themselves without being armed. It was created to disarm blacks and their republican supporters, period…and it way outdated. Time for a change. And yes I think the NRA needs to see the bigger picture and get behind HB915. As a career police officer there are MANY streets in Dekalb that I will not drive down at night without backup very near or with me. Please try and tell me that with all the robberies, rapes, and murders here that the answer is to further restrict law abiding citizens from protecting themselves? Not so. Guess what, when you call 911 in Dekalb you are often put on hold and our response time is horrible. We are so understaffed its not even funny. I go to alarm calls every day that have been pending for 3 hours or more, seriously. So the notion that you can depend on the government for your safety is ridiculous, you cant.

By Jim Wilson

January 4, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

For those that have not noticed, there is a battle raging on two fronts. Georgia has used “gun legislation” as a way of discriminating against minorities for years and now it has progressed to all law abiding and licensed citizens as well. Rep. Beardon’s Second Amendment Protection Act of 2008 (H.B. 915) is attempting to correct these imposed restrictions placed on us by the State. The NRA on the other hand is addressing the issue of property owners right’s in regard to controlling possessions inside automobiles while on their property. So regarding this the question becomes, “Does the individual property owner’s rights superceed those of the individual which are afforded by the Constitution”? Another part of the issue is directed at the defination of “home”. Automobiles have always been considered in Georgia to be part of the individual’s personal property and like your home, the police do not have the right to search it without just cause or a warrant. You have the right to keep people from smoking on your property but you do not have the right to forbid them from having unlit cigarettes in their car while there. Currently the forces that want to disarm the public are attempting to cause havoc in every arena that they can. Therefore to protect our liberties, we must fight the battle on more than one front at a time. The opposition is attempting to win by dividing the NRA leadership from its Georgia membership. The important issue here is the one that the NRA is fighting. Just for the sake of argument, if H.B. 915 passes and the NRA fails in it attempts to protect your rights, businesses will still be able to tell you that you can not have your gun on their property even though the State law restriction for carrying on that property had been lifted. We must fight the battle on two fronts and remain united with each other or we all lose.

By albie

January 4, 2008 6:19 PM | Link to this

Jerry, I would’nt trust you as far as I could throw you. The very huge majority of gun owners are very responsible law abiding people. The majority of people that carry enhance the probability that innocent lives will be saved. Gun free zones=shooting fish in a barrel. How many shootings happen at shooting competitions,NRA meetings,sportsmans clubs where there are plenty of guns and gun owners? Maybe you should stop thinking about drunks and deal with reality!

By Jerry

January 5, 2008 9:36 AM | Link to this

Well, two problems. You’re assuming that EVERYONE who either hasn’t been convicted of a felony or been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital is a stable, law abiding citizen. Patently not true. Second, no training is required to carry a weapon among fellow citizens. I’ve had extensive weapons training, and maybe you have too, but the majority of citizens don’t know the muzzle from the stock. People untrained in weapons and untrained in what to do in a tight space are likely to panic and cause more harm than good. Even professionals can cause a horrible situation - look at the Blackwater people in Iraq. I’m not a pinko, just someone who knows first hand how serious the discharge of a firearm is and how lightly some of you seem to take it. I’ve killed and had men very near me killed, and I don’t want ever to be in a firefight again, especially not one with panicked housewives and accountants blasting away.

By albie

January 5, 2008 11:15 AM | Link to this

I don’t assume anything. I deal with the facts. The estimates of gun owners in the US run between 60 to 80 million. If the majority of them were irresponsible deaths and injuries would number in the millions.Gun control has not been proven anywhere to keep guns out of the hands of criminals or to reduce violence against innocent people. You ignore the evidence where armed people have stopped criminals. Actually most states do reguire a permit to carry and in order to get that permit they do require training.Vermont does not require a permit or training and guess which state is consistently ranked one of the safest or the safest on a consistent basis. Thats right Vermont. As I said before the very huge majority of gun owners are responsible and they should not have their rights violated due to a very small minority. Do you actually believe that telling someone with criminal intent that they can’t do or have something is going to stop them? Criminals ignore laws and by disarming the innocent you just make the criminals job easier. Gun control creates an imbalance of power that favors the criminal.

By AW Guy

January 6, 2008 7:06 PM | Link to this

Yeah, the issue is property rights. Does my Boss have the right to tell me what kind of property I can carry locked in my car? Does mt boss have the right to search in side my car (which is my property) If he can search inside my car, can he search inside my house?

If my employer says I can’t take my gun out (except in emergency) and walk into his building with it, thats fine. But he has no right to tell me what I can have inside my car. That is the real heart of the issue

By HAL

January 7, 2008 12:12 AM | Link to this

I agree with AW Guy. The issue is that anyone’s boss should not be able to say what they can or can’t have in their personal propery (Car, house, whatever). I work the night shift and get extremely nervous when walking from the parking lot into the building and back out in the morning. The area I work in can be considered “safe” and has a low crime rate, but I bet everyone thought Luby’s cafe was “safe” until a crazy person drive into it and started killing people.

A business/employer should not be allowed to tell their employees what they can or can’t have locked in the employees private vehicle.

I am sure the NRA also supports the Second Amendment Protection Act of 2008 (H.B. 915) because it is PRO-2nd ammedment.

By donttreadonme

January 7, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

Although the tone of this piece shows bias against me and other free U.S.Citizens, the link to the Commerce of Commerce editoral article stands beyond dishonesty. I lost count of the misrepresentations regarding the bill. Joe Fleming, senior vice president for government affairs at the Georgia Chamber of Commerce takes every opertunity to mislead readers and twist the facts. Mr Fleming, practicing my rights does not infringe on property rights of a business.

By Jim H

January 7, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this

Your personal vehicle is your private property. A business owner/employer has no right to search your vehicle. Once you are in their building it’s their rules. It should be pretty clear.

All this does is create another “gun free” zone. We’ve seen what gun free zones accomplish. Just look at Va. Tech., the mall in Nebraska, Columbine and any other number of instances. Many died because the law abiding were disarmed and made easy targets. That is all gun free zones do, they create easy victims.

Now compare this to the New Life Church incident where one armed citizen is credited with saving 50-100 lives. Criminals, by nature of their actions, don’t obey laws. In fact, a gun free zone is just what they are looking to find.

Another incident involved the Appalachian School of Law shooting. Guns were retrieved from vehicles and used to subdue the perpetrator in that incident. How many more would have died if they were not alowed to have firearms in their vehicle?

One armed citizen can make a big difference. Refuse to be a victim.

By GA Resident

January 7, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this

Let’s say all the 20-something year old kids in the neighborhood and adjoining neoghborhoods decide to use my front yard for a pick up game of softball. I don’t want them to do this, as it tears up my yard & the bats and balls are dangerous as a person could get hit or my personal property (cars, windows) could get damaged. So I walk out front and tell them all to leave. It’s my property, I should have the right to refuse its use to anyone. Now, what if the Ga Assembly compelled me to allow these people to continue their game, no matter my wishes? My private property rights would have been rescinded by decree of the Legislators in the Capitol.

The above scenario is exactly analogous to the car carry bill. You’re saying people can carry a firearm onto my property, and there’s not a dang thing I can do about it? Why should I accept that? If you work somewhere where you don’t feel safe, get another job. Don’t trample on my rights to get your way.

And before the NRA-loyalists bash me (I am not now, nor likely ever will be, an NRA member), I should let you know that I fully support HB 915. It allows peaceable adults to act as adults without imposing any unwanted restrictions on personal property rights. Passing HB 915 will do more to ensure a Georgian’s right to self defense than any other piece of legislation!

HB 915 will: create a Bloomberg Law in Georgia that invokes strict (read: felony) penalties for illegal straw purchases; It allows peaceable adults to carry a firearm in their car however they see fit to do so; it repeals the racist and obscufatory ‘public gathering’ restrictions that are more restrictive than any other carry state in the nation, including California; it allows college carry - which benefits not only students but adult faculty and staff on college campuses across the state; It removes the requirement for a state-issued license for peaceable citizens with no crimial history to carry a firearm on their person; it makes the state Probate Judges accountable for the timely issuance of a firearms license, not the usual 6 months to a year it takes now; and it creates a Katrina provision meaning the Governor can’t compel the State to confiscate my weapon(s) during any period they deem it acceptable.

The NRA car carry bill allows me to keep a gun in my glovebox at work. That’s it.

Now which piece of legislation do you think accomplishes more for Georgians without victimizing anyone? Call the NRA and call your State representation in the Capitol and tell them the NRA-backed bill is a joke, that we need HB 915!!! Do it today, the legislative session for 2008 begins January 14, 2008!!!

By Jim H

January 7, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

GA Resident..This doesn’t apply to you unless your yard is being used as a parking lot and you have employees coming into your house. Kids trespassing on your property has nothing to do with allowing someone to keep a firearm in their vehicle.

By Ga Resident

January 7, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

Jim: my example is exactly analogous to the NRA bill. An unwanted land use or activity (storing a weapon is an activity) on my property from which I have no defense/recourse. Kids playing ball : employees storing guns.

If the kids want to play on the neighbors yard, and he’s OK with it, fine, have at it. Same deal as if you want to carry a gun to your job, choose a job that allows that. But at the very least leave the choice up to the land owner.

Don’t force people through government tyranny and oppression to accept something they don’t agree with. Force choice upon the people, force freedoms upon the people, sure… but not badly oppressive legislation the takes away choice and freedom.

We’ve systematically lost enough freedoms in this country over the course of 300+ years of government. It has to stop sometime, shouldn’t it?

By Tom

January 8, 2008 3:27 PM | Link to this

Jerry, It sounds like you had a real tough experience in combat and I wish you well in your recovery from the mental stress you’ve suffered. I agree with you I don’t ever want to be in a firefight either, but we don’t always get our live the way we want them. Our Government sent you to be in firefights, but you were sent armed to the teeth with the most efficient and deadly weapons available to defend yourself. I only ask the same chance from our Government. If I’m involved in a firefight I want the ability to defend myself and my loved ones ina similar manner. I ask you, Jerry, what is your plan to defend yourself and your loved ones if met with deadly force now that you’ve given your weapons back to the Government and you can’t get them back or replace them? Are you going to tell the criminal “I’ve already been through this.” and expect to be given some sort of pass? Our Founding Fathers gave us the right and ability to defend ourselves and expected us to be men enough to use it, whether against a miscreant nation or person attempting to deprive us of life or liberty,everytime it’s necessary. You don’t want to anymore, fine, but don’t expect the rest of us to give up the right