Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2008 > January > 15 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USThe gun deal
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The Senate Rules Committee has just gutted last year’s version of the NRA-backed guns-in-parking-lots bill.
With senators giving much of the credit to Gov. Sonny Perdue, who met with NRA top gun Wayne LaPierre last week, a new version of the bill now applies to roughly 300,000 holders of state-issued concealed weapons permits.
And then only in limited circumstances.
Perdue, who has locked horns with the National Rifle Association before, made clear this morning he was bothered by the clash of property rights and Second Amendment rights, and was prepared to wield a veto. He had delivered the same message to LaPierre last week, so it wasn’t a surprise to the NRA.
In the rules committee hearing, the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, which had led the opposition, asked for more time to study the fresh version, but was denied.
It was significant that NRA reps spoke neither for nor against the bill. In essence, the measure gives the gun organization just enough to declare a philosophical victory — which it can point to when a similar bill comes up again in Florida in the next few weeks.
In the Georgia version, to be voted on in the Senate on Thursday:
— An owner can ban all firearms from his property at all times.
— A business owner who leases the property can ban all firearms from the property, if the landlord agrees.
— A business/property owner can ban all firearms from the company parking lot if there is no public access to the company lot.
— A business/property owner can’t prohibit an employee from keeping a firearm in a company parking lot if it is open to the general public — and if those members of the public aren’t specifically prohibited from bringing firearms with them.
A WalMart, say.
But this employee protection is only extended to the roughly 300,000 Georgians who have state-issued concealed weapons permits.
But if WalMart wants to ban firearms for everybody, they can do that, too. Complicated, isn’t it?
This might to be compared to the city of Kennesaw’s gun law. Which declares that you must own a firearm, unless you don’t want to.
Comments
By Churchill
January 15, 2008 9:18 PM | Link to this
What a joke. It sounds like a bunch of retarded kids playing duh-tective.
By Churchill
January 15, 2008 9:37 PM | Link to this
COMMENT, ABOVE, NOT MINE.
By Churchill
January 15, 2008 10:03 PM | Link to this
ditto
By jm
January 15, 2008 11:22 PM | Link to this
Wait…doesn’t walmart SELL guns? that seems to be a bad example.
My employer has a private lot for employees, another lot it leases from a venue that doesn’t need it during the day (we do use keycards to get in), and a lot for visitors and employees. I can just see the email flurry when this thing gets passed.
By Mike
January 16, 2008 2:39 AM | Link to this
Top five baseless and subversive arguments against the Second Amendment… http://truthalert.net/Top%20Five%20Baseless%20and%20Subversive%20Arguments%20Against%20the%20Second%20Amendment.htm
By ron
January 16, 2008 5:34 AM | Link to this
So now the employer has to start checking the private vehicles of it’s employees to make sure that no one brings a firearm to work,either under the seat or in the trunk,or some other secret hiding place.this search policy has to be fair,above board, and equeally applied to all.Like most policies that employers have for employees,they will screw this one up too.I smell lawsuits coming.
By GodHatesTrash
January 16, 2008 6:53 AM | Link to this
300,000 paranoid pekkkerwoods have concealed weapon permits in Georgia? Hell, there ain’t that many high school graduates!
Trash. Stupid paranoid dumb-as-dirt inbred trash.
By mafuta54
January 16, 2008 8:08 AM | Link to this
My goodness GodHatesTrash! You are showing your utter ignorance and stupidity and the inference that you are actually the one you are talking about!! [Quote] By GodHatesTrash
January 16, 2008 6:53 AM | Link to this
300,000 paranoid pekkkerwoods have concealed weapon permits in Georgia? Hell, there ain’t that many high school graduates!
Trash. Stupid paranoid dumb-as-dirt inbred trash.[/quote]
By Jerry
January 16, 2008 8:32 AM | Link to this
This isn’t about guns. The real issue here is power. As for guns in cars, heck, no one is checking. Anyone who wants to keep a gun in the glove box is doing so now and will continue to do so whatever the law is. An employer ban on guns in the parking lot is unenforceable and would only become an issue if there were an ugly incident, in which event the land owner would have a defense. The real issue is whether the all powerful NRA can continue absolute control over the legislature, and losing this fight would be a crack in that power lock.
By Craig
January 16, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this
The government is telling property owners what they can and cannot do on their property. Odd how these SAME people were just recently screaming about emminent domain with the government forcing property owners to do something against their will. But somehow what was once evil for the government to do is now being shoved down our throats in another aspect of pandering. Unprincipled hypocrites.
By Mark McCullough
January 16, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this
OK NRA, you can step away from the Capitol now, and allow Georgians to weigh in on bills written by Georgians. HB 915 protects more Georgians and more Georgian gun owners than what is left of HB 89. You got your time in front of the cameras, now let us decide for ourselves.
By jose billing
January 16, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this
i think its stuipd cause come on what are we suppose to protect our self if danger came upon us…?
By John
January 17, 2008 9:45 PM | Link to this
You can read the bill at: http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2007_08/fulltext/hb89.htm
Despite claims that it was “gutted,” it looks to me like it accomplishes what was needed: - Legalizes weapons carry in parks and recreational areas, some of which are fairly remote. - Tightens up the permit issue requirements for counties, some of which have been taking far more time to issue firearm permits than the current law allows. - Keeps employers minding their own business so long as employees mind theirs.
I don’t understand how the guns-at-work provision can be cast as a clear ideological question by either side. The Second Amendment, so lavishly invoked by the NRA, is surely intended to constrain governments, not private individuals or businesses. But it’s not a clear property rights issue, either; businesses are already subjected to an outlandish array of requirements meant to ensure their employees’ well-being.
I see this simply as a public policy calculation: employers are commonly forbidding their employees to be armed on the way to and from work, and the State sees this as a net loss for society. It’s more akin to a smoking-at-entrances prohibition than anything else.