Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2008 > April > 24 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USFranklin, MARTA head: Gun bill would promote violence, vigilantism
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin this morning led a group of two dozen public officials, business leaders and workers in a plea directed at Sonny Perdue, asking the governor to veto a gun bill that would permit licensed concealed weapons to be carried on public transportation, in restaurants that serve alcohol, and in parks.
Prospects of vigilantism were raised by MARTA head Beverly Scott. And MARTA workers said they’re already passing around a petition to demand bullet-proof partitions for bus drivers and train operators should Perdue sign the bun bill into law.
H.B. 89, backed by the National Rifle Association and other gun rights groups, was passed by the Legislature on the final day of the 2008 session. Most of the debate had concerned a provision to permit employees to keep guns parked on corporate parking lots.
But in the final hours, language expanding the places where holders of concealed weapons permits was added — with little or now debate.
Perdue, who has until mid-May to sign or veto the legislation, has given little hint of what he’ll do. Although an advocate of gun rights, the governor has picked the occasional fight with the NRA.
Franklin said the bill radically changes the situation that police officers and other city workers face when engaging large crowds — at the annual Dogwood Festival or the Peachtree Road Race.
“The presumption has to be, if this bill passes, that there are concealed weapons by people who just might get mad with them,” Franklin said. “The presumption needs to be, in order to have a safe city, that there are no concealed weapons. And only those who are acting criminally might have them.”
Ben DeCosta, general manager of Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, said the legislation would put his facility under a “cloud.”
Firearms are banned from the facility, but the airport incorporates a MARTA station within its grounds. “So it opens a question as to whether or not police officers, law enforcement at the airport, can be assured that they’re the only ones with guns,” DeCosta said.
Beverly Scott, head of MARTA, declared her transit system to be safe. But even for those who question their personal security, Scott said arming individual passengers is not the answer.
“The method in which I would chose to wind up handling security and safety on the MARTA system is not by vigilantism,” Scott said. “And if that’s what we’re going to wind up deteriorating to, then that I would submit to you is just an incorrect way to go. That’s insanity.”
Also attending the press conference, behind the press and TV cameras, was state Rep. Tim Bearden (R-Villa Rica), author of H.B. 89. With him were several members of GeorgiaCarry.Org, which backed the bill.
“All this stuff we hear about people are going to start dropping their chicken wings and shooting is enough to make your head explode,” Bearden said. “We’re talking about law-abiding citizens going through background checks.”
“They cannot protect you in Atlanta. They never have,” said Bearden, a former police officer. “I was in law enforcement 15 years. I never rode up on a shooting in progress. I don’t like the idea of the police telling you, ‘Get mugged, get raped, get murdered. We’ll come by, take the report, and send flowers. That’s the wrong message.”
Comments
By Darrell
April 24, 2008 11:41 AM | Link to this
Liberals can never grasp the concept that if a criminal knows that legally other people may have a weapon, then many will think twice before trying to use a weapon around them. If they do choose to, then at least legally I have the ability and right to defend myself. Look at the states where they have allowed citizens to exercise their 2nd amendment rights the most have the lowest crime rates. Australia which locked up all the guns, has found that low and behold the criminals didn’t give theirs up. England which has for years bragged about their strict gun policy is having a huge increase in gun violence by criminals who know they have no one armed against them. This isn’t and never will be a 100% safe society. Let us the law abiding citizens conceal carry legally and watch the crime rate drop.
By Harvey
April 24, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
Every convicted felon was, just moments before his first conviction, a “law abiding citizen” who could pass a background check. The idea that the world is divided between easily identified “law abiding citizens” and the future felons and crazies is laughable. So is the idea that everyone, or even many people, have the cool and training to know when and how to use deadly force. I’m more afraid of the angry accountants and soccer moms than I am any robber.
By Justin Case
April 24, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this
An interesting point of view… “The presumption needs to be, in order to have a safe city, that there are no concealed weapons. And only those who are acting criminally might have them.” …So if I understand her correctly only criminals should be the ones carrying concealed weapons…too funny.
By Greg
April 24, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this
Being an law enforcement officer, I can see most of these new oncealed carry patrons becoming victims of their own weapons being used against them.
By BeachBum
April 24, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this
Ah yes, the engaging Mr. Bearden, with political stars in his eyes and higher office dreams in his head. And, of course, with this inordinate fascination with firearms. It seems he likes the palm filling heft of a walnut grip… Of course, any roommate from Tiny Tim’s high school graduation senior beach trip to PCB can tell you what kind of gun he really likes to handle.
Keep your powder dry, Tim, and keep that derringer fully loaded.
By 2AFan
April 24, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this
A friend, riding on Marta a few years ago, complained to a Marta employee about a grinning, gold-toothed fellow passenger who sported a handgun in his waistband. The “citizen” revealed the weapon to my friend by pulling back his jacket as if to communicate to my friend that he (the gold-grilled one) was in charge of things.
The Marta employee remarked “Oh, dats probly jes one of our unduhcovuh poeleese.”
And you know, he may have been right. That’s why we need concealed carry on Marta. Shirley you can understand this.
By jack
April 24, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this
So, if the MARTA workers get a bullet proof petition does that mean it can’t be signed with a bullet?
By fedupingwinnett
April 24, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this
Do you actually think that criminals care whether they can carry a gun legally. Why should we as law abiding citizens with concealed carry licenses be penalized? Franklin’s comment that “only those who are acting criminally might have them.” What a joke! Decosta’s statement is just as crazy/stupid. The police are not going to protect us just look at the nightly news. It is our right to carry a gun as long as we pass the background check. If criminals are not sure what citizen might have a gun (legally) they might think twice about pulling out their illegal/stolen guns. Sonny needs to sign this bill and he should have signed it yesterday.
By The Oddball
April 24, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this
The problem that “conservative” gun owners have on gun issues is that they are, by and large, law abiding people. Which, unfortunately, means their understanding of criminals is about nil. No one with any experience in law enforcement (25 years here) would ever make a statement like “if a criminal knows that legally other people may have a weapon, then many will think twice before trying to use a weapon around them.” The possibility of concealed weapons has never stopped a criminal from doing anything. They’re generally impulsive and stupid. The reality of this bill is that people with little or no training and experience with firearms may pull them out in a public place and start blasting at real or imagined threats, with dreadful consequences for anyone around them. It take police officers YEARS to learn how and when to use a weapon, and they still make mistakes — sometimes fatal mistakes — under pressure.
Next time you’re in a bar or on the MARTA train, take a good look at the people around you. How many of those people would you trust to make the right decision with a handgun in a high-stress situation with two seconds to decide, with your head and private parts in the potential line of fire? I rest my case.
By Harold J
April 24, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this
Why are they worried about LEGAL gun owners? Why are they not worried about the thugs who carry guns? It sounds so stupid that they want to put up a bulletproof partitions (not Petitions) on buses. It shows how dumb the people who run the city of Atlanta are. She should worry more about the gangs and thugs who are causing the crime and murder in the city carrying weapons. If you talk to a police officer on the street and they have no problem with legal citizens carring a weapon.
By Ga Resident
April 24, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this
Where in the heck does Mayor Frnklin get off telling me if, how, where to defend myself? How could she possibly understand the peril of walking to or from a MARTA stop, unarmed, at night? She can’t relate at all, (1) because she doesn’t use MARTA and (2) she’s got an executive body guard detail —armed to the teeth— to do her protecting for her. Hyppocrite.
Shirley, get off of your high horse and keep your trap shut. You have no clue, NO CLUE what it is to walk around today’s streets and public places at the mercy of those who would do you harm. You’re so insulated and out of touch with the average Joe Lunchbox that your comments, as confusing as they are, are offensive.
HB 89, as norrow in scope as it is, simply decriminalizes my right to defend myself in a couple of public places. It does not exclude those who commit crimes from punishment for those crimes, and it will not lead to an increase in firearms-related incidents. Your comments to the contrary are misleading and shameful.
Bullet-proof glass in buses? Guns at HJ Airport? Short-sighted strawman arguments. Yeah, let’s panic and fire up the knee-jerk reactions. Here, let me clip you a clue-pon: there are already concealed firearms on public transportation and at the airport. Everywhere, all day long.
All HB 89 does is give those of us who care about ourselves, our families and our futures the right to take a stand on our own behalves.
I’m not surprised Shirley Franklin, champion of the ‘Cradle-to-the-Grave’ social services concept, can not wrap her intellect around that idea.
By Tom
April 24, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this
Do you need a GED to write for the AJC? What is a bullet-proof petition? Perhaps the bus drivers would be better served by some kind of partition.
By Norm
April 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
Properly licensed residents, who carry weapons, are not the problem in this state or the city of Atlanta. It is the criminal element that will carry weapons and do what they may that are the problem. Mayor Franklin, Mr DeCosta, and Beverly Scott have yet to present instances where licensed weapons carriers have endangered anyone other than criminals that they seek to protect themselves from. Mayor Franklin and company are provoking fear rather than reason. They are protecting the criminals rather than the public. Mayor Franklin needs to solve the crime issue in Atlanta rather than focusing on citizens who follow the law. Citizens and legislators got House Bill 89 passed using proper procedure and working within the system. Where did the criminals get their permission Mayor Franklin?
By PR
April 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
Just one more reason people won’t come to Atlanta, and Georgia. The state will become “Dodge City” and everyone will be carrying guns. I donn’t like your looks…BANG! My dinner order is wrong…BANG! Got a problem with…BANG! Gov. Sonny…this is a no-brainer…VETO!!!
By Kay
April 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
Wild Wild West… That’s what we will have…
By ATL
April 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
No Mr. Justin Chase. You have completely misunderstood her comment.
You appear to be logic impaired.
By ATL
April 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
No Mr. Justin Case. You have completely misunderstood her comment.
You appear to be logic impaired.
By Bob R.
April 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
I have a concealed weapons license and underwent the rigorous background check, which as of last year is even more strict and lengthy, including GBI involvement and digital fingerprinting technology. Like most, if not all, CWL holders we are not out to undertake valiant vigilantism…what for? To become liable, get sued, or worst get killed? No, I believe we have our right to bear arms, a constitutional privileged we choose to embrace with responsibility and accountability.
Please support HB 89. Thank you.
By Gun Pro
April 24, 2008 12:24 PM | Link to this
Hey - I am with you ‘fedupingwinnett’. It works for the criminals, it works for me. I would rather be judged by 12, than carried by 6. I have a concealed permit and exercise my rights every day.
By Kay
April 24, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this
The Wild Wild West is what we will have…
By morris
April 24, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this
LET’S FACE IT WHAT Mr Bearden invisions is A WHITE PERSON BEING CONFRONTED BY A INTEMIDATING BLACK PERSON AND THEREFORE PULLING HIS OR HER HAND GUN. BUT LET IT HAPPEN THE OTHER WAY AROUND.THEN WHAT YOU HAVE IS THE REALIZATION THAT THAT MAYBE THIS WAS A BAD BILL.
By Jeff
April 24, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this
Personally, I prefer a Taser combined with a good hiking stick. Taser International has some good models available for purchase by private citizens, and in GA they are not considered firearms. My wife and I are actually planning on buying at least one this summer, maybe even one for both of us. (Probably the C2 model if you look at their website.)
Also, Taser International is in the process of fielding a new option for police: the XREP. Basically a shotgun cartridge that incapacitates you rather than blowing a decent sized part of your body away.
Now, as far as the debate over actual guns: If a person KNOWS that the majority of a population is NOT going to have a gun, he KNOWS that he can take a gun into that population and do pretty much whatever he wants, because no one will be able to stop him.
IF, however, he does NOT know that, he must think twice about what he is planning to do and how to do it.
Arm the population. At least then you’ll get SMART criminals!
By Jlapp
April 24, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this
The vast majority of concealed carry people are either retired officers or people who have been threatened by violence. It is not “gun nuts” who look for someone to shoot. Liberals should be on the exact opposite side of this arguement. Rich people can afford bodyguards and do not need to ride Marta. Concealed carry people do not commit crimes. They are worried about their own protection.
By John S.
April 24, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this
italic: “The presumption has to be, if this bill passes, that there are concealed weapons by people who just might get mad with them,” Franklin said. “The presumption needs to be, in order to have a safe city, that there are no concealed weapons. And only those who are acting criminally might have them.”
Mr. Galloway, AJC editors, et. al. - where is the parity on this? I’m shocked logic of this quote isn’t challenged at all. Perhaps we should just let Mayor Franklin write Op-Eds with no response either.
By haha
April 24, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this
Really funny stuff! Black leaders, in a black city againest guns concealed in the hands of white people. Wonder why? Doesn’t take much to figure that out. Just watch the news and see who is commiting the crime here.
By Hogg Legg
April 24, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this
Lying bald-headed fat-gut Sonny will veto it. If he had a pair, he’d tell Shurlee and her dope-dealing fambly to shove that flower up her anus.
By Scott
April 24, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this
The entire press conference was a bunch of blowhards looking to get a little face time on camera. They said little in detail and focused on fear, uncertainty, and doubt. If they are such good fortune tellers, why don’t they buy a lottery ticket and retire early?
The fact remains that armed citizens should have the means to defend themselves when faced by a thug wishing to act a forcible felony. HB89 does not permit vigilantism but instead expands where a person can defend himself.
Signing HB89 into law by Perdue would be a great action in and of itself so that the individual’s rights are expanded.
By DichotomE
April 24, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this
By most accounts I would be considered a “liberal”, but I’m also not dumb and understand very well that I have every right to exercise my right to carry concealed with my license.
By most accounts you might recognize that I am “educated”, but I am also very street saavy and can easily shady types or when a situation could potentially go down - due to my upbringing in a tough city.
By most accounts you might look and me and conclude that I am a “nerd”, but I am also very well versed in the use of my firearm and can flip a switch in a second to defend effectively myself using it.
I don’t need to mayor telling me that I don’t have good judgement about carrying a firearm. She needs to be more concerned about her ability to run this city with its $100 million deficit!! It’s time for her to go anyway.
By jay
April 24, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this
we should ban all handguns and semi automatic weapons. if you want to stay strapped keep that rifle handy.
guns are meant for protecting the freedom of georgia (from the federal govt, other nations, the militia of florida, etc.). guns are not meant to be put in the waistband of your pants while you ride marta or while you drink your coors light at applebees or whatever suburbia spot you hang out at.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
By Matt
April 24, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this
The “Wild Wild Wes” comments are simply absurd—and likely coming from crybaby sissies who’ve never even held a gun a day in their life.
The simple fact is Shirley is more concerned with protecting the rights of her criminal constituency that keeps her and her corrupt cohorts in office, than the safety of law-abiding citizens.
I ask all you anti-gun p*ssies to cite one—JUST ONE—example where a licensed firearm carrier committed an act straight out of the wild, wild west. Please—I’m dying to see where this is the case.
The fact is, due to liberalism in our courts and our politics, criminals are free to punish, rape, and terrorize our law-abiding citizens. We need to be able to fight back NOW! I’m not waiting for the Atlanta PD to come chalk up my body after some scum robs me off Techwood or by Turner Field—only to be released later on because his lawyers will claim racism or some b****** defense.
Support HB 89—give the law-abiding citizens the upper hand and let us protect ourselves.
By Bonedaddy
April 24, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this
Harvey, you are an freakin idiot. Why don’t you put a sign in your front yard saying I’m in fear of soccer moms not robbers, and I have no guns in my house. Lets see if you are visited late at night by a soccer mom or lawyer, or thug. Idiot.
By Matt
April 24, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this
Really funny stuff! Black leaders, in a black city againest guns concealed in the hands of white people. Wonder why? Doesn’t take much to figure that out. Just watch the news and see who is commiting the crime here.
You hit the nail on the head, haha.
That’s the real reason Shirley doesn’t want this to go through. She doesn’t want the law-abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves against her constituency that keeps her and the Atlanta City CARTEL[Council] in power.
By songbird
April 24, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this
The only time I’ve been bothered by anyone on Marta was some crazy lady spouting Bible verses.
Unless you’re riding the train late at night, I can’t see any reason why you would need a gun. I can’t think of a single instance anyone has been hurt by a criminal during the day on Marta trains.
The people who need to carry concealed weapons are those carrying large sums of cash to banks for deposit, pawn shop workers, maybe others, who are targets for thieves.
If a mugger graps your purse on the street and your gun is in the purse, good luck.
By West Cobb Dad
April 24, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this
Individual acting criminally has gun. Law abinding citizen obeys law and is unarmed. IAC holds up gas station where LAC is waiting to spend a week’s wages on gas. IAC gets money from register, shoots cashier and starts to turn on other customers. LAC bends over and kisses own butt good-bye. Franklin basically gave me the best arguement. Reminds me of that bumpersticker (out law guns, only outlaws will have guns). I have a permit to carry and spent 8 years in the Corps and am quite capable when it comes to using it. I am not a vigilante, but I’d me damned if I am going to let some punk IAC kill me or other innocents because I am a law abiding citizen. I carry. Always will. I would rather be arrested for violating the law where I am not suppose to carry than be buried.
By Concerned Citizen
April 24, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this
It looks like Franklin is working hard for the best interest of murders, muggers, and rapest everywhere. Remember Franklin and others all the other in their high, white, towers, the safer tomorrow is one were only the bad guys and cops have guns(and the rest of us are all victims). To everyone out there remember don’t ever try to defend yourself! Just don’t move until the bad guys are done with you.
By Boots
April 24, 2008 12:59 PM | Link to this
If the media is lying about the race of the perpetrators in the metro, then they ought to be sued.
Anyway, it doesn’t matter the race of the perpetrators and predators roaming the streets. It will certainly give pause to the predators to find that the populace are not willing to become defenseless victims anymore, but will have the capacity to defend themselves from the thugs that don’t want to work for theirs as long as they can take mine.
By Scooter
April 24, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this
Obviously Shirley doesn’t live in my section of Atlanta. A section where a white boy like me must get some early street cred amongst the thugs by standing up to the first few that try to flex on a crackah.
If somebody wants to legally carry a gun let’em! Unless Shirley wants to provide… well you know there is nothing she can provide to protect me. Because, the police will not be there when s**t starts to pop off. In that instant it is up to me to defend myself with sticks, stones, really really mean words etc… or capitulate. Screw that, my crazy mindset and knife has worked so far, but; I would like the LIBERTY of legally concealing a firearm since I obey the law.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this
Yeah, what we need is MORE gun control.. it’s working very well in Chicago.
By songbird
April 24, 2008 1:04 PM | Link to this
And to haha - when was the last time you were in the City of Atlanta. A black city, lmao. Ever been to Morningside, Virgninia Highland, Ansley Park, Inman Park, Grant Park. You obviously know nothing of the City.
Jay - you are right. The second amendment was meant to let the citizens protect themselves from a corrupt government, state, local or national, a coup or attempted takeover by another entity. Anyone on this blog watch Jericho? That show depicts a good reason why citizens should have guns, but carrying them around on Marta and to restaurants is unnecessary.
By UB
April 24, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this
You dumb SOBs keep voting for this fu**tard of a woman for mayor. Did I not see the other night that budgets were being cut for Police and Fire Departments in the City? People in Atlanta deserve everything this dumb bit$h bring to the table. I will not rely on her or the APD to protect my family or myself.
To be real honest with you people, I am not 100% sure if I was with my family and had a gun that I would come to your aid if something were to go down. My job is to protect my family PERIOD.
So Mayor Franklin here is a big ole STFU.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this
“Being an law enforcement officer, I can see most of these new oncealed carry patrons becoming victims of their own weapons being used against them.”
Sure Greg, I can see that.. it happens enough to police officers, why not civilians too.
Say, are you going to give us driving lessons too? Or should I just follow your example?
Not that I don’t respect LEOs. I respect them a great deal, unless they’re speaking as if they’re automatically superior to me because they wear a badge. Trust me pal, it’s worth the risk to me to carry. If you believe what you say, then you should be preaching education and training.. hell you should probably be preaching that in your own department.
By Millard
April 24, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this
GA Resident and others are correct about HB 89. It simply decriminalizes my right to carry in certain places. Anyone can carry a firearm and anyone can use them legally, or illegally. Changing the law has little effect on behavior. Support HB 89!!!!!
By Tim
April 24, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this
I am armed and proud…as soon as my wife’s carry permit comes she too will be armed and proud! We are both trained and are pretty darn good shots!I refuse to give in and let the Shirley Franklin’s tell me they have it all under control and for me not be concerned for my families or my own safety. Everytime one of these liberal politicians speaks out it is just more cause for concern…
By Jeff
April 24, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this
Why not just allow tasers everywhere? At least they’re not going to kill anyone!
As I said earlier: A taser and a hiking stick is a NASTY combination for incapacitation, and you have the capability of not actually killing the person unless you REALLY have to.
By makesyagohmmm
April 24, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this
Seems like old Matt up there is really into calling other people crybaby sissies and pssies. Issues there? It’s always telling about a person’s psyche to see who would cast aspersions at the toughness and courage of those he doesn’t even know.
Seems like the real pssy and crybaby would be somebody who needs a gun, beyond their hands or other melee weapon, to defend themselves.
Cobra Kai, never die!
By courageous
April 24, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this
I really regret having to live in a society that has reverted back to this wild west attitude. I support the constitution fully but I disagree with this gun crap. Guns give people a false sense of security and invincibility, they need to be outlawed altogether. You can cry out about the thugs all you want but I’m willing to bet that same thug would think twice about getting physical with someone their same size or larger, and why should they when they can stand twenty five feet away and take a life. You gun lovers are cowards just like the thugs you disclaim. why should people who are rational weather law abiding or not have to worry about walking down a street and getting shot because some idiot allowed to carry a gun is a coward and thats what gun lovers are cowards and punks.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this
Carrying them is unnecessary until the one time you need one. Wearing a seatbelt is unnecessary.. until you get into a car accident. Carrying a first aid kit is unnecessary, until you come upon an accident scene. Carrying a cell phone is unnecessary, until you break down in the middle of nowhere. Home insurance is unnecessary, until you house burns. Having a spare tire is unnecessary until you have a flat. I do a lot of things, pay a lot of money, own a lot of crap that is unnecessary, until I need it.
By BC
April 24, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this
What makes the conservatives think that they know better than the law enforcement officers who are AGAINST this bill?
By Millard
April 24, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this
Songbird says The people who need to carry concealed weapons are those carrying large sums of cash to banks for deposit, pawn shop workers, maybe others, who are targets for thieves.
Based on that theory, it is OK to defend your money, or your employers money but not ok to defend your life or your family’s life!!
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this
Look guys, because of Shirley Franklin ammunition sales (to my understanding) are banned in the city.. and yet.. the criminals still have bullets! If this is a trial plan for banning weapons (as she suggest she is in favor of) then it’s a clear failure.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this
So courageous.. women are cowards when they’re faced with a male assailant or multiple male assailants?
Good to know.. LADIES, according to Courageous.. the BRAVE thing is to get beaten, robbed, raped, or possibly murdered.. keep that in mind.
By Mark
April 24, 2008 1:22 PM | Link to this
This is amazing.
First BeachBum makes his childish allegations. Then morris tries to interject racism where there is none.
Statistics have shown over and over, in every state that has relaxed their gun control laws, that those with gun permits cause less crime than the general public, and cause fewer innocent shootings than law enforcement.
PR tried to use the same erroneous claims that the anti-gun crowd used during the Stand Your Ground debate, and the same tired rhetoric that has been used in every state. Yet a simple study of the facts show PR’s claims to be grossly unfounded.
If Atlanta wants to surrender more to crime, like Chicago and Washington, DC, then let them. Just don’t pretend to care one iota about my safety when you cannot protect the residents already there. Like the mayor said, “The presumption needs to be, in order to have a safe city, that there are no concealed weapons. And only those who are acting criminally might have them.” Only criminals in ATL can carry guns.
By Antus
April 24, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this
By The Oddball “Next time you’re in a bar or on the MARTA train, take a good look at the people around you. How many of those people would you trust to make the right decision with a handgun in a high-stress situation with two seconds to decide, with your head and private parts in the potential line of fire? I rest my case.” I ask myself that question everytime I see “police officers”. The small, the weak, the overweight, the feminine….
By appaled
April 24, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this
the comments made by beadern are so blatenly racist (and nonsensical) its sickening…i ride the MARTA everyday and am COMFORTED by the fact that no one is/should be carrying a weapon of any sort…public transportation is NOT the place for weapons…if someone is so terribly scared of MARTA (and the people riding it) than get in your car and fight through the traffic, where you are much more likely to die in a car accident than by being assulted in the MARTA station.
By PAT
April 24, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
Can any of these terrified individuls provide a significant number of documented cases of where a licensed concealed carry (CC) license holder started blazing away for no apparent reason?? No, they can’t. Can examples of where a CC holder stopped a crime in progress or one from happening be provided. Yes, numerous ones can be provided. Unfortunately, law inforcement usually shows up at the scene of a crime to take reports and clean up the mess afterward. Law-abiding citizens must be able to provide for their own security. Government can’t, and has no ultimate responsibility for providing security for individuals. The US Supreme Court has already spoken on that.
By Millard
April 24, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
To further these arguments, or to learn more about a person’s right to legally possess and carry a firearm, come to the Eastman Gun Show in Gwinnett County this weekend. Stop by the GACarry table and learn more about this grass roots effort. You may also visit georgiacarry.org.
By Have gun, Will Travel.
April 24, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this
“We preserve our freedoms using four boxes: soap, ballot, jury, and cartridge.”
“It is a strange desire to seek power and to lose Liberty.” — Francis Bacon
for more go to:
http://ntwebweaver.com/guncontrol.htm
By Have gun, Will Travel.
April 24, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
“We preserve our freedoms using four boxes: soap, ballot, jury, and cartridge.”
“It is a strange desire to seek power and to lose Liberty.” — Francis Bacon
for more go to:
http://ntwebweaver.com/guncontrol.htm
By Millard
April 24, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
I saw a guy on TV last night running after 3 or 4 British Bobbies with an ax. They had to call for back-up to handle this guy. With no guns, it took about 10 of them to take the perp down. And you want to live in a society that bans firearms?
By Chip Jones
April 24, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this
If you are not a member of the NRA,please check them out. You will be amazed at the good that they do. It’s a shame rags like the AJC continue to vilify the NRA and it’s members. I urge you to join us in the fight for all of our Constitutional rights. Thank you.
By derbyman
April 24, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this
We should already be able to carry anywhere we want thanks to the Second Amendment. Our forefathers knew that we could not always have either police or military with us at all times for protection and that is no different today.
By mother of two
April 24, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this
Making the assumption that a law abiding citizen who would like to, or currently does, carry a handgun is someone who wants to be a vigilante is not accurate.
I grew up around guns. We kept them in our house, used them to hunt, etc. Everyone in our small town carried a gun their truck. The interesting thing — of the 21 years I lived there — NO ONE was ever killed by a law abiding citizen “vigilante” carrying a gun, but there were a couple of murders after burglars broke into someone’s house. Interestingly enough, if a fight broke out in our town, it was usually settled with fists, not with the guns that were located only a few feet away.
Even though I grew up around guns, I had no desire to carry a gun until I was followed last summer while out alone. It scared me to death. The whole time I was being followed, I didn’t see a cop. If the man had tried to grab me, there would have been nothing I could have done. I am 5’4” and only 110 pounds. I can’t fight off a large man.
With all due respect to cops, they can’t be everywhere all the time and my husband can’t be with me all the time, therefore I need to find a way to protect myself.
I have since obtained a GA carry license, I practice shooting, and I have taken two gun safety/law classes. But, I still can’t carry a gun when I walk, because I walk past three MARTA stops!
This may sound awful, but I don’t want a gun to protect others, I want it to protect myself when there is no one else around to help me, and I believe all citizens should have that right.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this
Oh appalLed.. they’re carrying.. you just don’t know about it.. it’d be the same if people with CCWs carried on the train, you’d never know it was happening. I can’t understand why anyone would seriously consider what the people who run MARTA and the city would think on any subject, but I can certainly understand why MARTA employees, of all people, would want to have as few armed people around them as possible.
By Some guy
April 24, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this
Harvey, you are a moron.
By Liberty Bell
April 24, 2008 1:36 PM | Link to this
Violent crime rates and property crime rates are at historic lows in the United States, and that’s without being able to carry a gun everywhere under the sun. This isn’t about protection from criminals or protection from gun-toting vigilantes; it’s about scoring a political victory. And jay, kudos on actually having read the Second Amendment! I thought I was the only one!
By fedupingwinnett
April 24, 2008 1:43 PM | Link to this
Hey Jeff, I read an article (on AJC?) about a someone in Gwinnett selling C2 Tasers. They had free items too if I remember correctly. I think it was a Badie article if you need more info.
By VolGrad
April 24, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this
Were you under a deadline to write this article? Were you late?
By wackoNonSense
April 24, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this
I have a question for all of you who think you need to carry a conceiled gun to “protect” yourself. When exactly are you planning on using your concealed weapon? Are you going to preemptively pull it on anyone who appears menacing to you or “your family?” Are you going to try to pull it on some criminal who’s already pulled a weapon on you to try to rob you? Good luck with that one.
And a general question: What exactly are the statistics for armed robberies on MARTA? People keep commenting about all the criminals and thugs already armed on MARTA, but what are the exact statistics on this?
By Rayzr
April 24, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this
Jeff,
I have a taser as well and it is considered a firearm along with any other weapon which shoots a projectile or emits an electrical charge. Get your permit. Also, Songbird, I grew up in southwest atlanta and remember several incidents where teen gangs had handguns in the station as well as other incidents. Lastly, although the crime may not occur on MARTA, once you arrive downtown, you are suggesting we walk the streets and be victimized…not me. I am a responsible citizen and local leader…and I am armed. Crime will only escalate as the economy deteriorates and we should be prepared. I have seen only once where a legal gun carrying person has been charged with excessive force. Even then, he shot the criminal who robbed him.
By Courageous
April 24, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this
Seems to me the majority of gun advocates are punk a* caucasions scared of their own shadow. You all keep throwing up this scenario about black thugs, but think about this, if you are in a bar and you are confronted by some vagrant and you whup his A* or bettr yet get your a** whupped whats the next thing to happen. One of you run crying to your home or truck and come back with your firearm, talk about weak a* men. If all of you are so educated where is your restraint or reasoning? A gun toting coward is just as deadly as a souped up crack head. I’m with the guy who said a good taser and a walking stick would suffice in most situations. there really neer has been a need for weapons like this except in the time of war. don’t think I can’t handle a weapon I’m a retired veteran and i know how to use more than a gun to kick some of your pathetic asses.
By Millard
April 24, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this
Mother of Two - you hit the name on the head. Women are targets, simply because they are women, and it only makes good sense to protect yourself. That poor UGA student in N. GA. couldn’t protect herself against that maniac even though she had two years of karate study. And legally she couldn’t possess a firearm in a state park. At least that will change with passage of HB 89.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this
Obviously reading it isn’t understanding it. You know what the bill of rights is, right?
So many people don’t. The Bill of Rights doesn’t give our citizens anything. It simply enumerates the rights that ALL FREE PEOPLE ENJOY. You know, the rights that the government can never take away from a free people? The very rights that define what a free people are?
The fact that so many people look at the bill of rights and get it SO wrong is irksome to me. The one thing that’s certain is that it grants the government nothing. It refers solely to THE PEOPLE. The PEOPLE are not the STATE. The STATE is a separate entity and has its own powers. Also, though you’ve obviously read (and grievously mis-interpreted) the second amendment you apparently haven’t read the militia act of 1903 which explains defines all males between the ages of 17 and 45 as part of the “unorganized militia”. So as you can see.. regardless of your personal interpretation of the constitution.. I still have the right to bear arms.
By EX-MARTA rider
April 24, 2008 1:54 PM | Link to this
Songbird said “Unless you’re riding the train late at night, I can’t see any reason why you would need a gun. I can’t think of a single instance anyone has been hurt by a criminal during the day on Marta trains.”
I’ll give you two quick ones. 5:30PM ish on 2 separate occasions between Sandy Springs and North Springs Stations. The supposedly “good” side of town. I witnessed 2 unprovoked assaults on young women by drug-addicted thugs. Thank God they didn’t have a gun/knife because my holster was empty that day due to laws which HB89 should fix.
By MW
April 24, 2008 1:55 PM | Link to this
This is the most haphazard piece of legislation every passed by GA lawmakers —they barely debated it, sneaking it through in the waning hours of the last day.
It seriously frightens me to think of people being armed in restaurants that I patronize, Marta trains I board or other public places I frequent.
The second amendment was written a long time ago. Times have changed. Think of all of the people you have seen or met in public places. Do you really want some of these morons totng a loaded weapon with your person in their vicinity? I sure as hell don’t!
By GSU Prof
April 24, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this
I would love for one of you neo-cons to explain how it creates a safer environment by allowing more people to carry guns? How am I any safer riding marta if I know that criminals AND other citizens are carrying guns?
At a time of a recession, all-time high gas prices, foreclosures and lay offs…do we really want more people with guns?
The bottomline is a criminal is a criminal. S/he acts impulsively and irrationally. Knowing that others may be carrying a gun doesn’t fit into the rational thinking process for them. They see themselves as invincible.
My brother was a police chief in Birmingham. He and I frequently discuss this issue. He cites numerous times where a criminal displayed a weapon in a robbery or other activity only to be countered with another weapon. More often than not, innocent people were injured or killed. The criminal and other gun holder escaped.
By RCH
April 24, 2008 2:02 PM | Link to this
I have had a concealed weapons license for years and so do many of my friends. None of them have ever pulled their gun in anger. That weapon is the resort of last chance only when your life is in imminent danger, not when you have a disagreement with someone.
And by the way, M. Franklin travels with armed bodyguards. Shouldn’t we be afforded the same protection?
By oh noooo
April 24, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this
I think we need to strengthen our process in obtaining a CWP. The process is little more than a fingerprint and background check. If you are going to carry a gun then you should know how to use a gun. We need to incorporate gun training in the process of obtaining a CWP. Being in Law Enforcement, and having the years of training, I know what it takes to be able to pull that gun out and hit anything with some precision. I would hate to see what a person with no training would hit. (probably not the intended target) We need training in place with the CWP process before we vote on this bill.
By Mark
April 24, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this
Here’s the problem I have with HB89:
One of you ‘I have a right to bear arms gun-fanatic types’ will be riding Marta with me one day. You will get spooked, agitated, bothered in some way by a fellow passenger, pull out your gun and start blasting away. You will spray your fire anywhere and everywhere —and probably hit me in the back of the head while I’m not even involved in your fracas.
No one needs to tote a gun in public places —particularly you ‘I have the right’ folks.
By COURAGEOUS
April 24, 2008 2:09 PM | Link to this
Jimbo, i’m not saying women are cowards I’m saying twisted hypocrital feeble minded indivduals like you are. Cruel people have always walked this earth. And yes we do need to take a stand against them but guns have never been good for anything but destruction. Dont try and justify your ignorance by taking the side of women. You are probably an abuser scared of your own shadow and you need all the help you can get
By 2AFan
April 24, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this
Hey MW @ 1:55 pm:
The First Amendment too, was written a long time ago. Perhaps we should eliminate that as well.
FYI, morons already “tote” weapons. The bill allows non-morons to carry concealed weapons on Marta. You, then, would be prohibited from the ability to carry concealed weapons on Marta.
By notPC
April 24, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this
Knee-jerk reactions of anti-gun people, like Franklin et al, are very common, and often proved wrong. There are more than 35 states that already allow all of what this bill will finally allow Georgia citizens.
By Chess
April 24, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this
I wish I could have been strapped during those civil rights marches when those water hoses and dogs were being used.
By notPC
April 24, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this
Knee-jerk reactions of anti-gun people, like Franklin et al, are very common, and often proved wrong. There are more than 35 states that already allow all of what this bill will finally allow Georgia citizens…and the people aren’t lying dead in the streets. Wonder of wonders.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 2:14 PM | Link to this
GSU professor, you should KNOW the causes of crime and be able to understand that as the economy deteriorates crime will only increase, so yeah, I think there will be more guns in the hands of criminals, why not citizens. Further, the cops seem to think more guns is better for stopping crime, why else would the arm themselves with better and better weapons.. the latest being military carbines.. hey man I’m just following the trends set by the professionals.
Also, your brother in Birmingham? The city where people in five points were accosted en masse by a shotgun wielding robber and relieved of their wallets? Where my fiancee’ would routinely point out the locations where infamous violent crimes occurred as we drove through town?
GSU, you brother’s department may be the very reason I have a CCW in the first place.
By JackSheet
April 24, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this
I live in Tampa. Florida has tons of CCW holders, they pioneered shall-issue.
Same story, when they first proposed shall-issue politicians and some LEOs said it will be the Wild West.
Crime went down. Arrest rate of permit holders is a tiny fraction of general population arrest rate.
Don’t let the facts get in you way, Mayor Franklin.
By RCH
April 24, 2008 2:17 PM | Link to this
Greg
I would rather risk my gun being used againt me than having none at all. Officers like youself know you can’t be everywhere and many times when the serious shooting started the police evacuated( ran like kittens) to protect thenselves. South Central L.A and New Orleans come to mind.
For those who believe that this is a bad law must not know that the person beside them or elsewhere are armed; and neither does that criminal.
By JB
April 24, 2008 2:17 PM | Link to this
I have lived in Atlanta since 1999, and have worked and lived in downtown, Buckhead, and north Atlanta and have never once felt threatened. Marta may smell like urine, but that doesn’t mean we need to start pulling guns on each other. Between stealing water from TN, the gun issue, the lady in Cobb County who wants to ban Harry Potter, electing Perdue on the Confederate flag issue, and the mascot license plates, I can’t imagine what is next.
By djmagic
April 24, 2008 2:23 PM | Link to this
people should be allowed to protect themselves,the police can’t be every where.do background checks,and they need to give classes on gun safety also.i mean just because you are a police officer dosen’t mean that you won’t shoot someone just to be doing it.just last night in orlando,fl. a police officer shot her mate,now what does that tell you.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this
Courageous, I’m not ignorant. I’m a veteran myself. I took the teachings of the military to heart. “Always ensure you have the tools necessary to win the fight” was one I always liked. Guns defeated Hitler. Guns defeated Napolean. Guns settled this nation and guns freed the slaves.. guns are tools, like hammers and nails. They’re lifeless and have no intent. They bend to the will of their user completely. I think you are the one who is close minded and ignorant. You’re feeble minded with your black/white binary world view. I also like the fact that you want hit people while I just want to go through life minding my own business while protecting my life and property. It should also be noted that I didn’t start carrying until my future wife asked me to carry when we went to an especially bad part of Birmingham (I’m looking at your brother, PSU professor). She doesn’t carry herself but she approves and is generally glad I carry because SHE feels safer. If I were a coward who carried to ensure my aggressive dominance over people (you know, the reason you apparently have fists)then I wouldn’t carry the tiniest most pathetic .380 on the planet. Seriously, it’s about the size of a keychain.. Let’s put it this way.. if you and I tied it up in a bar? I would use a weapon, but it wouldn’t be a gun.. maybe a bottle or a barstool because I don’t believe in fair fights.. but the truth is that I wouldn’t fight you in a bar (or anywhere) because you aren’t worth the time or money it’d take to bail myself out of jail and pay a lawyer to defend me.. not to mention the job loss and damage to reputation.. you’re just not worth it.. no one is.
By Rayzr
April 24, 2008 2:25 PM | Link to this
Courageous,
I am Black, own a business and am a former kenpo karate instructor…and I carry. Several officers patrol around my store and we have become friends. They ALL recommended against batons (which I carried) in favor of guns for protections. Read todays cnn story of a police in baltimore who couldnt stop an aggressor after tasering him and had to shoot as the assailant drew a weapon. The element of surprise and stopping power is always your best defense. I prefer to fight, but in a robbery, I’ll use my gun, anyday.
By time for the truth
April 24, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this
The whining lefties and shameless race baiting blacks on here are as pathetic as ever. The right to defend yourself from thugs - armed or not - with EXTREMELY SEVERE legal consequences if you don’t follow the justifiably strict laws for legitimate self defence is perfectly reasonable. Local parks - noy just state parks should also be exempt from CC ‘bans’, as they are illegal and local councils have to back down when legally challenged. Better to maybe have the very occasional over reaction than to continue to allow sullen knuckle dragging thugs to car jack you, rob you, rape you or just beat you for whatever reason.
Mostly its a certain element of black males/yoofs and mexican type gangbangers that resort to extreme criminal violence on strangers - aside from occasional drunken brawls in and around bars/clubs which is a very different kind of problem. Talk to the cops in Kennesaw and see how the crime rate has plummeted there after their every household gun law (though not actually enforced) was enacted.
It may only take a second or two to shoot/kill someone - but then a kick in the head, a swing of a bat or a slash of the knife etc is just as potentially lethal and just as swift. When this long overdue law is signed it will likely deter, or at least make many potential thugs ponder for a moment or two if their intended victim is armed. The most hardened criminal/thug types who will richly deserve what ever they get from law abiding CC citizens if they threaten/attack them will likely not be deterred by the new CC law, but at least it gives the law abiding chaps and ladies an option they didn’t have.
Franklin is simply just a another a vile racebaiter - pandering to blacks who UNDENIABLY in the metro area are disproportionately responsible for street crime and at the same time are also disproportionately the victims of their fellow blacks.
My wife just got her CC permit. I’ve had mine for a year now. Her 9mm and my compact M&P .40 S&W will hopefully NEVER need to be used in self defence.
Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6
By George Johnson
April 24, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this
Here’s an idea, you liberals that hate guns, don’t buy them. We conservatives that do like guns and being able to protect ourselves, will buy them.
Then, you leave US alone, and we’ll leave YOU alone.
By 2AFan
April 24, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this
Dear “GSU Prof”:
The answer to your question may be found in John Lott’s excellent book “More Guns, Less Crime.”
Dr. Lott is a distinguished and published professor—in contrast to many urban “professors”. His heavily referenced book uses FBI crime statistics to refute many of the beliefs commonly held by people who have never examined the issue in depth. When he began the book, he postulated that when states grant citizens concealed carry permits crime would increase. In fact, he found the opposite. Violent crimes decreased while non-violent crimes increased slightly (probably because criminals resorted to non-confrontational means to “make a living”).
As for your brother-in-law (the supposed former police chief in Birmingham), we can thank him for Birmingham becoming one of the most crime infested cities in the USA. At least you are honest in admitting this.
Isn’t it reasonable to assume that since he presided over some of the rampant increases in crime that perhaps he isn’t the best person to solve the problem?
By steve
April 24, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this
This latest display by the elected officials of the city of atlanta shows why liberal politicians simply have no grasp on reality. How many gun related crimes and murders are carried out by licensed carriers last year in the city of atlanta? The city would be hard pressed to probably count 30 of them. Its funny MARTA workers are demanding bullet proof partitions on their trains now, shouldn’t they have asked for them 10 years ago? The 300,000 Georgians who have permits to carry sure are made out to be nuts by these people, what about the drug dealers and gang members that already inhabit their city?
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 2:28 PM | Link to this
See, now I DO agree with oh nooooo. There needs to be a training and certification requirement and that’s the main problem I have with our CCW program. Our CCW program is primitive for reasons HB89 fixes and because it doesn’t require state authorized training.
By TradeMe
April 24, 2008 2:28 PM |