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.”
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
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 | Link to this
Some of you comments just puzzle me. To my knowledge this is 2008, not 1808. This isn’t the wild frontier, and I thought that we were all civilized. If this bill passes, the wild, wild west will return right here to Atlanta! Shoot first, ask questions later. Everyone from frighten Granny’s, to over-zealous bigots will become “Quick draw McGraw’s”. If you are afraid to ride public transportation, catch a cab, or drive your own vehicle. As a former Marine, I know for a fact that guns don’t kill humans. Human beings kill other human beings.
By Christopher
April 24, 2008 2:28 PM | Link to this
Shirley, do you think banning something will help? How is that Drug war coming for you? Anybody still doing drugs in America?
Criminals by definition do not abide by the law. Shirley when will you wake up and realize that the folks who have been commiting all the crime in Atlanta are CRIMINALS???
By JR
April 24, 2008 2:28 PM | Link to this
GSU Prof, the statistics, from even the most anti-gun organizations, are clear; crimes are prevented by more people carrying firearms. Bottom line, criminals will obtain and carry weapons anyways. Bottom line, the police are under nonlegal obligation to protect you from criminals. Bottom line, there are those in law enforcement and government who don’t want law-abiding citizens to even own, much less carry weapons, even at the cost of more people being vitimized by violent criminals.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 2:29 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 JackSheet
April 24, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this
Mark’s sentiments bear examination:
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.
Brady Campaign has a web page with 48 cases (48 is a bad weekend in ATL) of CCW permit holders involved in violent incidents. After looking at the data you see six years of history with 4,500,000 CCW holder across 43 states. No innocent bystanders were shot by CCW holders, No LEO experienced loss of life by CCW holders.
This is not a perfect world, but CCW and RTC firearm owners are still the safest group in the nation.
By AMT
April 24, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this
Just remember this:
*When seconds count, the police are only minutes away. *
This is not a knock on our police department. They risk their lives everyday protecting us and I applaud them. But reality is until I can have a police officer with me at all times, ready to defend me, I will use my constitutional right to life and defend myself.
By Boots
April 24, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject/victim.
A gun in the hand is better than a policeman on the phone.
Guns have two enemies: rust and politicians
By Vantari
April 24, 2008 2:37 PM | Link to this
What we need is a bill that would BAN concealed weapons, they are useless in the spit second that transpires during a crime. Why go back to the wild west gunslinging days? By the way, any public place can be made 100% safe if there is a double door that locks on entry and exit, leaving a small space in between as a buffer, until it is opened from the inside to let people in or out.
By COURAGEOUS
April 24, 2008 2:39 PM | Link to this
This is not the right thing to do. Rational minds would find a better solution, like providing the cities with better trained officers and not the first eligible candidates off the streets looking for a paycheck. we have grown so accustomed to the haves and have nots we are driving our society in to ruins because people are not getting what they need to sustain their families from big government.
By Wild, Wild West?
April 24, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this
Those who’ve made the Wild, Wild West comments: paste a link where this has happened in a state that approved CCW. It hasn’t happened in Georgia. We already allow even non-CCW holders to carry in the gazillion autos on the streets.
It’s just like Ron White says….
By Vantari
April 24, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this
Are my comments banned from the AJC?
By THE CATHOLIC HAMMER
April 24, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this
First of all, the “wild west” wasn’t all that “wild”. Some advice: don’t believe everything you see on TV or at the movies. The “Gunfight at the OK Corral” claimed the lives of THREE men. That’s right, one of the most celebrated shoot-outs of the American West was no more dangerous than a typical drug-deal-gone-bad in Southwest Atlanta.
Now, for “gun control”:
YES, control guns, but only if thy can be controlled 100%. This means door-to-door searches of every single household in the City of Atlanta. Confiscation of every firearm found in those searches; searches of 100% of vehicles coming into the City and the confiscation of all firearms found. The police shall be unarmed as well, with their firearms locked-up, only to be used in extreme emergency situations.
In short, control guns 100%, or don’t control them at all. If you can’t be 99.98% sure the people within 1 square mile of you are unarmed, then you have every right to have a pistol on your person. Considering the City doesn’t have the ability to confiscate every single weapon, and search all vehicles coming into the City, then the City has no right in controlling guns.
By Churchill
April 24, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this
Jimbo, facts don’t mean jack to libs. Do not even try. They have a notion, in their little heads, about what “type” of folk want to carry guns. No amount of reasoning will convince them otherwise. Peace.
By BIG T
April 24, 2008 2:42 PM | Link to this
ATLANTA IS NOT A STATE. IT’S A CITY WITHIN THE STATE OF GEORGIA. SHIRLEY IS MAYOR OF ATLANTA NOT GEORGIA. IT TIME TO WHAT’S BEST FOR THE ENTIRE STATE NOT JUST THE CITY OF ATLANTA. SONNY STAND-UP FOR ALL OF US—-ATLANTA DIDN’T VOTE FOR YOU ANYWAYS.
By AMT
April 24, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this
One more thought to share.
Since the SCOTUS has ruled that I am NOT guaranteed protection by the police I should hope that I can protect myself.
Also, comments about sitting in a bar drinking and a gun fight breaks out doesn’t apply here. The law states that it is a place that derives at least 50% of revenue from food. So, think restaurant that has a bar…not bar that serves food.
By wheres my shotgun
April 24, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this
Criminals carry guns and dont care about such policies. While i have a license for my gun, i would also ignore such rules depending on what time of the day i was traveling…ect.
I would be more than happy to rid the world of some scumbag that has to resort to robbing and no telling what else. Sadly, theres more of these pple than yall think out there. I especially feel sorry for pple that have to walk home from Marta in Decatur and South Atlanta.
By Boots
April 24, 2008 2:49 PM | Link to this
Until we obtain a Utopian society where respect for each other precludes senseless $25 robberies that turn into murders, people killed driving down Spring St because some freakin’ thug wants to take target practice, or a person is shot just to see which way he’ll fall —- remember: God Almighty made all men, but Samuel Colt made all men equal.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this
Don’t forget that a lot of towns in the “wild west” had gun checks and total bans within city limits or in the bars and the only reason they worked is because somewhat law abiding citizens complied. The real wild west happened out of towns, in the wide open spaces where even today a lot of people wouldn’t be caught dead without a pistol of a rifle handy because of the animals alone.
By AnkledG26
April 24, 2008 2:55 PM | Link to this
Folks, I’m only 30 years old and have probably not experienced as much in life as some of the others posted on here (that is not an age joke). I have been around firearms my entire life and I have had a CCW since I was 21. Thank the Lord that I have never had to use it. But, if I had to, then I feel that I could, without a doubt, protect my family or myself. I have been shooting since I was 6 years old and I have since gone on to compete in IDPA, USPSA, and many target shooting events. So even though I’m 30, I have had the proper training to defend myself.
The second amendment states, “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.” Places like Iraq do not have that freedom, so insurgents (criminals) will go in and take over entire cities and the only resistance the insurgents have to deal with is the cities very minor law enforcement.
I honestly believe that these terrorists on foreign soil, know that if they decided to attack/invade that US, they will not only have to fight the US military, but also every home owner, land owner, man, woman, or child. I also honestly believe that if the liberals had their way and banned all firearms, the US would be at a higher risk for invasion.
To all you anti-gun liberals, think long and hard about what I said above, even you would pick up a firearm to defend yourself against attack.
By Heroshi
April 24, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this
“…people are going to start dropping their chicken wings and shooting…” That comment is just as ridiculous as the bill.
By Jeff
April 24, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this
Rayzr:
Thanks for the heads up. I am a former teacher, and my wife is a current teacher, so the background checks and finger printing shouldn’t raise any issues.
If the XREP ever becomes civilian-legal, I’ll probably buy a 12gauge and load it with them. But I’ll have a few buckshot shells lieing around as well…. I’ll know which is loaded. You won’t. Until then though, wife is against guns, and the tasers are our compromise.
Do you know which is better between the C2 and the X26? I lean towards the C2 more for concealability - its shape doesn’t give away its purpose, so if a perp sees it raised in the dark, they don’t know what’s coming. The X26 LOOKS like a gun in its basic shape.
Regardless though, I consider these mainly because I need something in my home aresenal with reach-out-and-touch power, even though I prefer the more close-in weapons of staff and blade type. Those don’t work so well when confronted with a gun though, unless the perp is a REALLY bad aim.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this
Actually, in Iraq every house is allowed one AK47 and a full mag. Now before you guys go jumping to some “and look at Iraq” conclusion.. It’s the armed citizenry who’ve been key in securing that country. Our people rely on them to help maintain neighborhood security and they were a big help in wiping out Al Quaeda in Iraq… sooooo.. there are pluses and minuses to having an AK47 and one full magazine in every home.
By Jason
April 24, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this
The press conference was a sad attempt at manipulation by Maor Franklin. First, people who have a concealed weapons permit(GFL here in GA) are less likely to commit a crime than law enforcement officers. We truly are law abiding citizens who have proven ourselves trustworthy over time. Second, HB89 does NOT allow us to carry into bars, only to establishments that derive more than 50% of their revenue from food. Third, we are NOT allowed to drink alcohol and carry at the same time. Now some will say how is that enforceable? The same way other laws are enforced, by catching someone breaking it. We don’t require breathalyzer tests before someone can drive after drnking do we? And again, we’re talking about extremely law-abiding citizens here. Foruth, many say we’re looking at the Wild Wild West. Rubbish. 37 other states allow permit holders to carry into establishments that serve alcohol. Those states have not experienced an increase in spontaneous shootouts. Quite the opposite in fact. Fifth, as for carry on mass transportation, over 40 states allow it without mass shootings. We are not treading new ground here.
What concerns me is that those opposed to HB89 base their opposition purely on emotion and not on facts. From Joe citizen this is understandable but I expect far better from government officials, elected or appointed. Facts bear out the argument that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens equals less crime and that “gun-free” cities experience some of the highest crime rates in the US. One need look no further than Washington DC, which bans handguns entirely, for prrof that gun-free zones are free fire zones for criminals.
I urge everyone to base their support or opposition on facts, not emotion and rhetoric.
By Q
April 24, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this
someone please tell me how often people are held up at a restaurant or a bar?????
How many innocent people have been assaulted on Marta???
i take my kids to restaurants and other places, and i am NEVER EVER afraid who is inside becuase I have enough sense to not intentionally put me and my children in a unsafe predicament.
however, now, i will have to wonder if the person sitting next to me is carrying a gun that could possible go off or could go off of the deep end!??????
RIDICULOUS!!!!!!
By COURAGEOUS
April 24, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this
Jimbo, I see that you can atleast rationalize the situation. i think we are getting off course here with this debate. I respect your opinion and the sincerity that you have towards your beliefs. “I” like yourself would not waist the time or energy getting into a bar fight with you or any other person. I just don’t believe we as a whole population are tolearable enough about anything i.e. traffic, fuel, hell even little league baseball to allow everyone the right to have weapons let alone concealed ones. So I may be prejudiced against them because i want to believe in the goodness of man and I can’t see putting such a devasting item into the hands of the bipolars, and the phobics especially the cowardly and be led to believe that the streets would be safer. You are a veteran as I am and i’m sure you’ve seen your share of blood shed so to my military brother don’t take this personal. You know we are shell shocked and tempermental anyway. (LOL)
By The Truth
April 24, 2008 3:07 PM | Link to this
As I have said before we concealed carry permit holders have been around all along and the bleeding heart liberals didnt know we were there. They wont know we are there now unless some punk thug forces us to reveal ourselves and God help the punk if he or she does. I am trained in the use of my firearms by qualified instructors as is my wife. You do not have to fear us unless you give us a reason to fear for our lives. Sonny dont listen to the publicity seekers and sign the bill!
By JR
April 24, 2008 3:09 PM | Link to this
I have an idea:
Let’s have 100% gun control in Atlanta (no private ownership of weapons, period). Take all of Atlanta’s guns and donate them to the law-abiding non-Atlanta Georgians. Compare violent crime rates after 5 years.
This is just one more case of Atlanta thinking they need to direct policy for the rest of the state, and given Atlanta’s crime rates v/s the rest of the state, I don’t think they have a lot of room to talk.
By ND
April 24, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this
I’m not completely pro-gun or anti-gun, but I am completely pro-MARTA. If the state is unwilling to fund MARTA, they shouldn’t be making rules for it either. Open your state pocketbooks and fund MARTA like every other comparably-sized transit system in America and then you can make all the gun-related MARTA laws you want.
By Packing law abiding citizen
April 24, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this
Amen Darrell! I couldn’t have said it better myself.
By Boots
April 24, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this
A 67 year old man was sitting in a Subway sandwich shop in Broward county Florida when two thugs rushed in and robbed the owner.
They jerked the old man up from his booth and herded him into the bathroom. Unfortunately for the thugs, the old man was a former marine who was packing. He knew why he was being herded into the bathroom, spun around and killed one and seriously wounded the other.
He would have been the subject of a police report if he had not been armed —- and he reduced the number of predators in Broward county by two.
Recently, an old man killed a burglar in his home in the metro.
It’s sad, but I want to enjoy my retirement with my wife and family, not be a victim of the predators that are roaming the streets of Atlanta.
Thugs, take notice. Old men can’t fight you, so we’ll have to shot you!
By Mark
April 24, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this
COURAGEOUS, what good is a “better trained officer” that’s 5 miles away? The mugging, kidnapping, assault, rape, or murder will be over even before someone can get through to 911. Even at the multiple-victim shootings the police were only able to arrive somewhere between 5-10 minutes after the first call. Is any criminal going to wait around that long? The cops are only going to be able to notify the next of kin.
By 2
April 24, 2008 3:17 PM | Link to this
harvey, you could not be more wrong. what a stupid statement.
i’ll bet 90% of “new” felons had an illegal gun, took it to a nonlegal area, with criminal intent. they just didn’t “happen” to become felons. they planned to become felons.
By Roger
April 24, 2008 3:19 PM | Link to this
I have a concealed permit. I have shown my gun once as someone attempted to carjack me. They decided not to once they saw my gun. Another time, someone decided they needed my camera more than I did. I told them to back off which they did not. Once I reached for my gun (did not pull it out) they decided they did not need a camera that day. Where was the police in these 2 examples that happened to me? If I waited to call 911 I would have been carjacked and mugged. Concealed carry save me. Support HB89 it can possibly save somebody else’s life.
Those individuals may think twice before trying to carjack or mug somebody else.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this
Courageous, I think the best way to approach the subject of ownership and carry is through regulation, education, and training. I don’t think that everyone should have a gun and I definitely don’t think that people who don’t want a gun should be forced to have one. I do think that if a person is mentally stable, of good moral standing, and without any previous criminal convictions that they should be allowed to train and certify to carry a gun if that is their decision. I don’t think anyone is truly arguing for anything different. I don’t think anyone wants guns in the hands of people who are by nature violent or unstable, but the facts and statistics support the notion that people with concealed carry permits are typically the cream of the law abiding cops, note I didn’t say “gun owners”, but permit holders.. Big difference there. I’ve also noticed that lot of resistance to carry on MARTA and in restaurants is because they don’t feel the weapons are needed in that environment. Well, as they say, half the fun is getting there and the person carrying it might need it on the way to the restaurant or to the MARTA station. For now I end up leaving my gun under the seat of my car and parking it in a place where I can watch it. That’s a little paranoid, but the last thing I want is someone stealing that gun.
By Rayzr
April 24, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this
Jeff,
I would definitely go with the C2 because of shape and reliability rating. Even though I carry, I keep a stun gun by my bed and actually keep a taser unconcealed in a holster while doing business. I was told by police to stay away from batons because they are difficult to handle and maintain while fighting. 20 tears of martial arts and weapons training makes me agree…cant count how many times i’ve been cut while training. Get what will stop the attack most efficiently, effortlessly and quickly. Contrary to what some say, it’s not about ego, it’s about protecting lives…yours and your family.
By Oh noo
April 24, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this
I’d like to respond to you wackoNonSense.
I will draw my concealed weapon with the intention of taking a life quite simply if I feel my life is threatened. Period.
And yes I would draw my weapon if a criminal drew one on me. But here is what separates informed and trained gun carriers from misinformed cowards like you. You might not draw it right away, because the truth of the matter is most of these punks out here are not at all good shots and are not tactical thinkers. You may have to react to get some space between you, throw an object in their direction or whatever you have to do to throw them off for a split second to balance the scales. The bottom line.. if you don’t draw you’re a sitting duck. And if someone has the b@lls to pull a gun on me and I’m carrying, they better use it. Because I am.
And for all of you who think that only white folks can be so law abiding and carrying concealed think again. I am a professional Black male who carries.
By Mark
April 24, 2008 3:23 PM | Link to this
TradeMe, your rhetoric of “If this bill passes, the wild, wild west will return right here to Atlanta! Shoot first, ask questions later. Everyone from frighten Granny’s, to over-zealous bigots will become ‘Quick draw McGraw’s’” is tired and cliche.
It was said in Florida when they voted for concealed carry. It was said when Georgia voted for concealed carry. It was said when Texas voted for concealed carry. It was said when Georgia voted for “Stand Your Ground”.
It’s been said more times than can be counted, yet it has not happened in any state during any relaxing of gun control laws. Today the only ones that still make such claims are the misinformed, the ignorant, or the liars. There is absolutely no data to back up the fear-mongering claims, and there is ample evidence to prove otherwise.
By wheres my shotgun
April 24, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this
Man theres some dumb pple on this blog. First of all stats may say that violent crime is down, but just like when Atlanta BADLY misrepresented the crime figures to make people feel safe for the 96 Olympics`…DONT BELIVE THE GOV HYPE!!
Society is getting worse, theres a break down in values. This especially seems true among young American blacks.
Just listen to the crap they play on v-103 and 107.9, u never hear white radio stations glorifying thugs or raping women!
Im not the average cat, im streetsmart, and if a robbery or carjacking can happen to me (yes ive had to outsmart thugs on plenty of occasions while working apt complexes throught Atlanta, Clayton, Decatur, Gwinette) It can happen to anyone!
How come everytime it was a black male when something crazy happened?? for all you blacks who wanna believe your race is no worse than whites.
I know alot of cool black guys id give the shirt off my back 2, but sadly if your carjacked or robbed or raped in metro Atlanta, chances are it was a Black male! And you wonder why police sterotype!!
By RCH
April 24, 2008 3:30 PM | Link to this
Ladies and Gentleman,
We have proven that this bill would not cause shoot outs, increase in accidental shootings,etc. Then why are these people( especially police administrators and politicians) against this bill. It is a deeper issue. It is that of controll. Politicians and police administrators and others want us dependent upon them for our very lives. With the way these people run our city there is no way in hell I would place my life in their hands.
By Shamalama
April 24, 2008 3:32 PM | Link to this
Mark, your “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,” is patently offensive to me.
The criminals are already doing just what you say. They’re illegally carrying on MARTA. They get spooked, agitated. They spray their fire anywhere and everywhere. You don’t seem to have the slightest bit of fear about them. So why is it you’re so scared of people that have an absolutely clean record, that are statistically less prone to criminal behavior that you and the general public?
By Mayor Bankrupt
April 24, 2008 3:32 PM | Link to this
Hey Shirl,
Worry about balancing the books first. Your grandstanding won’t mask you fiscal mismanagemnent. Fire that idiot CFO and get someone on board this time who has the proper qualifications not demographics.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 3:35 PM | Link to this
No, white males just build bombs, horde ammunition and try to wipe out their school. Asians are making a big splash on the trend with their new high scorer at VT, but it’s the white guys who have the real “history” of mass murders with guns. We also have the corner on the serial killer market generally speaking. Crime knows no racial boundary, if you think that only a black man can rob you sure enough it’ll be a white guy. I don’t care if you carry a gun to protect yourself, I don’t care if you don’t like people who don’t look like you, but this crap where you think criminals come in one or two colors? That crap is not only pointless and ignorant, but it’ll get you killed.
By The Truth
April 24, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this
Had HB 89 been signed into law at the time Meridith Emerson was captured and beheaded in a State park we would probably be talking about Hiltons death instead of an innocent young woman. Same can be said for the lady that was murdered on the silver comet trail in Paulding county. We need to be able to defend ourselves in these isolated areas in State parks. Please sign HB 89 Sonny!
By JR
April 24, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this
Q, what is ridiculous is your opposition to CCW being extended to Marta and restraunts, when CCW holders have BY FAR the lowest crime rates of any group in the nation. HCI can only find 48 cases out of hundreds of thousands of CCW holders over a decade. 70 year old women commit more violent crime than CCW holders. 12 year old kids commit more violent crime than CCW holders. Being in a restraunt or bus full of CCW holders is safer than being in a restraunt or bus full of cops (cops, by the way, have a higher rate of violent crime and accidental discharges then CCW holders, as well).
Use facts for your argument. Just say that guns are scary and you don’t like them, it will come off better than your wild imagination of what CCW holders, as a group, are like.
By Larry
April 24, 2008 3:37 PM | Link to this
Is a flamethrower covered under the second amendment? I would fall under the category of “arms”.
By RCH
April 24, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this
Ladies and Gentleman,
We have proven that this bill would not cause shoot outs, increase in accidental shootings,etc. Then why are these people( especially police administrators and politicians) against this bill. It is a deeper issue. It is that of controll. Politicians and police administrators and others want us dependent upon them for our very lives. With the way these people run our city there is no way in hell I would place my life in their hands.
By downtown
April 24, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this
This is what I’m hearing from everyone.
It’s basically a fear of one group having more power over another.
Problem is, criminals don’t care. They have guns already. People should be worried now about criminals on MARTA with guns NOW. They’re there. The criminals ride MARTA and hang out in Atlantic station, and around 5 points already. With Guns!
You worry about law-abiding citizens with guns! Why? What power am I going to take from you by carrying a concealed weapon?
Is this really NOT a race issue? I’d like to hear more from some of my black neighbors about this bill.
Is it the fear that a white person may get ” spooked, agitated, bothered in some way” by a black person, pull out their gun and shoot them?
Is this a cultural fear of having to be accountable for ones behavior in society? Are black people afraid of this?
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”
By Ron
April 24, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this
To the police officers that are basicly stating us ignorant common folk have no clue what we are doing; that is a big generalization.
Do all officers run red lights because they can, or is that just a few?
Do all officers tailgate because they know how or is that just a few?
Do all officers eat doughnuts or is that just a few?
Do not group ALL gun carrying, law abiding citizens in the same group less you all be grouped with your comrades.
I carry, I am licensed and I don’t care where I am, I carry. In Church, on the train, in my public office, in the restaurant, I carry and I will be protected.
Not by the officer that is too big to get out of the Apple B’s booth but by me.
By Paul
April 24, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this
The truth is, carry permit holders are more law-abiding that virtually any other segment of our population, including law-enforcement. Less than 1% of concealed carry permits have been revoked due to criminal activity by their holders nationwide, and in Georgia, it’s less than the national average. In other words, a police officer is far more likely to “go crazy and start shooting people” than a carry permit holder, yet people like Mayor Franklin trust them to carry guns around them, in restaurants, and on MARTA every day.
Everyone I know that’s ridden MARTA for any length of time has been held up or mugged, and several friends who have come into town to visit have been held up or mugged on MARTA. MARTA IS NOT SAFE! It’s ridiculous that the MARTA officials and Mayor Franklin are trying to push their anti-gun agenda against all reasons to the contrary, and are putting the citizens of Georgia and Atlanta in danger by doing so. They should be ashamed.
By WHY
April 24, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this
Why are these idiots afraid of law-abiding citizens and seemingly not afraid of criminals?? Unbelieveable!
By Rayzr
April 24, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this
Q,
Perhaps you should rephrase by naming a type of restaurant. My pizza shop has had several robberies even while owned by police officers. The Chinese restaurant in nearby downtown has experienced the same. Hit google and pull numerous stories…it even lists random shooting such as Wendys in Palm Beach.
I have seen at least 4 assaults on MARTA personally in 20 yrs. and I am not a frequent rider. Again, a police stat report may surprise you.
By Wackolibhack
April 24, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this
It is Bush’s fault that people need to pack heat on Marta (Bush hates public ransportation). There was never any gun violence, ever, before Bush and the well armed neocons stole the white house from Al Gore. Bush loves guns. I hate Bush.
By p
April 24, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this
COURAGEOUS you seem to have anger issues. glad you don’t carry. what grown man goes around bragging about fighting people? an immature baby. you have problems. seek help.
HB89 changes three things. carry on MARTA, carry in restaurants that serve alcohol - and you cannot drink alcohol, though, and carry in WMAs. we already can carry almost everywhere else.
Too bad the poor girl that was killed hiking with her dog couldn’t carry in that park. she might be alive today if she could.
the racist statements are idiotic. please stop. the truth is that upstanding, background-checked people of ALL races carry GFLs.
By JR
April 24, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this
RCH, the main reason the government and police leadership don’t like expansion of CCW rights is it places the capability to stop crime in the hands of citizens. Now, this may sound crazy, but it isn’t. It is not in the best interest of the government to appear that you can protect yourself better than it can protect you. After all, you pay taxes so the government can keep you safe and secure. If you can secure yourself anyways, why do you need to pay so much tax to the government? Now, whether or not you may be the victim of a crime because you can’t protect yourself is secondary; it’s about the government protecting its turf.
By Paul
April 24, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this
Shamalama,
“Mark, your “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,” is patently offensive to me.”
Why not provide ANY evidence of this ever happening? You can’t because it hasn’t. Carry permit holders are responsible people, and responsible people don’t do the things you’ve detailed above. It’s the same as all the predictions of cities turning to the “wild west” and there being “blood on the streets” when concealed carry bills were passed nationwide. It’s never happened. It’s been PROVEN that carry permit holders are the most law-abiding citizens, and that all the claims (like the one you’re making above) are simply fantasy.
I’d hope that Governor Perdue can see through the fantasy that the leftist politicians and their supporters are coming up with, and will sign this bill.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this
Rayzr, I wish I knew what pizza shop.. I’d totally eat there. But I don’t want you to compromise your privacy in this hallowed forum of public opinion.
By The Truth
April 24, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this
The defensive firearm is a special-purpose piece of safety rescue equipment, designed to extricate a person … from the immediate threat of savagely violent crime. It is like the fire extinguisher… . Neither piece of equipment will do you any good if you don’t know how to use it or are not psychologically prepared to face danger with that gear in your trained hands in a terror situation.”
By JustMe
April 24, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this
It never shocks me how many stupid people live in GA.
If guns are everywhere, think what that means. Let’s say that the percentage of ‘shots per gun’ remains the same. With more gun, there will be more shots.
Does anyone with any sense at all really think that with more guns there will magically be less shots?
With more shots, then those ‘more’ bullets will hit ‘more’ people.
I don’t care if we are talking about criminals or law abiding citizens. Just think for a minute, PLEASE. More guns = more shots going off = more people hurt/killed. It is a simple equation.
Realize that I am all for guns for hunting or even target shooting at a range. But there is NO reason to carry a gun into a Chili’s to eat dinner! None. Zip. Zero.
And, don’t give me this “well the robber can go into Chili’s with a gun.” Fine. He is breaking the law - does that mean you need to? Will starting a gun fight and potentially killing innocent people help? Let the police do their job and catch the ciminal. That is their job, not yours.
Believe it or not, there are some very peaceful Countries with low crime that ban all guns. Wow! Imagine that!
By Convicted Gun felon.
April 24, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this
Shamalama Ding dong. Fo’ Sheezey!!!
It not fair if my marks are armed. How can I steal they stuff if they gonna start blastin?
By michelle
April 24, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this
ex-marta has it all wrong.
just because you witness an assault on someone who is not threatening YOU, does NOT give you the “right” to whip out your gun unless you are a cop!! that is what is called vigiliantism and that is going to land your a* in jail, stupid. how you gonna claim self defense when it isn’t yourself or the group you are with being directly threatened?
By BT fan
April 24, 2008 4:01 PM | Link to this
It is really SAD Atlanta has come to this threshold.When I was young, my mother and me came from out town on Saturday to shop at Richs, Davidson and consumed hot dogs at the Varsity. We never lock our car, walk from Davidson(Macy) to Richs down Marietta Street, Five Points and had a great time. I have not been to downtown Atlanta in 12 years except GA Tech games..I had a friend who was mugged near Five Points, watch and cash and a neighbor carjacked on Virginia Ave, 23 stitches, wreck car..
By Kevin
April 24, 2008 4:01 PM | Link to this
Those of you that think that Sonny makes decisions with one ounce of focus paid on the Metro area are sorely mistaken.
Since inauguration, the Governor has shown nothing but disdain and contempt for the economic engine of Georgia. He forgets that 60% of the state’s population lives in the Metro area and that Atlanta is the only thing separating Georgia from Mississippi.
By Oh noo
April 24, 2008 4:07 PM | Link to this
Downtown
Black man here. Favor the bill to allow lawful concealed carry on Marta or restaurants or wherever the h3ll else it will allow me to carry legally.
By elorei
April 24, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this
I think it is quite evident that many of the posters here against HB 89 do not understand the current laws we already have. If you are at chik-fil-a eating a sandwich, there are probably legal guntoters there with you. If you are at a movie theatre, there are probably legal guntoters around you. If you are shopping for a new dress at Lenox mall, there are probably legal guntoters there all around you.
HB 89 lets people protect themselves in more places. People that are already one of the LOWEST OF ALL ADULT DEMOGRAPHICS in crime statistics. Lower than school teachers. Lower than police.
Next time a thug with a gun tries to rob you, just show him a copy of the law that says it is illegal, this will stop him, right? Laws are only good at stopping the lawful, criminals intent on rape or murder are not afraid of a misdemeanor carry charge.
By JB
April 24, 2008 4:11 PM | Link to this
Even if HB 89 passes, the reality is that the vast majority of the normal citizens of this State will continue to live their lives the same as they do now, completely oblivious to who is carrying a weapon in public. The reason is that most of us with sense don’t live in constant fear of being randomly murdered by a black man.
By bj
April 24, 2008 4:18 PM | Link to this
This article, like so many on the AJC web site, is full of typos and confusing verbiage. Have editors deserted? It’s obvious that writers have!
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 4:22 PM | Link to this
JustMe, what countries are those?
The UK? Where violent crimes rose year after year and gun crime is still rising despite a five year mandatory sentence for possession?
Australia? Where lo and behold they still somehow have crime and the fall in crime in recent years still hasn’t returned to pre-ban levels?
Germany? Where the cops are armed to their eye balls? Nope..still have crime there too, hell they have terrorist groups hanging out there too and a rising neo-nazi sub culture.. sounds like a great place.. WHERE ARE THESE COUNTRIES? You don’t name them, you merely state they exist..
Hey are some of these peaceful places that ban guns Washington DC? or Chicago? Is it New York City? Or Philadelphia? I’m gonna need some numbers and facts here JustMe, something more substantial than “Justme’s mercantile theory of bullets”.
Here is the deal, more than a million new guns are purchased every year. This has been going on EVERY YEAR for years. Since 1993 crime has plummeted to pre-1980 levels. In 2005 violent crime fell to the lowest point in over 40 years. This is documented by the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. So, apparently.. more shots DOES equal less of them going off..
I can forgive a lot of the stuff on this posting, but first you call me stupid, then launch into some monologue on the number of bullets in guns in circulation and the effect of the net bullets per gun rising. It’s apparent you don’t have much in regards to tactical thinking since apparently all crimes must happen at your destination, never in transit. You’re “for hunting” and “even shooting at the range” HOW DO YOU SIGHT IN THE HUNTING GUN IF YOU CAN’T GO TO THE RANGE? So I guess, thank god that makes sense to you, oh mighty logic master.
Please tell me where we, the armed citizens who obey the law, have been shootin’ up the place and wounding bystanders? I again must insist on numbers or citations, not your experience from watching CSI.. You guys keep telling me this is happening, but I’ve never heard of it happening and I’ve never seen it happen, and I’ve certainly never done it. PLEASE HELP ME OUT HERE. Throw me a bone, even a little one.
Also, news flash, the cops on the Northern Illinois campus responded in 29 seconds. The shooter killed 6 people and wounded 15 in half a minute. If the cops were psychic flash gordon maybe they could “do their job” but it’s nice to know I have an extra edge since the average response time is to a 911 call is minutes which is only slightly longer than 911 hold times.
By Cruzin
April 24, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this
Liberals will always condemn an honest law abiding person for having guns while the criminals prey on society committing horrendous crimes. The police can’t stop a crime, they respond after the fact. If you ever had to call 911 like I did, and was told, we have no available officers, then your screwed. I had a guy coming at me screaming, and the police were changing shifts.Too bad for me, I was left to fight it out. I imagine every criminal and thug in Atlanta is screaming ” thank you Shirley, thank you, thank you! “
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this
Um, Michelle,
Let me direct you to Georgia Code O.C.G.A. § 16-3-21 or Use of force in defense of self or others; evidence of belief that force was necessary in murder or manslaughter prosecution..
Which SAYS: A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
Now Michelle, what do you think a third person is?
I’m not a vigilante if I’m obeying the law..
By Houckster
April 24, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this
This law by the brain-dead bozos in our legislature is obscene as it is stupid.
There isn’t enough personnel to check to see if a person is carrying a weapon legally or illegally. So what happens when someone sits down besides you and they’re packing a gun? Just what can you do but hope the guy is OK. But the fools in our legislature are telling us we have to take that chance much more frequently.
And you only have to be wrong once.
And just where do you go while you’re in a MARTA train car when that person pulls that weapon and starts firing. O why I just pull out my Uzi and fire back. Of course then the next person has to decide who started it and who’s defending themselves. Well better safe than sorry: Shot them both!
I’m glad these gun’s right advocates aren’t firemen. They apparently don’t realize that throwing gas on a fire results in a bigger fire.
Now, you know something’s wrong if you’re on a MARTA train but with if the bill becomes law, you have no way to know that you’re spending your last moments on earth. When someone
By Houckster
April 24, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this
This law by the brain-dead bozos in our legislature is obscene as it is stupid.
There isn’t enough personnel to check to see if a person is carrying a weapon legally or illegally. So what happens when someone sits down besides you and they’re packing a gun? Just what can you do but hope the guy is OK. But the fools in our legislature are telling us we have to take that chance much more frequently.
And you only have to be wrong once.
And just where do you go while you’re in a MARTA train car when that person pulls that weapon and starts firing. O why I just pull out my Uzi and fire back. Of course then the next person has to decide who started it and who’s defending themselves. Well better safe than sorry: Shot them both!
I’m glad these gun’s right advocates aren’t firemen. They apparently don’t realize that throwing gas on a fire results in a bigger fire.
By Rayzr
April 24, 2008 4:33 PM | Link to this
JustMe,
I would support a total ban if it were possible to remove all guns…it is not.
Based on your reasoning I wonder where you live…
It must be in Chicago or DC where they have a ban on handguns? And each year, they battle for the moniker “murder capital” of the US.
If so, I am sure you feel safe knowing there are no gun carrying, law abiding citizens next to you in restaurants.
Explain why there is sooo much gun violence in those cities?
By Roger
April 24, 2008 4:36 PM | Link to this
To all of you that believe the police have to protect you, you are all wrong. You have no right to Police protection (Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981). The only person you can to depend on to defend you in the commision of a crime is yourself or somebody who can help you. The police cannot help all people all of the time. We have to defend ourselves.
By Thomas
April 24, 2008 4:37 PM | Link to this
I do not like the bill and I do not think Bearden is particularly intelligent or educated but to think that legalizing concealed weapons will increase the number of criminals carrying concealed weapons is strains logic. Criminals will carry them regardless. The danger is that law abiding citizens might make a mistake and shoot someone they see as threatening who is not.
By A2Fan
April 24, 2008 4:37 PM | Link to this
Houckster,
You shouldn’t carry a weapon then. Having fired twice, you are obviously trigger happy.
Case closed.
By Jimbo
April 24, 2008 4:43 PM | Link to this
In an oil rig fire or gas main fire often the only way to put it out is to blow it out with an explosion.. In a forest fire, smaller fires are lit to contain bigger ones.. more fire literally controls less fire.. your analogy breaks down pretty quickly upon close examination of fire fighting tactics.
By The Truth
April 24, 2008 4:45 PM | Link to this
Pro gunners remember a vote for Obama or Billary is a vote for gun bans! Please dont believe the lies and BS that they are spouting forth about their gun policies.
By dcunited
April 24, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this
First off, it was rather safe for a woman to travel alone during the ‘Wild’ West times, they were protected, unlike today. Very few were gun men in the Old West and very few needed to be. The West was ‘wild’ but primarily because of wild animals and country, not constant shootings. Outlaws were famous, not because they were so vicious, but because they were so rare. Many of those headed west had just finished a war and did not want to fight. Those that did, often were shot or found the wrong in of a rope via a judge. Most famous gun fighters of that time would be second-rate at best by today’s gangs.
Secondly, this bill in no way supports the ‘right’ of someone who is spooked by his own shadow to shoots. In fact, this bill almost assuredly does not mean there will be handguns where there were not, just that those that choose to follow the laws will be allowed to carry there as well. I have seen guns on people in malls and on MARTA. Did you know that it is already legal for those with pistol permits to carry their pistols into most other places around the state? Where is the innocent blood in the street by concealed carriers? To my knowledge, in Georgia, there is none. The only altercation involving a CCW on mass transit that I have read of happened in Texas and it was ruled as self-defense. This bill simply expands the current laws to include restaurants that serve alcohol (provided they will not be drinking) and MARTA.
By Rayzr
April 24, 2008 4:57 PM | Link to this
Anyone see today’s news report of an arrest of a criminal seeking escape on MARTA?
Case closed in favor of CCWs.
By fedupingwinnett
April 24, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this
So you people who said there’s little or no crime on Marta, well I guess you missed the news a few minutes ago when 2 guys hopped on a Marta bus after they committed a bank robbery. Yep, there’s no criminals on Marta.
By Rayzr
April 24, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this
Michelle,
I dont think anyone is suggesting being protection for everyone else. Mother of two expressed our sentiments quite well.
However, your assumption is incorrect according to the law. A person may use force (ie gun) to prevent a third party from threat of death or serious injury.
Also, look up the word vigilante…it is not what you seem to think.
Check out GA law at www.georgiapacking.org
By Bernard
April 24, 2008 5:16 PM | Link to this
Carry permit holders are the most law-abiding group of people in the state. Most years, that includes police; more police officers are charged with excessive use of force than CCW permittees. The required part of the course is mostly what a permit-holder CAN’T DO.
Most felons become felons at an early age; usually at their first opportunity, around 18. Ask a police officer if he’s ever arrested a 30-year-old felony suspect with no prior felonies.
I agree, when Mayor Franklin starts riding MARTA at night, without her armed body-guards, I’ll listen to her opinion.
By Larry
April 24, 2008 5:27 PM | Link to this
It is natural to worry about the “stray bullet” theory, and I must admit I thought about it a lot after the Virginia Tech tragedy last year. I wondered what I would feel if my daughter had been in the room when the nut decided to start killing people. What if an armed sane student had been there and after the nut had killed two students the sane student decided to defend himself? What if the sane student had fired at the nut, but missed and killed my daughter before firing again and killing the nut?
We know now that the sane student would have saved 28 lives, but if it had happened as in my hypothesis, no one would have looked at it that way since we would have never known the extent of the horror the nut had planned. This is proven by the two recent massacres ended by armed citizens. They hardly got any press at all. The sane student would have been a hero in any case because he at least tried to do something rather than stand there like a lamb at slaughter.
So, if I’m in a restaurant with you and someone comes in with a gun and starts killing people (as in Luby’s), try to stop it. If someone comes in waving a gun and asking for money, hide under the table and be quiet. This is exactly what’s been happening in the 30+ states which allow guns in all restaurants and the 43 which allow guns on public transportation.
By Colin DuPee
April 24, 2008 5:28 PM | Link to this
To start, “liberals” are not all anti-gun. I love all our civil rights, thanks.
Last time I saw Shirley Franklin in public was at a grocery store accompanied by a man in a suit with a wire in his ear, and a bulge under his coat. I’m sure there’s an armed guard at her side at all times. Obviously, unless she’s a hypocrite she can’t be against all firearms, just the requirements to possess them.
If the requirements are the issue, then so be it; pursue legislation that makes it every bit as difficult as necessary for civilians to carry concealed weapons. Just remember that the police are civilians too. Just because you’re employed by the state doesn’t mean you are better-suited to carry a gun. Similarly, just because you choose a life outside law-enforcement doesn’t mean your only choice should be Victim.
By James770
April 24, 2008 5:31 PM | Link to this
Hey Oddball How come the cities and states with the most stringent laws against honest citizens owning, carrying or possessing pistols have the highest crime rates. Crime skyrocketed in Morton Grove, Ill. when they outlawed pistol ownership by honest citizens and has remained high for over 20 years. At the same time Kennesaw, Ga. passed a law/ordinance stating all citizens will be armed and the crime rate went down and continues to be very low. Another example is Washington D.C. whose crime rate skyrocketed when they passed the laws against lawful gun ownership.
As far as your example of the type of people that ride MARTA and whether you would want them with concealed weapons - some of those people are the reason I and many citizens won’t ride MARTA until we can protect ourselves.
What percentage of Georgia citizens that have passed the background checks and issued a Georgia Firearms License have went on to being convicted of a felony and imprisoned?
By JHSVT
April 24, 2008 5:56 PM | Link to this
I wonder if people even realize just how many people are currently caring weapons already? The word is concealed! I certainly don’t take my weapon off if I go in a mall or for a bite to eat. I’m not leaving my weapon in my car for someone to steal anyways. We are ALREADY caring every day and there are no gunfights in the street that I have ever heard of.
By All or None
April 24, 2008 6:21 PM | Link to this
“I say everyone gets one or nobody gets one, it will be anarchy.” King George 4th
By johnny
April 24, 2008 6:31 PM | Link to this
ask the mayor if she would ‘walk’ down’ in a bad street by her self,without all her gaurds with her,see how much guts she has,welcome to the real world.does not really matter weather purdue signs the bill or not.i have had a permit 40 years,take it every where i go,just like most do
By CYNTHIA TUCKER
April 24, 2008 6:36 PM | Link to this
I just don’t feel safe on MARTA By CYNTHIA TUCKER | Friday, February 9, 2007, 05:44 AM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Two weeks ago, after a pleasant, hassle-free trip to Hartsfield-Jackson on MARTA, I gave some thought to taking the train more often. Right now, my car is in the shop. Couldn’t I take MARTA rather than renting a car?
No, I won’t. It gets dark early, and I don’t take MARTA after the sun goes down. I don’t feel safe. It’s a rare day that I see a MARTA cop in or around a train station, and the lack of visible police leaves me feeling too vulnerable.
If I were a guy, I might feel differently. Call me paranoid, but as a female city dweller, I take a lot of precautions. (I lock my car doors before I crank up.) I need to see more police, around the stations and on the trains, before I take the risk of riding MARTA after dark.
Am I the only woman in Atlanta who feels that way? Let’s hear from men, too. Do you think MARTA is safe? What experiences have influenced your opinion?
(In today’s AJC: MARTA crime numbers show that someone is robbed or beaten up twice a week on MARTA property. )
By Edward
April 24, 2008 7:00 PM | Link to this
Pass your own stupid gun laws in Atlanta and leave the rest of the state alone. We will pass our own gun laws. The 2nd amendment seems like it does have a home in Atlanta,and become a black or white issue. IT is the law for ALL people that are citizen’s of this country.
By GW
April 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Link to this
My loyal believers,
It has been brought to my attention that some of you think that people should not have guns. Well let me tell you somethings. How do you expect to carry out my orders without guns and bullets. Did a single one of you stop to think about that. There are a lot of Axes of Eeeevilllllls out there to be blown away before one of them gets through to my home and blows me away. By the way, don’t you go and believe all those stories about war veterans having nightmares and getting up and killing citizens. It only happened to a handful of people back in Vietnam and it never was really proven that they hurt anyone. Just to be safe though, I have instigated orders to make sure that these people simply remain in this man’s army until they can no longer harm anyone. And remember that I am always here to provide you with all the social security you will ever need. Just volunteer and I’ll give you your own free gun and all the bullets you can shoot.
Your Welcome, Your leader, GW
By Edward
April 24, 2008 7:07 PM | Link to this
Hell, yes
By samuel
April 24, 2008 7:34 PM | Link to this
I am a 41 year old black man who has lived in inner city Atlanta all my life. I have never owned a gun in my life, and I never will. Nor have I ever been threatened with a gun, and includes the more 30 years that I have ridden MARTA. Believe or not, not every black neighborhood is so dangerous that you need a gun, and I include MARTA buses and trains that run in my neighborhood.
By Who cares what Franklin thinks
April 24, 2008 7:42 PM | Link to this
It is one of the most predictable things in the world; if anyone proposes allowing law abiding CC permit bearing citizens the right to cary their guns with them anyplace not currently covered by the law, there will be a flock of chicken littles running around squaking about how this will lead to wild west shootouts on every street corner every day. It is funny that this does not happen now when they can already carry so many places today. Where are the daily wild west shootouts in those places? Now, as for Shirley Franklin, who had a son in law given a life sentence for drug dealing and a daughter convicted of money laundering (while Shirley supposidly did not know even though, if I am not mistaken, they were living with her) do we really care what this clueless twit of a mayor thinks about this issue? She should be focusing on getting the city out of the financial mess that her administration created and perpetuated. Fat chance on that.
By b8fish
April 24, 2008 8:46 PM | Link to this
“Why not just allow tasers everywhere? At least they’re not going to kill anyone!”
Hey, Jeff - you going to rely on a one shot stop?
By More
April 24, 2008 9:29 PM | Link to this
A gun can solve a lot of problems — especially a big gun. I don’t mean no wimpy little gun like a 38 or 45 — toys. If you mean business, then you need a gun that has its own built in wheels, suspension system, and motor. That’s a gun. It just won’t fit on these scrawny Marta trains or buses. So, what good is a law that lets you carry around your big gun if your big gun won’t fit in what is needed to carry it around. You know what I mean. We need bigger buses and bigger trains. While you’re at it, we’ll need bigger doors on the restaurants.
By latter_day_hippie
April 24, 2008 10:03 PM | Link to this
First, I feel compelled to point out that there are factual errors in the above article regarding the evolution of House Bill 89 and its passage by the Georgia Legislature. While the content of HB89 was expanded in the last days of the 2007-2008 session, this was done by incorporating content from other bills that had been the subject of considerable debate and in many cases already passed in some form by one or both chambers of the Georgia Legislature. While I acknowledge the practice of journalists letting their work share their feelings on the topic of that work, factual errors (including those committed by omission) that slant an article should not be tolerated.
That aside… Guns are a polarizing issue and gun-related matters will drive a strong emotional response from people on either side of the issue.
My request to the Governor (and everyone else) is to look beyond the emotion, such as was displayed today by Mayor Franklin, and consider this bill on its factual merits:
HB89 will give property owners and tenants more, rather than less, control over whether and how firearms are carried on their property.
Firearms already are being carried on MARTA, in restaurants serving alchohol and in those other locations HB89 would make accessible to holders of Georgia Firearms Licenses. However, those carrying them today are those who violate the law and would use them against law-abiding citizens.
Arguments that the changes that will be wrought by HB89 are not enforceable are moot. Enforcement will happen exactly as it does today save that law enforcement officers will first check to see if someone carrying a firearm in one of these locations holds a valid Georgia Firearms License prior to deciding to make an arrest. This same scenario is played out already every day when law enforcement officers see or are summoned to address individuals carrying firearms in locations already not considered to be off-limits.
While HB89 (or any other legislation I can contemplate) will not take firearms away from criminals who should not have them, it also will not make firearms easier for criminals to get. To the contrary, part of the language of HB89 is designed to punish those who purchase firearms on behalf of others who do not legally have the right to purchase them themselves. It also will increase the ability of law-abiding Georgia citizens to defend themselves against those who would do them harm.
The experience of other states (Florida, Texas and others, well documented in independently produced research and statistical analyses) has demonstrated clearly that those who hold licenses to carry firearms are less likely, not more likely, to be involved in a firearms-related or any other crime. Arguments that those who are so licensed are more prone to crime or violence are simply not borne out by the facts.
Governor, please sign HB89 into law. The facts are clear — this legislation is to the benefit of the great state of Georgia and all of its citizens.
By LEO
April 24, 2008 11:11 PM | Link to this
Take a look at states that have open carry laws / vs. cities like D.C.
Prohibition does not work.
What’s the real difference between a CC permit holders walking outside with a weapon vs. walking to long horns with his gun?
Fear mongering and ignorance to anyone who thinks “blood will rain from the skys” if the law is amended.
As it stands now GA law is the most OBSERDLY worded pos law on the books- defines a public place as “but not limited to” - WTF is not limited to? That’s damn vague isn’t it?
Take your head from your a* and do some home work on gun facts. Then we can talk.
By Az
April 24, 2008 11:25 PM | Link to this
“Why do I carry a gun? Because I tried carrying a cop, but he was heavy…and it annoyed him.”
I keep seeing the same old tired and cliched responses from the anti-gun crowd. “Veto this bill because nobody should carry a gun into a bar!” - well, Mr. Lack-of-Reading-Comprehension, HB89 specifically prohibits the carrying of a weapon into a bar, as well as the consumption of alcohol when carrying.
“Veto this bill because I don’t want someone carrying a gun at the restaurant that me and my family are eating at…” - Well, Mr. Clueless-About-Current-Laws… As the law stands right now, it is perfectly legal for them to carry into any restaurant where alcohol isn’t served. IE - McDonalds, Denny’s, IHOP, Stevie B’s, etc. Have you been getting “shot up” there?
“Veto this bill because there’s no provision to ensure someone carrying a gun doesn’t drink alcohol…!” - Well, Mrs. Lack-of-Critical-Thinking, there hasn’t been any provision as the law currently stands to ensure someone doesn’t carry into restaurants that serve booze, bars, or on MARTA now. We’ve just been trusting those gun owners to follow the law on their own. So…why would they suddenly go crazy now?
Can’t you people have a logical thought in your brain w/o resorting to emotional blackmail? Are you capable of critical thinking at all? Or are facts just some unpleasant thing that get in your way?
For those that want the truth, visit http://www.georgiapacking.org
For those that hate facts and rely on emotions…just go hide under your rock. Please.
-Az
By Aphrodite
April 24, 2008 11:34 PM | Link to this
I was held up Christmas ‘06 in the virginia highlands. I walked by 2 people wished them merry christmas and got jumped with a gun stuck in my face. I begged for my life and gave them all I had. Luckily, they left me with a black eye and a beating heart. I dreamed of killing the criminals waking up in a cold sweat afraid to fall asleep. Mad at myself for wanting vengeance. Then I traveled abroad. Other democratic countries with strict gun laws do not have the gun destruction that we in the U.S. read about everyday. We should eliminate guns altogether, travel to a country with strict gun laws and read the local paper. There are places in the World where neighbors watch each other’s children, people from all over come together, kindness is normal, to bad I’m afraid we are losing it here. Stop the war, feed the poor.
By DP
April 24, 2008 11:53 PM | Link to this
If Shirley and MARTA don’t want guns on MARTA, then install metal detectors so the thugs won’t have them either. The new fancy gates should have metal detectors anyway. If checks were made, then CC’s would have to stop and show their credentials and the hassle would cause them to leave it locked in the car. Mission accomplished, no thugs with guns on MARTA. Also, if a CC has a gun in a bar, they can’t drink alcohol.
By deejaytpc
April 25, 2008 1:04 AM | Link to this
I witnessed firsthand the sneaky way that HB 89 was passed. There was NOT discussion about guns in restaurants or on public transports. The bill was passed quickly in both Senate and House, with no opportunity for debate. Speaker Richardson blatantly ignored raised hands before the House vote. Is this a democracy? I don’t think so. The gun manufacturing industry is responsible for making sure that gun control is stymied in this country…like so many other issues, money talks. With no gun control, illegal guns proliferate, making “law-abiding citizens” feel the need to ramp up their arsenals…WOW, more money for the gun manufacturers!!
When will “the people” take back their government from the special interests with lots of money? Pro HB 89 interests had lots of money and used it effectively at 10:00 pm on the last day of the legislative session - pretty sad situation really…
By zantac69
April 25, 2008 2:42 AM | Link to this
If I had the ability to legislate such, I would require that anyone who is licenced to carry attend a training course in gun safety. THEN, I would have no problem with armed citizens carrying weapons. Unfortunately, too many people do not know how to use their guns.
By michael
April 25, 2008 4:12 AM | Link to this
To all of our License holders. Have you joined GCO yet? I am a license holder and last year (because of marta) I was disarmed. Got off the train walked a little bit and had a gun pointed in my face and was robbed. Why? Because of Marta!
By Jeff
April 25, 2008 5:41 AM | Link to this
b8fish:
I deal primarily with DEFENSIVE tactics in regards to my personal safety and that of my family. A C2 will stun the perp for about 30 seconds, and it has the capability to deliver multiple shocks from the same shot.
It also only has a range of something like 15-20’. In 30 seconds, I can EASILY cover that distance and close to within effective range of a slightly more deadly blade or staff based weapon, and by the time the perp can respond to said weapon’s presence, I can have it in position to deliver them the ultimate choice of leaving and living or trying to continue and dieing.
In a situation outside my home, the 30 seconds gives me PLENTY of time to high tail it and call 911 to my position. There again, it also gives me time to come in for a hand to hand knockout blow and thus buy myself even more time.
Point being: With a gun, you’ve got basically one option: kill him. With a taser, you’ve still got the lethal force option if you know what you’re doing (and killing a human isn’t exactly something that is overly hard to do, biologically speaking), but you’ve also got several more options. I personally prefer to have as many options as possible in an emergency situation.
By Bob
April 25, 2008 6:27 AM | Link to this
Why do we have laws that punish law abbiding citizens from having guns, but it’s ok for criminals to have guns and kill, rob, and carjack innocent citizens?
By Bob
April 25, 2008 6:33 AM | Link to this
Plus, ask Mayor Frank why don’t criminals stop carrying guns? Why pick on the citizens who work and try to enjoy life.
By 243
April 25, 2008 7:05 AM | Link to this
and now we read that city hall is cutting back on the number of officers on the streets in TODAY’s paper due to the $170 million over-run!!!
amazing!
By Michael Smith
April 25, 2008 7:38 AM | Link to this
If you do not have the right to defend yourself against armed criminals in public, then you have no rights at all — which, of course, is exactly what liberals are hoping to make us: a society of rightless creatures totally at the mercy of the government.
By A Taxpayer
April 25, 2008 8:28 AM | Link to this
Come on people. Michael is right. We should have the right to use deadly force here at home to defend ourselves. What are we, a bunch of hypocrites? If it is OK to use deadly force to protect us from foreign terrorists, then it should be OK to use deadly force to defend ourselves against the home-grown terrorists. Just think about that poor hiker and think about Michael’s scenario and think about all those people that the escaped convict allegedly shot when he escaped in Atlanta. Obviously, I don’t know for a fact that any of these scenarios would have had better outcomes if everyone had been carrying Glocks or Smith and Wessons, etc. However, we sure know what the outcome was without the weapons in the hands of the victims. Anti-gun laws do nothing to protect us. Criminals carry guns, don’t they? How many of them have gun permits? They still manage to get their automatic weapons and all the bullets they want regardless of the laws. Why is that. Let’s put this thing to the test. Our elected officials need to have a week designated as “Show Your Gun Week” where everyone sports their finest weapons everywhere they go. Who in their right mind would dare say something as stupid as “Stick em Up”? I wonder.
By Will Jones
April 25, 2008 9:17 AM | Link to this
Georgia and Atlanta must be where America is strongest: please do sign the bill into law, Governor.
By dcunited
April 25, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this
Jeff:
First of all, I admire your morality of not wanting to kill someone if you do not have to. My main problem with the Taser is tactics. First, you can not practice with it in the same way you can with a firearm. Second, I want the attacker to be thinking ‘I do not want to be shot’ not ‘what is that thing’. Honestly, if he sees the gun and takes a hint and leaves, it is all the better for both of us. Third, correct me if I am wrong but, multiple shots does not really multiply the effectiveness of it as multiple shots of a handgun does increase the likelihood of stopping an attack. Forth, in your senario, you either have to leave in 30 seconds, which is hard to do with a two year old, or be ready to attack him with another weapon should he choose to continue the fight. This is problematic in that you are attacking someone that is incapacitated, making you the attacker. This also requires you to move closer to your attacker, causing skill to be negated by luck and pure strength; not a good idea by a health martial artist, nearly impossible by a 70 year old lady or someone who is protecting their family. This is all assuming one attacker, with multiple there is no way this type will work. I believe Tasers may have a place, they would be a good tool for a single attacker using fists or maybe a stick when you have the possibility of pulling a pistol should you need it. Police around my county carry both and quite often when a Taser is used they have several officers around and it is simply to subdue using as little lethal force as possible, not to actually stop an armed attack. I am glad that you wish to keep your family safe, I just see handguns as a much better option if you can only carry it or a Taser.
By sjfj
April 27, 2008 9:39 AM | Link to this
if you are white, and on MARTA - you are a sitting duck to attack ….especially the further south you go. I am in favor of people having protection. Those trains are NOT monitored well, rarely do you see police on it, and you are out of luck until the next stop.
By yes - I said it
April 27, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this
Well, that’s nice. But what about if we are going to the airport? We can’t take guns in there. I guess they could be checked (and stolen by ASA employees - it’s guaranteed).
What about an event in the evenings? I doubt they let you walk in with a gun.
Or if we are coming or going from work - are guns allowed in office buildings?
I think it’s a good idea, but what about the places we GO? Do they allow them?
I would love to see a few low-lifes who have raped and killed, and are still running around on MARTA like a pack of wild animals - get their due justice….since the justice system can never get them.
By Wackolibhack
April 27, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this
It is Bush fault that there is gun violence. Bush invented gun powder and guns. Bush invented racism, hurricane Katrina anyone, Bush hates blacks (Thanks, Cayene West). Bush hates MARTA. I hate Bush!!!
By BLWhite
April 28, 2008 3:58 PM | Link to this
To Mayor Shirley: Should we also presume that some people in cars might get “mad” also… let’s ban cars… or just start by banning wheels. To Ms. Scott: Take an English class. To AJC: Fire somebody and hire a good proofreader.
By broward College
August 15, 2008 5:03 PM | Link to this
Excellent observation!
we thank you , broward college kenpo club broward college kenpo club
By Hmmm......
January 27, 2009 12:00 AM | Link to this
I have to laugh at the guy posting all in caps about “IF THE SITUATION WAS REVERSED” as I cannot recall a single accounting of a white person robbing a group of blacks at gunpoint! It is ridiculous to continue to challenge law abiding citizens from carrying a weapon when the criminal has such EASY access to them. Mrs. Franklin, why would I be comforted by the thought that the only guns in your fair city were being carried by criminals? If you want to require additional education for the permits, THAT might make sense. But to deny a basic Constitutional right to law abiding citizens only gives the upper hand to the criminal. Honestly, I never imagined myself owning a weapon, let alone carrying one on my person … 7 1/2 yrs in your fair city has changed my position. Permit and pistol accompany me out on your city streets now, woe to he who choses to take what’s mine.
By Hmmm......
January 27, 2009 12:01 AM | Link to this
I have to laugh at the guy posting all in caps about “IF THE SITUATION WAS REVERSED” as I cannot recall a single accounting of a white person robbing a group of blacks at gunpoint! It is ridiculous to continue to challenge law abiding citizens from carrying a weapon when the criminal has such EASY access to them. Mrs. Franklin, why would I be comforted by the thought that the only guns in your fair city were being carried by criminals? If you want to require additional education for the permits, THAT might make sense. But to deny a basic Constitutional right to law abiding citizens only gives the upper hand to the criminal. Honestly, I never imagined myself owning a weapon, let alone carrying one on my person … 7 1/2 yrs in your fair city has changed my position. Permit and pistol accompany me out on your city streets now, woe to he who choses to take what’s mine.