During debate over “The Irresponsible Gun Use Protection Act” that passed the Georgia House this week, the Second Amendment got quite a rhetorical workout. It was cited to justify things that ought to embarrass the many reasonable, responsible gun owners in Georgia.
For example, under the bill, gun-permit holders who take weapons to an airport and try to bring them through security and onto an airplane would get off scot-free as long as they whip out the “oops, I forgot it was there” defense. Those who try those antics without a permit would be charged with a misdemeanor.
Maybe it’s me, but not knowing the whereabouts of your weapon as you stand in an airport security line doesn’t strike me as responsible gun ownership. And shouldn’t those licensed by the state to carry weapons be held to a higher standard of behavior than someone without a permit? House Bill 875 does the opposite. It excuses irresponsible behavior, and that has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.
Under the bill, local school districts would also be able to empower civilian personnel to carry and use firearms in K-12 schools. That too has nothing to do with the Second Amendment, and everything to do with an abandonment of common sense.
HB 875 sets out very vague, minimal standards for training of civilians authorized to carry weapons in school, but those standards are much less rigorous than those for law-enforcement personnel. And why do we require extensive training and testing of law-enforcement personnel? We do so both to protect the general public and to protect the officers themselves. Even with such extensive training, tragic mistakes occur much too often.
Given all that, why on earth would you give a loaded weapon to a teacher, counselor or custodian and not require that person to have the same training as a law-enforcement officer, particularly in a school setting where the potential consequences of a mistake are so high? The Second Amendment is no excuse for that lack of responsibility.
The bill also allows permit holders to carry weapons into any government building that does not have a metal detector or other screening process to prevent armed visitors. Cities and counties that want to bar armed visitors from their buildings could not legally do so unless they invested in expensive equipment and the personnel to man it.
That becomes especially problematic thanks to yet another provision of the law. Suppose a law-enforcement officer sees an unfamiliar armed person in a government building. Under HB 875, “a person carrying a weapon shall not be subject to detention for the sole purpose of investigating whether such person has a weapons carry license.” In other words, the officer would be barred from asking to see the person’s carry permit. That prohibition would apply not just in government buildings, but anywhere.
The bill would also legalize the carrying of weapons in bars, a step that most responsible gun owners know is foolhardy in the extreme. Technically, it leaves the current ban on weapons on college campuses intact, but makes it unenforceable. It would also legally introduce firearms into churches, mosques and temples.
None of that has anything to do with the Second Amendment. For example, Georgia law has drawn the line against gun possession in places of peaceful worship for more than 100 years with no challenge to its constitutionality. HB 875 backers are misusing the Second Amendment to disguise the fact that the changes they seek cannot be defended on rational, common-sense grounds.
