GCO: Atlanta plans to announce the arresting of any carry within the law tomorrow - Page 5

lhuff · July 2nd, 2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mulle46

1.Why would a person with a CCW not have the permit on them if they are carrying?

3. If the police do find someone who is legally CCW but somehow forgot their permit, why would they arrest and or seize their weapon?

A couple of things to remember are L
To your point 1 - Georgia doesn't have a CCW permit. We have a Georgia Firearms License with which we may carry concealed or open. We must have the license on us to carry either way, but we are not constrained to concealed carry.

and

to your point 3 (INAL but...) - Unless the police have “specific and articulable facts” (Terry vs. Ohio) to "stop and frisk" you, they should have no way to know that your are carrying concealed. Remember the five magic words "am I free to go?".

MattH · July 2nd, 2008, 08:53 PM

If you watch the other video with the Atlanta police chief you quickly see that he is ignorant as well. I just don't get LEOs who are anti gun - he actually said that if you find yourself in danger, call the police and they will come protect you! I'm glad I wasn't drinking my Mtn Dew at the time!!!

mulle46 · July 2nd, 2008, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lhuff

A couple of things to remember are L
To your point 1 - Georgia doesn't have a CCW permit. We have a Georgia Firearms License with which we may carry concealed or open. We must have the license on us to carry either way, but we are not constrained to concealed carry.

and

to your point 3 (INAL but...) - Unless the police have “specific and articulable facts” (Terry vs. Ohio) to "stop and frisk" you, they should have no way to know that your are carrying concealed. Remember the five magic words "am I free to go?".

Thanks for the clarification about Georgia law. In regards to my point 3 in my original post, if the police approach you because you printed or are OC, they would have reason for a investigatory stop, Terry frisk. My point was why would they arrest and or seize the weapon if they can verify the legal status of someone who forgot to have their firearms license on them?

rmodel65 · July 2nd, 2008, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mulle46

Thanks for the clarification about Georgia law. In regards to my point 3 in my original post, if the police approach you because you printed or are OC, they would have reason for a investigatory stop, Terry frisk. My point was why would they arrest and or seize the weapon if they can verify the legal status of someone who forgot to have their firearms license on them?

no they dont check this link that georgiacarry sent addressing my harassment

Letter to Glynn County requesting action

excerpt from the end citing case law :

On the issue of whether a firearm, by itself, justifies detaining and investigating a person, there
are many federal cases addressing the issue. United States v. Ubiles, 224 F.3d 213 (3d Cir.
2000) declares that possession of a firearm in public, with no other circumstances present, does
not justify a stop. "For all the officers knew, even assuming the reliability of the tip that Ubiles
possessed a gun, Ubiles was . . . lawfully exercising his right . . . to possess a gun in public." See
also United States v. Dudley, 854 F. Supp. 570 (S.D.Ind. 1994), in which the court declared that
a report of persons with guns did not justify an investigative stop. "In short, the Government
failed to establish . . . that some reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, based on articulable
facts, justified this seizure. And, if the stop itself is unlawful, neither Terry nor Michigan v.
Long authorize the police to search the suspects or the suspect's vehicle for weapons, even if the
officers reasonably fear for their safety."

Likewise, the U.S. Supreme Court in Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000), declared that there is
no "gun exception" to the Fourth Amendment.

GeorgiaCarry.Org asks that your officers stop harassing law abiding Georgians with unlawful
detention. Absent reasonable suspicion of a crime, the person stopped is under no obligation to
cooperate with an unlawful detention. Since so many of your officers are being trained to detain
all persons in possession of a firearm, even in the absence of any suspicion of illegality, then the
results of this Glynn County policy could be disastrous.

Please put a stop to this conduct at once. We look forward to hearing from you in writing
regarding how you intend to address the conduct of your officers and department supervisors in
Glynn County.

rmodel65 · July 8th, 2008, 09:01 PM

motoion for Preliminary Injunction / Temporary Restraining Order click to read

DarinD · July 8th, 2008, 09:33 PM

This mayor must have Maryland Roots

Anubis · July 8th, 2008, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinkerinWstuff

Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin said citizens can't bring guns into the terminal and argued that airports remain attractive targets for terrorism.

Allowing citizens to carry firearms "would create an environment that would endanger millions of people," she said.

Faulty logic. The 2001 hijackers used knives, so she should be working to get knife carry banned.

retsupt99 · July 8th, 2008, 10:57 PM

Interesting read...perhaps the news media (including Fox News) should read it before spouting off about people carrying in airports.

No one is allowed beyond security check points while armed; they do not seem to understand the 'meat' of this law, and how the Mayor of Atlanta has chosen to ignore it.

I'm confident the court will smack the Mayor's hands!

Stay armed...to and from the airport...stay safe!

Moga · July 9th, 2008, 05:24 AM

Most states in the country allow some form of airport carry in non-sterile areas. I believe there are only seven states where it isn't allowed.

The City of Atlanta is posed to lose to Georgia Carry yet again. But unlike previous battles, this time the outcome of the lawsuit has ramifications for Franklin and DeCosta personally.

US Code 42 Chapter 21 Section 1983

Section 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance,
regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the
District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any
citizen of the United States or other person within the
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges,
or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable
to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other
proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought
against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such
officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted
unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was
unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress
applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be
considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

I would like this to be the last time anyone in Georgia, especially in Atlanta, attempts to circumvent the Amendment II freedoms protected by state law and the BOR in a pursuit of a personal agenda. I want these bozos to be made example of, so others are very keenly aware of the ramifications of interfering with the lawful carry of firearms.

We shall see. July 21 is quickly approaching.

Moga · July 9th, 2008, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anubis

Faulty logic. The 2001 hijackers used knives, so she should be working to get knife carry banned.

Anubis, the propaganda of terrorists carrying guns on a GFL has been used before by this crowd, when they were attempting to scare the public into panic so that the Governor of Georgia would veto HB89. I think this was back in April. How ridiculous is that???

Once YouTube has finished processing the video of the press conference that I have, I'll add it to this thread.

July 8th, 2008, 09:33 PM	#46
DarinD Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: PA Posts: 136	This mayor must have Maryland Roots __________________ Life is too short, stop to smell the roses and don't let anyone take it away from you!

July 8th, 2008, 10:57 PM	#48
retsupt99 VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Central Florida Posts: 12,361	Interesting read...perhaps the news media (including Fox News) should read it before spouting off about people carrying in airports. No one is allowed beyond security check points while armed; they do not seem to understand the 'meat' of this law, and how the Mayor of Atlanta has chosen to ignore it. I'm confident the court will smack the Mayor's hands! Stay armed...to and from the airport...stay safe! __________________ ‘‘Four out of five politicians surveyed prefered unarmed, ignorant peasants.’’ — Unknown Liberals are as American as 'dog dodo' pie...

July 9th, 2008, 05:24 AM	#49
Moga Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Atlanta Posts: 153	Most states in the country allow some form of airport carry in non-sterile areas. I believe there are only seven states where it isn't allowed. The City of Atlanta is posed to lose to Georgia Carry yet again. But unlike previous battles, this time the outcome of the lawsuit has ramifications for Franklin and DeCosta personally. US Code 42 Chapter 21 Section 1983 Section 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. I would like this to be the last time anyone in Georgia, especially in Atlanta, attempts to circumvent the Amendment II freedoms protected by state law and the BOR in a pursuit of a personal agenda. I want these bozos to be made example of, so others are very keenly aware of the ramifications of interfering with the lawful carry of firearms. We shall see. July 21 is quickly approaching. __________________ Dont believe OBAMA: http://www.nraila.org/OBAMA/ They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759. Proud Member of GeorgiaCarry.Org

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

July 2nd, 2008, 08:53 PM	#42
MattH New Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: SC Posts: 7	If you watch the other video with the Atlanta police chief you quickly see that he is ignorant as well. I just don't get LEOs who are anti gun - he actually said that if you find yourself in danger, call the police and they will come protect you! I'm glad I wasn't drinking my Mtn Dew at the time!!!

July 8th, 2008, 09:01 PM	#45
rmodel65 Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: brunswick Posts: 46	motoion for Preliminary Injunction / Temporary Restraining Order click to read