Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   Lawsuit filed--Atlanta airport (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/lawsuit-filed-atlanta-airport-5325/)

Musket 07-02-2008 07:59 PM

Lawsuit filed--Atlanta airport
 
FYI,

(PS--please notice the phrase "gun toting")

*********

Lawsuit filed over Atlanta airport barring guns

Advocates for new law say gun-toting visitors should be allowed in terminal
The Associated Press
updated 7:54 p.m. ET, Tues., July. 1, 2008

ATLANTA - The nation's busiest airport dueled with gun rights advocates Tuesday over whether a new Georgia state law allows visitors to carry firearms at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

City officials in charge of the airport declared it a "gun free zone" when the new law took effect Tuesday. Gun rights supporters, including a state legislator who helped pass the law, quickly filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the designation.

"My message is simple, 'Leave your firearms at home'," airport general manager Ben DeCosta told reporters at a news conference...........more

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25479434/

ScottG 07-02-2008 08:12 PM

Ok, we know the guy's a ****, but does the city own and operate the airport? If not, it seems unlikely they could declare it anything. State laws always trump city laws if the state is willing to enforce it.

The rep who pushed the law has threatened to go on the property carrying and daring the goon to do something about it. Maybe it's time we start putting these anti-gun people behind bars for violating pro-gun ordinances and laws....

Dillinger 07-02-2008 08:30 PM

This is going to get touchy. We are talking about Federal Area's of control ( Federal Employees, Federal Mandated screening procedures, Federal Airspace, Federal background checks on construction labor done at airports, etc. ), in a Post 9/11 world that still has aircraft travel down in this country. This is a bad play in my mind. Pushing the Feds to come down one way or the other, so soon after the Supreme Court decision could backfire on our side BIG TIME.

If they quote the Post 9/11 security needs as a reason to be able to declare it a gun free zone, or if they state that All Federal property should be outlawed for carry ( like court houses ), it will give the Left an anchor to start building their new foundation on.

Someone with some pull, the NRA, should really evaluate whether now is the time and place for this argument so soon after a step forward...

JD

johnsteele 07-02-2008 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillinger (Post 30159)
This is going to get touchy. We are talking about Federal Area's of control ( Federal Employees, Federal Mandated screening procedures, Federal Airspace, Federal background checks on construction labor done at airports, etc. ), in a Post 9/11 world that still has aircraft travel down in this country. This is a bad play in my mind. Pushing the Feds to come down one way or the other, so soon after the Supreme Court decision could backfire on our side BIG TIME.

If they quote the Post 9/11 security needs as a reason to be able to declare it a gun free zone, or if they state that All Federal property should be outlawed for carry ( like court houses ), it will give the Left an anchor to start building their new foundation on.

Someone with some pull, the NRA, should really evaluate whether now is the time and place for this argument so soon after a step forward...

JD

Very true,some caution is called for. On the other hand there are many RTC states where airports are not off limits (VA and TX come immediately to mind) and, as far as I know, there is no body of evidence to suggest that it is a problem in those states. In a rational federal analysis of the problem one would hope that would weigh heavily in any such decision. (Oops, screwed up there, used rational and federal in the same sentence.)

It would seem prudent for the NRA and GeorgiaCarry to begin gathering data on other states in anticipation of possible FAA review and/or Congressional hearings. This may be a case where FAA rule-making would be easier to overcome, their process for public comment is at least rational. Once Congress gets involved the irrational anti-gun nuts will probably rule the day.

My guess is that the Georgia courts will rule against Atlanta on preemption grounds. But it sounds like the city/airport management is just irrational on the matter and will not let it go at that. More Georgia taxpayer money and passenger charges being spent in pursuit of a personal crusade.

Dillinger 07-02-2008 09:17 PM

I agree, there are states that you allow carrying onto their property, but I can't help but feel that information will be lost in the shuffle. :mad:

I fear this will come down to the Feds having to say Yea or Nay on carrying a loaded weapon into an airport. Factor in the recent economic woes of just about every airline. Factor in the "bail out" help they have needed to just keep going. Then factor in that it was a 5-4 decision and suddenly the water gets a little choppy for my tastes...

I am sure the folks filing the lawsuit will do their homework, and I do believe that the airport manager is taking things a bit personal. I am just cautioning that NOW might not be the best time to kick this particular hornets' nest...

Then again - maybe there is no time like the present. *shrug*

Quote:

More Georgia taxpayer money and passenger charges being spent in pursuit of a personal crusade.
100% Agreed!


JD

Musket 07-03-2008 12:58 PM

While I agree that people should be able to carry under these circumstances, and I think the airport manager is a fear monger, I am not sure if this is the best time/place to smack them. I agree with Dillenger.

No one can guarantee where a lawsuit will land, there are many things that can influence a suit--even things such as how you word it when initially filed.

I hope they succeed, but it makes me very uneasy they are jumping on this so quickly--the ink has not even dried on the new RTC law.

If they do move forward, they very much need to coordinate with key players: NRA, local gun groups etc. It needs to be an orderly move....

johnsteele 07-03-2008 03:06 PM

While I agree with the suit in the interests of resolving what appears to be a state sovereignty issue I also see the danger of waving this particular red flag in front of this particular bull at this particular time. That being said I'm not sure there is any good/bad/better/worse time to raise the issue when the feds are actively involved.

In restrospect I think it would have been better for the state representative that sponsored the bill to have written to the state Attorney General requesting him to enforce the law and advise Atlanta to cease and desist overstepping their authority with respect to Georgia firearms laws. I don't know if that is a viable procedure in Georgia but it might be less confrontational and risky than slapping them with a law suit.

BigO01 07-03-2008 04:23 PM

Yes this ones a spin of the Roulette wheel especially when you consider ALL of the pertinent facts involved that will be ignored .

I find all of the new Federal restrictions I have been told of from Friends who fly very interesting , especially when you consider the simple fact that the 911 Hijackers didn't have a single firearm or bomb among them .

The planes them selves were the "Bombs" yet how many millions of Americans have been forced to take their shoes off repeatedly prior to boarding a plane these last 7 years .

When you think about it for a moment it was the most glaring condemnation of the "Sheep" response of just give them what they want and you'll be just fine .

In previous hijackings they always went for stealing the plane to go to some far off foreign country and made insane demands that were eventually met for the hostages release , ah the trouble with "Assume" !

Then there is the quite reasonable position that all Federal property is public property after all our or more accurately our parents and grandparents tax dollars bought and developed them and "WE the People" have the right to exercise all of our Constitutional Rights on them .

Of course one never knows how any court may rule .

ScottG 07-03-2008 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnsteele (Post 30241)
While I agree with the suit in the interests of resolving what appears to be a state sovereignty issue I also see the danger of waving this particular red flag in front of this particular bull at this particular time.

I say we make this bull a steer.


Quote:

Originally Posted by johnsteele (Post 30241)
In restrospect I think it would have been better for the state representative that sponsored the bill to have written to the state Attorney General requesting him to enforce the law and advise Atlanta to cease and desist overstepping their authority with respect to Georgia firearms laws. I don't know if that is a viable procedure in Georgia but it might be less confrontational and risky than slapping them with a law suit.

That's a good idea, set everything up first then come down on the miscreant. It would be better to wait and be prepared, then to march the guy off to jail for violating state law.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:06 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.