Welcome Back to the Wild West …
… where the new sheriff in town is Atlanta’s airport general manager Ben DeCosta. Concealed weapons are the issue, and DeCosta and other Atlanta officials are taking a hard stand against a new Georgia state law (House Bill 89) that permits citizens with firearm licenses to carry concealed weapons aboard public transportation, in state parks, and elsewhere. DeCosta’s response: Not in my airport.
Good for him. He may not be Wyatt Earp, but DeCosta is taking the lead in seeing that guns don’t proliferate in his territory.
Of course, with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last week that reaffirmed an individual’s right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, it was expected that new legal battles would arise over gun ownership. It’s just nearly impossible to believe that the first significant battle would come at a U.S. airport, where the need for security has become inherent since 9/11.
Says DeCosta, “We have the legal grounds to take this stand, and we are also driven by my unwavering belief that guns have no place at airports.” While DeCosta cites the Georgia Code (Section 16-11-127) that includes a “public gathering exception,” Atlanta mayor Shirley Franklin is calling on Washington to resolve the issue. One suggestion: Mandate that any public facility receiving federal funding be declared a gun-free zone.
DeCosta also cites support from airport groups, AAAE and ACI-NA, and quotes AAAE president Chip Barclay who, in a letter of support, says that “any and all attempts to prohibit weapons from our nation’s airports are necessary and must be supported.”
This is not about gun ownership rights; it’s about sanity. We already have enough stress bouncing off the airport terminal walls these days without having to worry if half the folks hanging out pre-security are packing weapons – concealed, no less.
Writer Jay Bookman of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution may have said it best: “Like so much about the gun issue, this is more about symbolism than practical effect. But the symbolism in this case works against the gun lobby, which may find it has significantly overreached and chosen poor ground on which to fight.”
Thanks for reading. jfi
When seconds count, the Cops are only minutes away. By the way “Gun Free Zones” are nothing more than killing zones for the criminally bent.
I can see both sides but through my eyes as an airport employee whom works with construction projects at 2 airports owned by a municipality it depends on the situation. The first airport is a GA airport in a rough neighborhood and I am frequently there working overnight and usually arrive by myself and leave by myself. Guess what - I carry; I don’t care what law is on the books - I carry. However, the second airport is a hub airport and my vehicles trunk is usually a safe place for my gun. But I also work many overnights at the hub airport as well and therefore I am comforted of having my gun, which I will take from my trunk and strap it when I leave work, especially in the region of which I live where predators prey the foreign and vacation travelers by car jacking. I guess for the average traveler in the country it usually isn’t necessary to have a gun in the terminal but I don’t see the problem with having one concealed in your car in the parking garage.
Like it or not, if you read the Georgia law and listen to the legislator who wrote and worked to pass it, it’s pretty clear that the Atlanta Airport was never intended to be exempt from the law. Anyone who wants is certainly entitled to disagree with the law, but no one is entitled to violate it. That’s what being a nation of laws is about.
All the hype about “wild west” is just ridiculous. This same argument comes up every time a law allowing or expanding citizens’ abilities to carry weapons, concealed or otherwise, is proposed. Despite giant increases in these types of laws over the last 20 years, not a single one can be shown to have increased violent incidents anywhere they’ve been passed - not one single example. Instead, it’s the same kind of fear mongering that has become the first best weapon of those pushing a faulty political agenda in this country, whichever side of the political spectrum they come from. Anyone who looks at the facts can only assume that it’s a myth that appeals to those who are themselves so emotionally unstable as to be too irresponsible to be trusted with anything that might be potentially dangerous if misused, and who can therefore not understand that the majority of people aren’t.
And while I’ll respect Richard’s choice to say, “If I get killed, oh well”, or “I’ll use my gun on myself first”, that is simply his choice. Just because he’s inclined to die rather than take an adult’s responsibility for his own safety, that doesn’t give anyone the right to require others be so willing to die so that Richard feels good about his personal choices. Having been a police officer for several years, I can tell you that if you think that the police will, or even can, protect you if you get robbed, your horribly misinformed and naive. They’re not even legally obligated to do so if they can. The police take the report after the fact, they don’t stop the crime. They carry guns to protect themselves, not you. And everyone else should be allowed to do the same.If you check the national statistics compiled by the Department of Justice, you’re more likely to be killed or injured even if you totally comply with a robber than if you use a gun to defend yourself. Guns in the hands of the law-abiding work, and work well, to deter and prevent crime. That’s why every state and federal politician is personally guarded by people who carry them. Every citizen deserves the same right.
The “Wild West” already exists on the streets, in publicly-accessible business establishments, at schools, on public transportation, and anywhere else criminals have free access.
The only choice is: shall upstanding citizens continue to be denied the right to defend themselves, criminalized by fear-mongers and people holding temporary governing reins of power?
In the end, denying upstanding people this ability harms only upstanding people. This is why it’s a PROTECTED RIGHT, because it affects everyone’s ability to protect themselves against the criminals we all point to when addressing our fears. Tossing out people’s right to defend themselves when addressing violence is absolutely tossing the baby out with the bath water. It makes no sense.
and what about when you leave the airport to go home? criminals (who don’t care about the “gunfree zone”) know you are going to be coming with all your personal affects you have taken on vacation with you and that you are going to be unarmed. in Atlanta, where I am from, I take MARTA to the air port. if you want to see how “safe” MARTA is just search for it on youtube.com. you will see why law abidint citizens who have subjected them to the same background checks as the GBI would want a gun.
also please note that guns would only be allowed up to security check points. at that point they would not be allowed any further.
Well, if you have not been to the Atlanta Airport recently, the whole area is an area, where I would want a gun.
Actually you could probably buy one off the street in that area for really cheap.
I absolutely agree with your position. We have enough unarmed nuts among us, without having armed ones. I own a gun; and I keep it safely at home unless I’m going to the gun range. I am not so paranoid that I think I have to carry a gun with me everywhere I go just in case one of the nuts acosts me. If I get robbed, I’ll call a cop. If there are no cops around, I’ll give up a few bucks and consider myself lucky. If I get killed, oh well. Life’s a crap shoot and none of us knows when it’s going to end. A meteorite might kill me tomorrow (and it’s probably about as likely as getting robbed…I haven’t been robbed yet and I’m 66. As my mother used to say, “Hope for the best, prepare for the worst and take what comes with a smile.” That’s good advice, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to carry a sidearm with me in order to be prepared. I’ll use my gun on myself first!
Sorry but I have to disagree. Some of the nations airports require one to transient highways and secondary roads to get there, sometimes thru areas less than desirable, areas that I feel safer armed. Do you really think that I am going to leave my legally carried weapon in an airport parking garage; not likely. Does the words Miami Airport ring any (alarm) bells?