Court rules that legislator did not mean what he said

March 13, 5:11 PMAtlanta Gun Rights ExaminerEd Stone

Next

8 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Atlanta Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

GeorgiaCarry.Org Attorney John Monroe serving Rep. Bearden's lawsuit on Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin during a press conference at the airport.  In spite of this picture, she initially claimed she was not served.

News outlets across the country are reporting that a federal appeals court in Atlanta yesterday upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit that sought to stop the City of Atlanta from arresting people carrying firearms in the unsecured areas of Atlanta’s airport. The consequence of yesterday’s ruling is that Georgians with firearms licenses who carry firearms at the airport or in its parking lots may risk arrest on felony charges carrying a penalty of up to twenty years in prison and a $15,000 fine.

The basis for the judges’ decision is a determination that the new law was not intended to include airports. Ironically, Georgia General Assembly Representative Tim Bearden (R-68), who wrote the new law, is also the plaintiff who filed the lawsuit to enforce it. It is a rare event for the author of a law to be a party arguing in court over what the law means, and it is extremely rare for the court to conclude that the law meant something completely different from what its writer intended.

Atlanta Gun Rights Examiner caught up with Rep. Bearden at his home in Villa Rica, Georgia, where Rep. Bearden still showed visible signs of frustration with the court’s decision. "We write the laws, not judges," Rep. Bearden said. "HB 89 clearly applies to airport terminals. The law was to permit Georgia families to protect themselves even at the airport, so long as they were not in the federal, secured area."

John Monroe, the Roswell attorney who represented Rep. Bearden and GeorgiaCarry.Org, also appeared puzzled by the court's decision.  Mr. Monroe pointed out that the law permits a person to "carry such firearm in public tranportation, notwithstanding the specific law that makes it a crime to carry a firearm in the airport.  The meaning of the law is pretty clear."

Rep. Bearden and John Monroe had good company in their opinion, as Governor Sonny Perdue declared to the press after signing the bill that HB 89 would decriminalize the carry of firearms at the airport. Responding to a journalist’s follow up question of whether it was "a good idea," Georgia’s Governor said, "Yes."  He gave the example of his wife and emphasized that he wanted her to have the right to be armed when in Atlanta’s airport parking lot alone at night.

The issue of carrying firearms at the airport was also discussed in the Georgia Senate. During public debate on the bill, Sen. Vincent Fort asked Sen. Chip Rogers, who was presenting the bill, whether he would "feel comfortable" with people carrying firearms "into the airport, going into the atrium" and as far as the security lines. Sen. Rogers pointed out that the bill applied only to those with a firearms license, and the Senate voted minutes later to pass the bill. The court ignored this debate and declared that the new law meant the opposite of what the House, the Senate, and the Governor all considered the effect of the bill on the airport to be.

In Villa Rica, Rep. Bearden is weighing his options, but he emphasized to the Atlanta Gun Rights Examiner that Georgia is determined to "fix this" and restore the effect of the law. It remains to be seen whether the courts will let that happen.