GA's HB89 Signed Into Law

S

Shamalama

New member
Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue signed HB 89 into law. The bill, sponsored and advocated by GeorgiaCarry.Org, is the most important pro-gun legislation in the history of Georgia. When the bill takes effect on July 1, 2008, it no longer will be a separate crime, for people with firearms licenses to carry a firearm into a restaurant that serves alcohol, on public transportation, or in state parks. The bill also relaxes car carry restrictions for people eligible for firearms licenses and tightens the time frames for issuance of firearms licenses by probate judges.

http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/2008/05/14/gov-perdue-signs-hb-89
 
I do not keep up too much with the legal doings of you "hicks in the sticks" down there. I do not follow your news papers since most of the stories are about stills, possum recipes, and who married their cutest cousin so I am not up on the local scene. :D ;) Is that the bill that allows carry in your car at work?
 
Last edited:
Sonny has very reluctantly signed this law. It would have gone into effect on the 16th without his signature. He has said he thinks it will be struck down by the courts.

Sonny's delay in signing this bill shows he is not truly a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. I intend to write him a letter and rebuke him for delaying this bill. I certainly would not thank him for sitting on his hands for over a month.
 
Playboypenguin.... for your information we don't marry our cousins down here.... we just date them. :D

Seriously, HB89 gave us the following additional "rights" with our firearms license... on July 1, it will be legal to...

1. Carry in a restaurant that serves alcohol
2. Carry on public transporation (bus, train, etc.)
3. Carry in state parks.

There is some more legal stuff in the bill, but those are the 3 biggies. It was a hard fought victory and I credit an organization called Georgia Carry www.georgiacarry.org . They are a home grown, Georgia only group who fights for our conceal carry rights. Without the GCO coordinating this effort, it is unlikely that HB89 would have even made it out of committee.

This is from their web site.

At approximately 3 p.m. on May 14, 2008, Gov. Sonny Perdue signed HB 89 into law. The bill, sponsored and advocated by GCO, is the most important pro-gun legislation in the history of Georgia. When the bill takes effect on July 1, 2008, it no longer will be a separate crime, for people with firearms licenses to carry a firearm into a restaurant that serves alcohol, on public transportation, or in state parks. The bill also relaxes car carry restrictions for people eligible for firearms licenses and tightens the time frames for issuance of firearms licenses by probate judges.

The author of the bill, Rep. Tim Bearden worked tirelessly to see it passed, and GCO thanks him for his unwavering support. Sen. John Douglas championed the bill in the senate. Both legislators recently received GCO’s Legislator of the Year and Senator of the Year awards, respectively. GCO congratulates the leadership and members of both the senate and the house for shepherding this important legislation, and the governor for signing it into law.
GCO also wishes to thank its many members who attended public hearings (that Maureen Downey of the AJC claims never occurred) and media events, and who contacted their legislators and the governor in support of the bill. Without the support of GCO members, this “dangerous bill” that makes Georgia “become less safe” (according to Ms. Downey) never would have been possible.
Click to expand...
 
FireMax - am I reading the bill incorrectly?

It appears that it strips the Paragraph VIII right to bear arms from unlicensed individuals while in a motor vehicle - an unloaded, cased firearm separated from its ammunition is not an "arm," it's a chunk of metal. Can "prescribing the manner of carrying" extend to rendering the firearm inoperable and useless for self defense? Based on my reading here, it looks like those people who don't wish to ask permission from the government to exercise their uninfringeable Paragraph VIII right to keep and bear arms have been thrown under the bus.

Or is there another provision of law not mentioned in the bill that covers unlicensed carry in a motor vehicle?

Also, is a firearm enclosed in a holster such as a US Army 1911 holster with a flap, "fully exposed to view?"

L214_Colt_Army_Holster_1.jpg


And if my shirt slips, or my jacket temporarily covers an inch of the top of my hip-holstered firearm, have I committed a crime because the firearm is no longer "fully" exposed to view?
 
Mvpel, your question is a good one. The law seems to contradict itself, first saying that the gun can be transported unloaded and separated from its ammo, and then in section (e), it says that this law does not prevent a private person (as long as he would be eligible for a license, but does not require him to have a license) from transporting a loaded firearm in a private passenger motor vehicle.

When I look at the section marked out (section in red is no longer in the law, it is removed by HB89), it seems that the law is saying that your rights as an unlicensed Georgia citizen have increased because you no longer are required to carry a weapon in a vehicle in "open view". In other words, it seems to me the law is saying that the weapon can be loaded and placed anywhere in the vehicle.

However, I am not a lawyer and don't take my word for this.

To be sure, it is not clear. I will seek some clarification from some of my contacts at GCO. You may do the same if you like. Their public email is info@georgiacarry.org .

This Code section shall not forbid the transportation of any firearm by a person who is not among those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129, provided the firearm is enclosed in a case, unloaded, and separated from its ammunition. (e) This Code section shall not forbid any person who is not among those enumerated as ineligible for a license under Code Section 16-11-129 from transporting a loaded firearm in any private passenger motor vehicle in an open manner and fully exposed to view or in the glove compartment, console, or similar compartment of the vehicle; provided, however, that any person in possession of a valid permit issued pursuant to Code Section 16-11-129 may carry a handgun in any location in a motor vehicle.
Click to expand...

Also, is a firearm enclosed in a holster such as a US Army 1911 holster with a flap, "fully exposed to view?"
Click to expand...
As with most law, it is nuanced. I do not know if the law would cover a holster flap. Anyone else have an opinion on this?

And if my shirt slips, or my jacket temporarily covers an inch of the top of my hip-holstered firearm, have I committed a crime because the firearm is no longer "fully" exposed to view?
Click to expand...
I don't think HB89 changed anything in regard to what you are describing here. However, if I were an un-licensed Georgia citizen, I would make sure that my firearm was "fully exposed to view" because I never know what an officer or prosecutor would think about even the slightest bit of the firearm being "inadvertantly" covered by accident. Again, I am no lawyer. Send an email to info@georgiacarry.org and see if they can clear up these issues for you.
 
Thanks for the clarification - the HTML version ran (d) and (e) together so that I thought the unloaded/cased requirement included carrying in a vehicle. Good to know that's not the case.

Now if only we could get the same provision passed in New Hampshire.
 
You're welcome... I believe the section that was removed...

in an open manner and fully exposed to view or in the glove compartment, console, or similar compartment of the vehicle; provided, however, that any person in possession of a valid permit issued pursuant to Code Section 16-11-129 may carry a handgun in any location in a motor vehicle.
Click to expand...

... was removed in order to protect our wives and other family members who may use the car of a licensed holder. Before the change, I, as a Georgia firearms license holder, could carry my gun anywhere in my car I wish and the gun could be loaded. If I forget my gun is under my seat and my wife is pulled over in my car without me, she would be guilty of a crime. The change in the law protects her as she is now legal to carry a gun anywhere in a car, just like a license holder.
 
First off, I resent anyone implying that only the truly southern states have "hicks in the sticks". Anywhere from Mansfield on south in Ohio can offer up some serious competition and we're quite proud of it.

Now, where's our restaurant law? You better leave it in your car here if the establishment A. holds a Class D liquor license (standard license for service and sale) and B. sells liquor or beer for consumption on the premises. I have to disarm to go to Chipotle - I envy you greatly down in Georgia.
 
Meanwhile New Hampshire has never had a alcohol-service carry restriction, and we routinely compete for last place in crime rates.
 
Playboypenquin: If you don't tease us about marrying our cousins, we won't tease you for being a Kalifornia girly man. ;):D
 
In the city where I live, the police chief was quoted in the paper as saying this new law endangers his police officers. What a bold faced lie. I am writing a letter to the editor to point out that Florida has had this same restaurant/alcohol provision for years and there has not been one single reported incident there.
 
The provision in H.B. 89 that precludes ANY consumption of alcohol while carrying must have been written by a Primative Baptist. Sonny didn't like the way the bill was drawn; nor do I. He thought it was too intrusive; so do I. However, I do like being able to carry in restaurants that serve alcohol. Now I won't have to be a scofflaw.
 
July 1, 2008.... the new law takes effect. I will go out to dinner that night at a restaurant that serves alcohol with my .45 at my side. Yip.. yip.
 
I will go out to dinner that night at a restaurant that serves alcohol with my .45 at my side.
Click to expand...

Yea, like you have never done that before anyway!

The provision in H.B. 89 that precludes ANY consumption of alcohol while carrying must have been written by a Primative Baptist. Sonny didn't like the way the bill was drawn
Click to expand...

Sonny's dislike of this bill had nothing to do with the fact that drinking was forbidden while carrying.
 
Quote:
The provision in H.B. 89 that precludes ANY consumption of alcohol while carrying must have been written by a Primative Baptist. Sonny didn't like the way the bill was drawn

Sonny's dislike of this bill had nothing to do with the fact that drinking was forbidden while carrying.
Click to expand...


Yeah, on reflection, my response was poorly-written. Although I'm not much of a drinker, I was expressing my personal opinion about the Baptist influence. I was told by a supposed "insider" that Sonny didn't like the way the bill was written. I don't know what it was, specifically that Sonny didn't like.

Some folks opined that the "no alcohol" provision is so vague as to enforcement responsibility that Sonny didn't like that part for that reason...not from the "teetotaler" aspect. There was nothing written into the bill regarding how the "no alcohol" provision would be enforced. I'd be o.k. with the same standards for drunk driving, and I'd be equally o.k. to lower the d.u.i. standard to .05%.
 
Sonny did not like the bill for several reasons. Mainly, though, it is because it was hated by his rich business friends and the restaurant owners association. He was also very opposed to the parking lot provision, again because his rich business friends didnt like being told they had to allow it. He also did not like the provision that would have forbidden the governor to confiscate weapons during emergency. This was stricken from the final bill, because Sonny would have vetoed the bill if it had taken away the power of the governor to confiscate your weapons for you own protection if he saw fit.

Perdue is not a friend of personal liberty nor the 2nd Amendment.
 
I agree with much of what you say benign.neglect. I don't care for Sonny. He is a symptom of a republican party that has come to be to "cozy" with liberals, so much so that republicans are beginning to vote like liberals. I don't care for it. I won't vote for a republican like that ever again. Bush 2000 and Bush 2004 were my last votes for the lesser of evils.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top