Posted: 12:49 pm Thursday, May 29th, 2014

Sam Olens, Nathan Deal slam door on talk of ‘accidental’ campus-carry law 

By Jim Galloway and Greg Bluestein

Less than 24 hours after a gun group went public with its contention that language contained in two separate gun bills passed by the Legislature would allow concealed weaponry on public university campuses, Attorney General Sam Olens formally shot the idea down.

Read the background we posted this morning. Olens’ judgment on the state of campus carry in Georgia can be found in an FAQ piece his office just produced, to guide state agencies on enforcement of gun legislation passed by the General Assembly this spring. You can read it below.

The attorney general explains that two bills passed by the Legislature, HB 60 and HB 826, were in conflict when it came to weaponry in school zones. HB 60 was signed last by Gov. Nathan Deal, so it has the last word. From Olens:

“Therefore, there is a general prohibition against carrying weapons in a school safety zone (which includes the real property or buildings of public or private elementary schools, technical schools, vocational schools, colleges or universities.); however, a person who possesses a weapons carry license may have a weapon when carrying or picking up a student and may have a weapon in a vehicle that is in transit through or parked within a school safety zone.”

Deal said in a separate statement that he was aware of the “overlapping provisions” so he contacted state lawyers about how to avoid a possible legal conflict. Said Deal:

“I signed HB 60 after HB 826 to ensure the major substantive provisions in HB 60 became law. In doing so, any contradicting language was conflicted out in favor of the last bill signed.”

As some of you have noted, the above is not a legal opinion, but a guide for state agencies. We inquired as to whether a more detailed explanation were on its way — and were told no. Which means the AG’s office may be holding fire for a lawsuit that’s promised to come.

Here’s the entire document from Olens’ office:

218 comments
SouthGeorgiareader
SouthGeorgiareader

No doubt the Guv and his minions knew they would be defending this mess at taxpayers' expense.  Competence is not the word we can use to describe our legislative and executive branches of state government.  Now, we'll see whether the judicial branch is competent.

BigHat
BigHat

Bang bang you shot me down
Bang bang I hit the ground
Bang bang that awful sound

Bang bang my baby shot me down 

mrob
mrob

"Red states are dangerous states with lawmakers equally dangerous to enact dangerous laws to drive home a point to exhibit conservatism'---mrob

DS
DS

I've never heard of a legislature passing two laws with overlapping, contradictory provisions in the same session. How did this get by Cagle and Ralston?

Does the timing of the governor's signature really make any difference in the enforcement of conflicting provisions? I wonder if there's even a rule for this, since one would assume that a competent legislature would resolve conflicting provisions before passing the final versions.

How are police officers supposed to enforce these laws on the streets? How are judges supposed to instruct juries to apply these laws in court trials?

What a mess. The legislators couldn't pass hardly any useful legislation during their session, and they botched the little bit of work they did get done.

Mitchellbrooks
Mitchellbrooks

So, just where is the signatory page showing the date the governor signed HB 826?

Jim, you might want to follow up on that.  Something smells rotten in Denmark. 

MaryElizabethSings
MaryElizabethSings

The more guns that are freely floating around in our society, without regulation, in every place we gather, the more likely will be the possibility that those of unsound mind will use one of those guns to inflict pain upon, or even take, the lives of others, without cause. 


Please consider the need for some regulation of guns in a civilized society.  We may all support being able to drive a vehicle to give us mobility in order to "pursue our happiness," but, as a civilized society, we do not allow the right to drive to those under a certain age, nor to those who have demonstrated that they are not able to drive a vehicle without harming either themselves or others, in the process of doing so.  Every person has the right to life, as well as the right to freedom of fear of being gunned down by a person of unsound mind, with no reasonable explanation for doing so. 

Gunluvr
Gunluvr

If Sam Olens wants to "slam the door" on campus carry then he just might find the door opened for him on election day in the future.

Jke
Jke

I'll take a chance and weigh in on a topic that is so emotional it might cause a knife fight.  


Unless the US Constitution is amended to change or revoke the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights, guns are not going away in our lifetime.  The US Supreme Court, even packed with 9 liberals will not change this, as the principle of stare decisis is historically held in such great regard by even the most ardent of justices.  If a law of a state, or that state's constitution are more limiting than what the US constitution provides, that law or constitutional provision is unconstitutional.  See Heller.  Further, a state's constitution can grant more freedom than the US Constitution. Therefore, Georgia's new gun laws, which do not limit, but grant more rights than the US Constitution, are constitutional. 


The GA Supreme Court can't do much unless the AG is wrong about the time of signing.  they also can't do much unless there was some limitation in the law that  violates due process or equal protection, or if some portion of it was was so ambiguous that it was not understandable.


Thus, the law as it is, is here to stay, unless it is legislatively changed, or if there is some fatal flaw in the way it was passed, or if the AG is wrong.  Everyone needs to deal with that and move forward.  For those of you who think the law is wrongheaded, then work to have it changed.  Just don't keep harping on it and doing nothing other than anonymously hacking away on a blog.  If you ar ein the minority, and it seems you are, well, it's a democracy.  Work to make your beliefs the majority opinion.       

P-Evans
P-Evans

Not so fast there. This document is only a FAQ, and not an official AG opinion. Not holding out hope that the official opinion will differ, however. But no matter, hopefully the courts will understand what words mean and how the process of bills adding to, deleting from, or merely referencing code works in the Legislature in the creation of laws. 


You know, the rules regarding strike-outs and underlines that apparently Gov Deal and Atty Gen. Sam Olens are ignorant of. The governor does not get the option to make a law "different" by signing bills in different orders, when they are passed in the same legislative session. The rules did not change. And by the way, where is the signatory page showing the date the governor signed HB 826? Hmmm. It seems to be missing in action.


HB 826 will be law come July 1st regardless of whether the code-writers update the OCGA correctly or not. The OCGA is not law, the bills that are signed into law are the law.

Mandingo
Mandingo

Bang !!!!           Bang !!!!!!            Shootem' up !!!!!!!            Yeeeeeee   Hawwwwww  !!!!!!!!!.        Guns everywhere baby  !!!!!!!!!!!             Don't Thread on me...............   The Georgia GOP continues to lead with low morals and mis-guided value systems that have no boundaries. Campus carry will be signed into law during Deals second term.

td1234
td1234

3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment . The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64.


http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

td1234
td1234

Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. 

       ---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).

td1234
td1234

A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.
      --- Thomas Jefferson to Peter Carr, 1785. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.
We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; 
        ---Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.
No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms. 
         ---Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.

Mitchellbrooks
Mitchellbrooks

@DS 

Would you mind pointing out what you feel are the contradictory provisions in HB60 and HB826?  Remember that what is being passed are the lines with either strike through where code is being deleted or underlines where code is being added.  The other sentences are merely there for reference of existing code and are not part of the legislation actually being passed by the legislature, only the changes to existing code are being passed.  


And to answer your question, no, the sequence of signature has no impact in the case of these two bills. 

td1234
td1234

@MaryElizabethSings And who says second amendment supporters are not in favor of some regulation. I do not think you will find one that wants convicted felons or the mentally ill to have weapons. 


All this law allows is people that have already went through the process to get a carry permit to actually have the 2nd Amendment protections to "bear arms" in more places instead of having to lock the gun in their car (that could be broken into and stolen) or to break the law by carrying it in restricted areas anyway. 


I have had a carry permit for over 20 years and have always carried on me when sitting in line to pick up my children at school. The former law said when I was on the street in front of the school and driving back and forth to my house it was legal but I could not have it when I drove on school grounds. That was a stupid law that has now been resolved.  

Docfinder
Docfinder

@Mandingo Typical liberal.  If they cannot form a logical argument, they start to call names and ridicule.  Just like bullies back in school, they thrive off from an audience of people listening to them crack jokes.  Your unable to even realize that "more guns everywhere" already exists but yet gun violence is way, way down. I love the tolerance of liberals.  They will stand on their soap box and tell you how you should tolerate folks with different sexual or religious beliefs, but if you enjoy the hobby of shooting, or if you practice the right to bear arms, your some sort of hick rube to be made fun of. 


td1234
td1234

@Mandingo And yet Georgian's still do not have more 2nd Amendment protections as the progressive state of Vermont. 

ByteMe
ByteMe

@td1234 Good luck fighting against RPGs, armed drones, cluster bombs, etc. with your little gun.  Thinking you have a chance against a well-equipped standing army is lunacy.  Of course, I didn't expect anything else.

Shar1
Shar1

@td1234 Jefferson lived in fear of a slave revolt. Of course he advocated a gun as a constant companion - as long as you were a "freeman".

KellyBurke
KellyBurke

@Mitchellbrooks IF the laws are in conflict, the later bill rules. It happens more than you'd think. It happened with OCGA 16-11-62(2) and resulted in a court case 10 years later where the Supreme Court ruled that the one day difference in signing of conflicting bills meant the later bill won. I'm not convinced these two laws are in conflict however.


DS
DS

@Mitchellbrooks, from the story above: "The attorney general explains that two bills passed by the Legislature, HB 60 and HB 826, were in conflict when it came to weaponry in school zones."

Mitchellbrooks
Mitchellbrooks

@GB101  

I'm referring to the actual legal document, the one with the governor's signature in ink on it.  Unlike the governor and AG would lead us to believe, the sequence of signing really has no impact on the law anyway, but I am curious if they are playing games with the signing dates thinking it somehow matters.

BuckheadBoy
BuckheadBoy

@td1234 @MaryElizabethSings I support the 2nd Amendment, and keep showing-up on the village green with my pike and dirk for militia drill. But, alas, there is never a drill; just the village idiot running around with his firearm. Now I know that a few years back five of the nine on the Supreme Court said that we could keep a firearm at home under the 2nd Amendment, but what does that have to do with the village idiot running around with his all over the village all of the time? Anyone who would want or permit that must not really be interested in "insuring domestic tranquility". I'd better get home now and make sure that my 3rd Amendment protections are still in place. Don't want any troops quartered there this week. They always make such a mess.

honested
honested

@td1234 @MaryElizabethSings 

tiny dog,

Both the Federal and State transfer and carry requirements are severely lacking.

Expanding the area where people who are not sufficiently comfortable in their own skin so they have to have a popgun strapped to them with every step they take is nothing short of lunacy.

Civilized society has been held hostage by the gun manufacture and marketing industry for decades. It is time for common sense pushback before all is lost.

MaryElizabethSings
MaryElizabethSings

@td1234 


We do not need guns allowed on college campuses, bars, and churches.  Most reasonable people know why.

honested
honested

@Docfinder @Mandingo 

I'm glad you are at least capable of recognizing the enhanced tolerance of the liberal mind.

Especially with the level of knuckle-dragging lunacy we have to put up with from conserrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrvatives on a daily basis.

GB101
GB101

@ByteMe


It is not lunacy.  History is full of examples of asymmetrical warfare and examples of the smaller, poorly armed side winning.  One example may be familiar to you, a war that began in New England in 1775 and ended in Virginia in 1781.




honested
honested

@Mitchellbrooks @GB101 

It doesn't really matter.

You guys will interpret it to suit your own delusions and prance around with your little popguns thinking you are welcome wherever you go......

then you'll squeal like little pigs when you are appropriately locked up.

td1234
td1234

@BuckheadBoy You really need to go and read the Heller decision before you keep posting stuff that makes you look foolish.

td1234
td1234

@DewieCheatem_n_Howe People have been taking guns into bars for years. The only difference was good law abiding citizens now can do it legally while the criminals are still going to break the law as they have always done. 

Mitchellbrooks
Mitchellbrooks

@DewieCheatem_n_Howe  

Firearms have been allowed in restaurant bars since 2008 in GA and it has been legal to consume alcohol in those establishments while carrying since 2010.  Seen any blood flowing in the aisles of Red Lobster? 

ByteMe
ByteMe

@GB101 @ByteMe Again, if you have to go back 200 years for your example of how you're going to win against cluster bombs and nuclear munitions, you've failed the "reality test".

The-Centrist
The-Centrist

Sounds just like a birther conspiracy....

honested
honested

@td1234 @BuckheadBoy 

Luckily, 'Heller' is a bump in the road that will be corrected once the 'federalist' scum have been purged from the Court.

Gunluvr
Gunluvr

@The-Centrist @Gunluvr Thanks for that great question. I use a variety of cleaners and solvents; Rem-Oil, Breakfree, etc. and I use the same oils on my swords also. No, God didn't weigh in on preventive maintenance.

KellyBurke
KellyBurke

@The-Centrist Problem is, the governor's website showed HB826 signed on April 29. I have a copy of the webpage showing that. It was changed later. If the website was in error, so be it, but show us the bill.