The employee walked into the office, and the alleged suspect followed him.
The employee told police as he sat on his chair he noticed the man pulling up his shirt, and grabbing a gun.
The employee grabbed his own gun, which the suspect saw, and stated, "No!" The suspect turned around, walked out of the office and took off running.
More Here This link is broken.
Mobile Police confirmed that one man was shot in his leg at Sunset on
the Bayou Apartments. The man was shot by a woman after he broke into
her apartment. The man knew the victim before he tried to burglarize her
apartment, according to a news release from the Mobile Police
Department.
PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — Philadelphia police say a store owner shot an armed robbery suspect in Kingsessing. It happened around 5:30 p.m. Monday in the 5400 block of Chester Avenue.
Pensacola, FL — As TFTP reported in February, Corey Marioneaux Jr., 24, is a father of two, church-going community member with no criminal record who defended his family from armed intruders. Because the intruders were cops, however, Marioneaux was charged with attempted murder of a law enforcement officer. He was completely innocent.
Thankfully, however, justice has prevailed and the State Attorney’s
Office announced its decision not to criminally prosecute Marioneaux as
he acted in self-defense and they could not prove that he knew the
intruders were cops.
March 2022 firearm sales and National Instant background Check System (NICS) checks done by the FBI are both the third highest on record. The NICS system started record keeping in 1998. There are 24 years of data for March.
The 2022 firearm sales and NICS checks are starting to show a trend of the third highest after 2020 and 2021. In March of 2022, the firearm sales were about 1.62 million. In March 2020 they were 2.37 million. In March, 2021, they were about 2.0 million. The next highest March was in 2013, with about 1.47 million firearm sales.
The NICS checks for March 2022 are also much reduced over the previous two years. In 2022, they were 3.08 million. In 2020, they were 3.74 million. In 2021, they were 4.69 million. The next largest number of NICS was in 2018, with 2.77 million Checks.
The NICS checks do not correlate well with firearm sales because large numbers of NICS checks are used for weapons carry permits and carry permit rechecks. The reform of the Firearm Owners ID (FOID) system in Illinois has significantly reduced the number of carry permit checks and rechecks done in Illinois. At times, the permit and permit rechecks in Illinois were as much as 23% of all NICS checks done in the United States. In one month, there were 640,000 NICS checks for permits and permit done in Illinois.
March of 2022 continues strong firearms sales, close to the capacity of manufacturers to produce the firearms desired. A trip to a local gun store showed significant amount of product in the racks and on the shelves. March traditionally has higher sales than January or February. In ordinary times, after March, sales tend to slump until September.
These are not ordinary times. The war in Ukraine may effect demand in the United States in unexpected ways. The uncertainty in American political institutions may cause a spike in sales. Uncertain times result in increased demand for firearms and ammunition.
If ammunition manufacturers are able to meet and start to exceed demand, increased availability of ammunition could lead to more firearm sales. Increased availability of ammunition should lower prices. Inflationary policies of the Biden administration may offset such a trend.
With the 1.62 million firearms sold in March of 2022, the total number of privately owned firearms in the United States is approximately 484 million.
If the current trend continues for all of 2022, the 500 million mark will be passed near the end of the year; almost certainly by the end of the first quarter of 2023.
Much of the demand is from new gun owners. A significant number of new gun owners are minorities and women. The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates 13.8 million first time gun buyers purchased firearms in 2020 and 2021 combined.
The estimate for the number of privately owned firearms in the United States is derived using the method created by Newton and Zimring. Gary Kleck extended the estimates through 1986 in his award winning book Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. This correspondent has extended the estimates through 2019 using the same methods.
There is a delay in reporting of the numbers of firearms manufactured in the United States to preserve proprietary information. For that reason, the 2020, 2021 and 2022 numbers are estimates using the number of firearms sold with NICS checks.
©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
DOTHAN, Ala. (WTVY) -A Midland City homeowner shot a man who attempted to break into his house early Wednesday, according to the Dale County Sheriff’s Office.
“The suspect attempted several ways gain entry into the home, including entering through a child’s bedroom window,” Chief Deputy Mason Bynum told News 4.
Do Studies Show Gun Control Works? No.
Anyone basing a gun control position on scientific evidence is building on sand.The vast majority of studies are flawed because of cherry picking data in time and space. Brown demonstrates how this is done.
CAMP COUNTY, Texas (KETK) – An alleged home intruder was shot in Camp County early Thursday morning.
According to the Camp County Sheriff’s Office, they were called to a report of a person breaking into a mobile home brandishing a knife on County Road 4151. The 911 dispatcher was advised that the intruder had been shot.
The saga continues in defense of the First and Second Amendment in federal courts. On April 1, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a split decision in a three judge panel, reversed the District Court's decision to transfer the case to New Jersey. In a court opinion, this was a vigorous slap down against very bad judicial bias and activism.
Defense Distributed sued the State Department for violating their First and Second Amendment rights to publish computer files on the Internet.
They reached a settlement. Various Attorney Generals filed unprecedented actions to prevent the settlement from being implemented. One of the most egregious was the New Jersey Attorney General (NJAG) Gurbir Grewal, who filed injunctions against Defense Distributed for their publishing efforts in Texas.
Defense Distributed filed suit against the NJAG. The District Court in Texas ruled against them. They appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Defense Distributed won.
The State Department joined Defense Distributed in a lawsuit against the NJAG for interference. Grewal moved to have the case dismissed, and failing that, have the case against him severed from the more general case, and moved to New Jersey, where, he would have more influence, power, and likely, a more sympathetic judge.
In the opinion issued on April 1, 2022, the Fifth Circuit slaps down both the New Jersey District Court and the Texas District court who agreed to severe Grewal's case and move it to New Jersey. From the opinion page 5-6:
Following our remand to the district court, Defense Distributed amended its complaint to join the State Department as a defendant for its alleged failure to comply with a Settlement Agreement reached with Defense Distributed in 2018.Shortly after, the NJAG moved to sever Defense Distributed’s case against him and transfer that portion of the case to a New Jersey federal court.The State Department opposed severance, as did Defense Distributed. Nonetheless, the district court obliged the NJAG by written order both severing and transferring the case against him.
The Fifth Circuit states, on page 12:
We conclude that the district court clearly abused its discretion by applying the wrong legal standard for evaluating the NJAG's conjoined severance and transfer motions and by egregiously misinterpreting Defense Distributed's claims.
On page 22:
The district court also misapplied the second factor of the severance analysis in determining that Plaintiffs' claims do not involve common issues of law or fact.
From page 30, last page of the majority opinion:
Correctly assessed, the NJAG did not carry its burden to clearly demonstrate that transfer is clearly more appropriate than the Plaintiffs’ choice of forum. The district court erred legally and factually in virtually every aspect of this issue, and its decision, which has unnecessarily lengthened this litigation even more, represents a clear abuse of discretion for which mandamus is an appropriate remedy.
The dissent, unexpectedly, disagrees, claiming the transfer of the case to a New Jersey Court, where the New Jersey AG is the defendant, is not unusal enough to warrant the extraordinary remedy of mandamus.
Author's Opinion:
The appearance of corruption of transferring the case to New Jersey, when the appellate court had already ruled against the NJAG's claim the case should be tried in New Jersey instead of Texas, is unmistakable. The District Courts actions are indeed unusual and egregious. They call out for correction.
The Fifth Circuit majority opinion is correct and much needed.
©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
DES MOINES, Iowa —
Polk County deputies have arrested a suspect who had been shot in a March home invasion.
The incident happened March 21 at a home near Bondurant. Deputies said a homeowner called authorities about a home invasion before firing shots at the intruder.
Officers had been looking for 56-year-old Edward David Luncsford as a suspect in the crime. He was located on March 31 and arrested on an unrelated warrant.
On March 30, 2022, a three judge panel of the Fourth Circuit published an opinion in the case of Knibbs v Momphard. The Court found for the Estate of Knibbs, which is suing Deputy Momphard of the Macon County Sheriff's Department. It was a split opinion, for the Knibbs Estate.
Important precedents involving firearms and the Second Amendment are solidified by this opinion, which cites several previous cases. The Constitutional Amendment primarily cited is the Fourth Amendment. However, the citation to the Fourth relies on the Second Amendment, which includes the possession of a firearm in the home for self defense.
This author sees the important issues in this case, clarified by the March 30 opinion, as:
1. The mere possession of a firearm by a homeowner is not sufficient to justify the use of deadly force by officers.
2. There is a right to come to the door with a firearm.
3. Officers must identify themselves as officers to gain qualified immunity.
4. Mere verbal announcement, without visual confirmation, is not sufficient to gain qualified immunity.
5. Sufficient precedent exists for officers to be aware of their duty in these situations.
A brief synopsis of the case and disputed events:
On April 29, 2018, there was a dispute between neighbors on Pheasant Drive, which was a private, one-lane dirt road without street lights. It was dark when Deputy Momphard answered the complaint. As part of the investigation, he attempted to contact the Knibbs family. He did not turn on his emergency lights or use his siren. There was a full moon.
As he knocked on the door and announced himself, he heard a shotgun being racked. He feared for his safety, and moved onto an attached porch with windows. He shined his flashlight through one of the windows to see Knibbs, holding a shotgun. It is disputed whether the shotgun was pointed at Deputy Momphard or not. Momphard fired numerous shots, killing Knibbs.
The court cited the previous Cooper case, from the Fourth Circuit, decided in 2013. From the Opinion p.25:
“Reacting to the sight of Cooper and his shotgun,” and without giving any warning or identifying themselves, the officers shot Cooper. Id.at 156. Accepting this evidence at the summary judgment stage, we held that the officers unreasonably feared for their safety because “the mere possession of a firearm by a suspect is not enough to permit the use of deadly force.”
The also cited the Hensley case, fromthe Fourth Circuit in 2017. From the opinion, citing Hensley, p. 25:
Similarly, in Hensley, the plaintiff’s evidence at the summary judgment stage showed that Hensley held a handgun in his hand as he walked off his porch towards law enforcement officers. 876 F.3d at 578.The handgun was pointed down towards the ground during the entire incident, and Hensley “never raised the gun toward the Deputies or made any overt threats toward them.” Id.Nor did the deputies order him to stop, drop the gun, or “issue[] any type of warning” before shooting him. Id.Under these facts as proffered by
26 Hensley––despite contrary factual assertions from the deputies––we reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the deputies on qualified immunity grounds because a jury could reasonably conclude that Hensley posed no reasonable danger to the deputies, and that they “shot Hensley simply because he had a possession of a firearm.” Id. at 583.5
The court cited The Betton case, from the Fourth Circuit in 2019. Officers have to give sufficient warning for suspects to reasonably believe they are officers. As cited in the Knibbs case, p. 26:
Finally, in Betton, officers entered Betton’s home pursuant to a search warrant without announcing their presence. 942 F.3d at 188. Betton drew a handgun from his waistband and held it by his hip pointing down. Id. at 188–89. Once he entered the living room where the police officers were located––with his gun still pointing down––officers shot him without giving any instructions or warning. Id. at 189. We held that a reasonable juror could conclude that these actions constituted excessive force, noting that “Betton could not have known that members of law enforcement caused the noise that he heard on his property, because the officers had failed to announce their presence at any time before firing their weapons.”
In the Knibbs case opinion, published on March 30, 2022, the court found mere verbal announcement without visual confirmation, is not enough. From p. 36 of the Knibbs opinion:
Utilizing these principles, the question is whether it was clearly established in April 2018 that an officer may not use deadly force against a homeowner who possesses a firearm inside his own home while investigating a nocturnal disturbance but does not aim the weapon at the officer or otherwise threaten him with imminent deadly harm. This is so even after the homeowner hears the officer announce himself––but cannot visually verify that to be true––and ignores commands to drop the weapon.
From the opinion, there is a right to come to the door with a firearm, p. 28:
Under the circumstances proffered by the Estate’s evidence, there was no lighting either inside or outside of Knibbs’ home. And it is undisputed that Deputy Momphard’s blue emergency lights were not operating. Against this backdrop, a reasonable officer would have recognized that it was unknown whether Knibbs could discern who was outside on his porch before answering the door.6 Such an officer would have also recognized that Knibbs, in turn, was within his lawful rights to arm himself to “investigat[e] a nocturnal disturbance on his own property.” Cooper, 735 F.3d at 160 (quoting Pena, 316 F. App’x at 312). That decision would have been, and in fact was, “perfectly reasonable,” and it “should have been apparent to [Deputy Momphard] at the time of the shooting” that Knibbs could do so. Id. (quoting Pena, 316 F. App’x at 312). After all, “the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute” in one’s home. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 628 (2008). Deputy Momphard readily acknowledged this premise at his deposition, admitting that Knibbs “ha[d] a right to come to the door with his firearm” and that “[i]t wouldn’t have been an issue” if Knibbs opened the door while holding his shotgun––“I would have had a casual conversation with him just as I had a million different times with a lot of other people.” J.A. 308–09.
On page 30 of the opinion, Sheriff Holland testified the mere racking of a shotgun is not a threat sufficient to justify deadly force.
SHERIFF HOLLAND: No.... It's not illegal to rack a shotgun."According to the opinion, the primary material fact turns on whether Knibbs ever pointed his gun at Deputy Momphard. It is stated as the only thing in the case which could have caused a reasonable officer to fear for his life.
The court acknowledged shooting an individual for merely possessing a firearm in his own home, by a government agent, violates the Fourth Amendment.
The law holds the court was compelled to view the case in the light most favorable to the appealing party, in a summary judgement case. This means the court accepted the version of events put forward by the Knibbs estate. The Fourth Circuit ruled the case should be allowed to go to trial, and that Deputy Momphard did not have qualified immunity.
The court explored the concept that Deputy Momphard could have qualified immunity if he could show the constitutional right he violated was not "clearly established" at the time of the incident.
The Cooper, Hensley, and Betton cases supplied the precedent. Deputy Momphard should have been able to draw the logical conclusion. P. 42
.. the contours of Knibb's cosntitutional right were "beyond debate" in April of 2018.
The opinion included this significant statement on page 45:
We begin with the requirement that the officer not take an action that a reasonable man would know is contrary to his duty.
The primary dispute is whether a person, in his own home, merely holding a firearm, is a sufficient deadly threat to allow a police officer to shoot them, and be immune from lawsuit under qualified immunity.
An important part of this case is whether merely verbally announcing they are a law enforcement officer is sufficient to enable a homeowner to determine they are such. Anyone, including criminals, can easily announce themselves to be law enforcement officers.
This case only applies to the Fourth Circuit. Application can be made for a en banc panel, although such is less likely in the Fourth Circuit than in the Ninth Circuit. Absent a re-evaluation of the case en banc, the case can be appealed to the Supreme Court.
©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
GREENSBURG, Pa. —
No charges will be filed in the 2019 death of a man who was shot in Jeannette, the Westmoreland County District Attorney's Office announced Wednesday.
Mariell McGowan-Means, 29, was shot and killed Cuyler Avenue in October 2019. District Attorney Nicole Ziccarelli said county detectives and Jeannette police investigated the shooting, and their investigation was reviewed by prosecutors.
"The person who shot and killed Mr. McGowan was at his own home with his family when he learned that McGowan and two other men were coming to his residence armed and to do him harm," Ziccarelli said in a statement. "The resident also knew that McGowan and others with him had participated in an armed home invasion and brutal assault of another man earlier that same evening. The resident repeatedly told the armed men not to come to his home and that there were children in the residence. The armed men came to his home anyway. Fearing for his life and the lives of others in his home, the resident shot McGowan just outside the home."
Photo Courtesy Todd Orr, 1 October, 2016, Gallatin National Forest, text by Dean Weingarten
In 2016, this correspondent and others started searching for incidents in which a handgun was fired to defend against a bear or bears, and failed to stop the attack by driving off or killing the bear.
The access to a defensive tool, such as a shotgun, rifle, bear spray, handgun, hatchet or knife all present similar problems. Therefore we only considered cases where a handgun was actually fired. If we were looking at the effectiveness of bear spray, we would only look at cases where the bear spray was actually sprayed.
To prevent selection bias, all cases where a handgun was fired defensively against a bear or bears, which could be documented, were included.
People on the Internet claimed handguns were ineffective in defending against bears. Over years, we found 120 cases where handguns were effectively used in defense against bears. We found three failures.
The three failures included failures against the three bear species found in North America, one each of polar, grizzly, and black bears.
Here are the details of the three cases, presented in chronological order, followed by analysis and commentary:
Kiepertoyo Hinlopen Strait, August, 1995
Another five people of the crew set out separately with only a .22 pistol and a flare gun. After an hour's march, the second party were met by a bear, 75m away and openly aggressive. The bear was distracted neither by warning shot nor flare and attacked one of the party. As he did so, he was shot, from a range of only 15m and turned against the man who had fired at him. This man tossed the gun to the first, who shot again. The process was repeated, with first one man being attacked and then the other. By the time the pistol was emptied and a knife drawn, one man was dead and another badly injured. The survivors retreated to the ship.
(snip)
On examination, three shots to the head were discovered, none of them piercing the cranium.
The victim had three years experience with the Origo, with many bear observations, and there were sufficient weapons on board to equip everybody.
Analysis: There have been several cases where large bears have been killed with .22 rimfire cartridges. One of the most famous is that of Bella Twin, who killed a world record grizzly bear with a .22 single shot rifle, near the village of Slave Lake in Alberta, Canada.
A .22 can penetrate to the vitals of a large bear. To kill a large bear quickly with a .22 means the shot or shots have to be precise and to the brain. None of the shots from the .22 in this case were to the vulnerable points in the bear's head, where the brain would have been hit. It is very difficult to do this if the target is moving and 15 meters (50 feet) away. A more powerful cartridge could have made a difference. Shooting the bear from very close range, and knowing where the brain is located inside the bears head, might have made a difference.
Tossing the only firearm to another person, multiple times, does not appear to be a good tactic.
As seen in the next case, merely having a more powerful firearm may not be enough.
June 20, 2010, Alaska: Geologist Pistol Defense failure Grizzly Bear, .357 Magnum
Miller managed to pull out his .357 Magnum revolver and squeeze off a shot, possibly grazing the animal. Then he fell onto his stomach, dug his face into the dirt and covered his neck.
The bear went for his exposed right arm, gnawing and clawing it and chipping the bone off the tip of his elbow. The attack lasted 10 to 15 seconds, then the animal lumbered away.
As Miller rolled over and was getting to his knees, the bear, only about 40 yards away, came at him again.
He managed to fire two more shots, but with his right arm badly injured he thinks he missed the bear. Then he lay still as the animal gnawed and clawed at him.
After the second attack, Miller played dead again, lying still for three to five minutes. He tried to move and realized he couldn’t. He was too badly injured.
“I was just hoping my radio was still in my vest pocket and it was,” he said. “I got it out and started radioing mayday, which nobody answered.”
Analysis: The account shows Robert Miller did what he was trained to do. His training failed him. It seems likely he did not hit the bear with any of the three shots he fired.
Playing dead when you have the means to stop the attack, is a bad strategy. It may provoke an attack.
Miller seems to have been more concerned with playing dead than with actually hitting and killing the bear. He might have escaped injury if he had concentrated on stopping the attack by killing the bear. Many bears, even grizzly bears, stop the attack and leave if they are severely hurt, even if they are not mortally wounded.
September 6, 2015, Ocate, New Mexico: Failure, .38 revolver black bear
The hunter received bite injuries to his foot through his boot as he climbed a tree to try to escape the bear. He was taken to Alta Vista Hospital in Las Vegas, N.M., where he was treated and released.
(snip)
In Thursday’s attack, the hunter told officials he was eating lunch under a tree when he spotted the bear and her cub in a watering hole. He took photographs and started shooting video of the animals when the mother bear got angry and charged. The hunter, who officials did not identify, climbed the tree to escape.
At one point, the hunter fell 15 feet from the tree and then managed to climb back up. He fired his pistol into the air and at the female bear in attempt to scare it, but the animal didn’t leave. He then radioed for help. His guide told officers he found the hunter clinging to the tree nearly 50 feet from the ground.
Analysis: The hunter was particularly concerned with preventing injury to the bear rather than in protecting himself. It appears he never hit the bear while he emptied his .38 revolver. While climbing a tree to escape a bear appears reasonable, there is a good chance it will trigger an "escaping foe" or "escaping prey" reflex in a bear. It is similar to running away, another bad idea.
Black bears usually retreat if they are hurt. Standing your ground and concentrating on stopping and/or killing the threatening bear is a better tactic, especially for black bears.
The above three cases are the exceptions.
In the 120 other documented cases, the firing of a handgun was effective in defense against the bear or bears.
The number of conflicts between bears and humans is on the rise, partly because of increasing bear populations, partly because of increasing human populations.
All three species of North American bears are thriving with increasing populations. Humans are the only species capable of managing the bear populations. The number of conflicts between bears and people is small compared to bear populations. If all the threatening conflicts resulted in the death of the threatening bear, the numbers would not be a significant percentage of the species population.
The 123 cases found so far resulted in about 75-80 bears being killed, over more than a hundred years. The number is insignificant for bear populations. Boar bears kill many times that many bear cubs each year. Over a quarter of bear cubs are killed, each year, by other bears, mostly boars.
Bear cubs, each year, are about 1/3 of the population, before the end of hibernation. Roughly 8% of a bear population is killed each year by adult bears. For every thousand bears, about 80 are killed each year by other bears.
About as many bears are killed by bears, each year, for each thousand bears which exist, as have been recorded as killed by people defending themselves with handguns against bears, in the last hundred years.
Even if the number of unrecorded handgun defenses is ten times as high as the recorded defenses, the number is insignificant for bear population management.
The number of bear cubs killed by bears is likely to be reduced if adult bears are killed by humans during hunting or in defense of life and property.
In spite of adult bear predation, bear populations continue to outpace existing habitat carrying capacity.
It is better to reduce the bear population by removing particularly aggressive or bold problem bears, than it is to reduce the population by removing bears at random as cubs.
The populations have to be reduced. Firearms have the advantage over bear spray as a defensive tool, because the bear is usually killed, rather than leaving a problem bear for the next human to deal with.
If the human is injured or killed, the bear is usually killed afterward.
If a person is carrying a handgun to protect against bears, they should be mentally prepared to use the handgun to kill a threatening bear.
Reluctance to use the handgun in an effective way increases the danger of injury or death.
©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
SHERIDAN — Sheridan County and Prosecuting Attorney Dianna Bennett will not pursue charges against a man who fatally shot Leonard Laszlo, 46, in August 2021. Laszlo’s death, law enforcement officials said, was determined to be the result of reasonable self-defense.
And in late January, an attempted carjacking suspect was shot six times
after a pizza delivery driver, who was licensed to carry, fought back in
Kensington.
The Action News Data Journalism team found a significant increase in defensive shootings.
In
just the first three months of this year, more people have been shot in
defensive shootings than in each of the last three entire years.
If
defensive shootings continue at the same rate through the rest of the
year, Philadelphia is on track to have more than five times as many of
these incidents as last year.
A man was shot and killed in what Citrus County Sheriff’s Office authorities believe to be an act of self-defense.
Sheriff’s office deputies responding to a disturbance at around 4:28 a.m. Saturday, April 2, found 36-year-old Kyle Davis dead near the back door of a home off of West Mistflower Place in Homosassa Springs, according to sheriff’s office spokeswoman Brittney Carman on Monday.
LUBBOCK, Texas (KCBD) - No charges will be filed against Kyle Carruth after the Attorney General’s Office convened a grand jury in the death of Chad Read.
On November 5, 2021, Read was shot during an argument with William Kyle Carruth. The shooting was caught on camera.
The Office of the Attorney General, acting as Attorney Pro Tem, presented to a Special Grand Jury of Lubbock County, the investigation into the shooting of Chad Read by Kyle Carruth that occurred in Lubbock, Texas on November 5th, 2021. The presentation of the case included several eyewitnesses, the family of Chad Read, and additional evidence that was not previously released to the public.
MEDIA COURTHOUSE – A Chester man was acquitted on all charges Friday in the 2019 shooting death of 22-year-old Ricardo “Ricky” Brown after Brown and another man allegedly tried to rob him.
There are no arrests and Saint Paul Police are investigating after a man was fatally shot early this morning (Fri) while attempting to break into a home in the city’s Hamline-Midway neighborhood.
On March 30, the Georgia House passed the Senate's Constitutional Carry bill, SB 319, with an amendment. From the eagletribune.com:
ATLANTA — The Georgia House on Wednesday approved a bill that would let Georgians carry a concealed handgun without first getting a license from the state.
Senate Bill 319 passed 100-67, with the Republican majority supporting it and Democrats opposing it. The bill is similar to a House measure lawmakers passed earlier this month.
Presenting the bill, Rep. Mandi Ballinger said there was no need to rehash the debate from a few weeks ago.
On March 28, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed House HB 1358, with a substitute amendment which replaced the wording of HB 1358, as passed by the House, with the wording for SB 319, as passed by the Senate. The bills are fairly similar. The main effect is to remove the requirement to have a concealed carry permit in order to carry weapons concealed in Georgia. The house amendment has not been posted yet.
Governor Kemp has come out strongly for a Constitutional Carry bill in Georgia. He is facing a tough primary. If either bill or a hybrid is passed by both chambers of the Georgia legislature, Governor Kemp has ample incentive to sign it. He has said he would do so. His primary opponents support Constitutional Carry as well.
There are still members of the Georgia legislature who oppose Constitutional Carry. They are primarily Democrats, but include some Republicans who would like to see both bills die. It could happen, if the Senate and House keep amending each other's bill, eventually the clock could run out without either passing. That seems unlikely, but hotly contested issues often produce unusual results.
It is in Governor Kemp's interest to pass a Constitutional Carry bill before the primary occurs. The primary is to happen on May 24th. With an open primary, online registration, and same day registration to vote, it is possible crossover vote could make a difference.
In the legislature, there are possibilities of conference committees and legislative maneuvers, as has been seen in several other state legislatures. The March 30th vote in the House would appear to make it easy for the Senate to approve the bill. Much depends on what is in the amendment. Because the amendment has not been posted on the Georgia legislative website as of the time of this writing, the entire effect of the amendment is unknown.
Georgia is close to becoming the 25th state in the Constitutional Carry club. If it does so, half of the states in the union will have Constitutional Carry (permitless carry).
No permission from the state or federal government will be necessary to carry a handgun, in most public places, in the State of Georgia.
So far this year three states, Alabama, Ohio, and Indiana have joined the Constitutional Carry club. In addition to Georgia, Nebraska is close to passing a Constitutional Carry bill. The Nebraska bill will probably be voted on March 31 or April 1 of 2022. The current states which are members of the club are:
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
Those states represent over 60% of the land mass of the United States.
Update: The senate has passed SB319. It will be sent to Governor Kemp, who has said he will sign it.
©2022 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
Gun Watch
Posts
All Comments
