Monday, July 14, 2008

Hartsfield-Jackson OK Corral

Well, since we were talking about Atlanta earlier today, and gun control issues over at DADvocate's blog, it only makes sense that a synergy of gun control and the Atlanta airport would come across the newswire this evening.

While Georgia recently relaxed many concealed carry rules, a new argument has arisen concerning carrying concealed weapons around the Atlanta airport. While the new Georgia rules are really a red-tape issue clearing up some rather selectively enforced gun laws, the idea behind carrying guns around a large, crowded international airport gives me pause.

I know its a big airport, but we have enough trouble with folks forgetting to take their hunting revolvers out of their bags before boarding as it is. After all this country has been through because of some security lapses at airports, is it too much to ask that we keep airports as a DMZ?

.

4 comments:

Leigh C. said...

These issues will only continue to merge if, over time, Atlanta BECOMES the Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, a la "Futurama". Just sayin'...

S.A.W.B. said...

Quote - After all this country has been through because of some security lapses at airports, is it too much to ask that we keep airports as a DMZ? -

It is exactly that reason that the carry/conceal rules for law-abiding private citizens should be relaxed at HJIA, along with most every other public place.

And, before you make with the bleating of gun-crime statistics, lemme know when you dig up the last big shootout that involved a legal gun owner who wasn't mentally ill.

Cousin Pat from Georgia said...

I'm not going to bring up gun-crime statistics, because I don't need to for this argument. What I will bring up is that, unlike Texas diners, airports these days (especially HJIA) have brigades of armed guards securing the place.

I also bring up that accidents happen, even with responsible gun owners. Such accidents are devastating in the most remote suburban cul-de-sac; they are only amplified when they occur near an airport.

I'm thinking of people forgetting that their guns are in their purses and getting involved in tragic incidents with armed airport guards.

I'm thinking of all the additional responsibilites of guards in this airport, now having to determine who is the law-abiding gun owner and who is the criminal element trying to sneak through now that guns are now a familiar sight. I like guns being an unfamiliar sight at airports, because that makes guards' and vigilant civilians' watchfulness more effective. That helps them keep people on planes (and on the ground, as 9/11 so brutally proved) safer and more secure.

S.A.W.B. said...

Your last two paragraphs are fraught with hyperbole so grand, it's almost funny.

Nobody with a gun in their bag/purse at security is getting through unchecked. Assuming the SCOTUS ruling holds up, if you have a gun on your person, or in your bags, and are licensed, no harm no foul. No license, then we get to move over to the side area and discuss why you have an unlicensed firearm with you at the airport.

As far as additional responsibilites, that's laughable as well. It's the same responsibilities as these people have now, with the added task of running a person's government-issued identification against a database to see if they are flagged for a carry/conceal permit. If yes, great, carry on, pardon the pun. If no, the the same scenario as above applies.

I think more visible guns, on folks not in a uniform, in an airport, or damned near any other public place, are a welcome sight. After all, as the saying goes, an armed society is a polite society...