Firearms Allowed at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson Airport

by Libby Zay 
Posted May 4th 2010 01:43 PMUpdated May 4th 2010 02:09 PM



Kevitivity, flickr

Lawmakers in Georgia have approved a bill that would allow gun owners to carry licensed firearms in parts of Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport.

USA Today reported the airport strongly opposes the bill, which would permit the carrying of firearms in areas not controlled by the federal government, such as terminals, drop off and pick up areas, baggage areas, and parking lots.

The legislation expands on a law passed in 2008 that allows Georgia residents with firearm licenses to bring concealed weapons into public places such as parks and recreational areas, restaurants, and onto public transportation.

In March 2009, the Hartsfield-Jackson airport issued a statement praising the Court of Appeals decision to uphold a lower court's ruling that concealed weapons do not belong at the airport.

"We are pleased with the court's ruling and that Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport will continue to remain a safe, secure, gun-free environment for its 90 million passengers a year," said Aviation General Manager Ben DeCosta in the 2009 statement.

Airport officials nationwide are closely watching whether or not Governor Sonny Perdue will sign the legislation into law.
Filed Under: News

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum


Filter by:

Susie H.

you are dumb .. watch this and think again missy.

don't be stupid ...

May 31 2010 at 2:24 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Jay, thanks for the lengthy well reasoned response. In my resonse to Bro. Bill I found myself once again attempting to capsulize the background reasoning behind the historical formation of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. I inevitably fail in this endeavor as forums such as this lack the space and I the time to adequately expound the cast of characters that influenced the framers and authors as they struggled, debated, and argued for years to create our Constitutional Republic such as founded had never been seen or imagined in any way previously through recorded history. These wise and learned men were students of the success and failures of all known forms of government beginning in Biblical times, thru Greek democracy,Roman Empire,Magna Carta to the system of English Common law. They turned the world on its head breaking from mother England where the King was law. Instead declaring the Law is king ! I am a retired deputy sheriff from South Georgia with one of several passions being American History from the first Settlers coming here to worship freely as they saw fit. My geneology like most is varied. My ancestors were french hugenots (protestants) fleeing catholic persecution in the mid 1600's. Our Federal government was created by the consent of the governed, same being citizens of one of 13 original colonies that became states. I dont need any pettifoggin lawyer to tell me what the Constitution means. Nor do I recieve my rights from the very same uniquely American system of governance. Tis God and God alone who grants my and every other American citizen freedom not of but instead from the law. I am not armed because I am an American. I am an American because I am armed.....I now step off the sopbox...God Bless America and all her citizens........Good night

May 05 2010 at 11:35 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
jay love

MIKKI: I am totally sorry, (wait, no I am NOT) I do not agree with either of your two arguments in the least bit, no legal, lawfully, law abiding citizen should ever have to "prove" anything to anyone, least of all the out of control government their rights and abilities to own and bear arms. by the very nature of having a clean record and living a clean civil life American citizens and lawful persons rsiding in this country under the documents of our founding fathers do not need and god forbid should never need a permission slip from some government lacky to own and bear arms for their lawful intent, personal protection and defense of our nation should the need arise. up to me I would repeal the statute covering fully automatic weapons as well for qualified law abiding citizens, in fact every able bodied citizen, male and female should be trained and issued an automatic rifle and a good pistol with a store of ammo to be kept under lock and key at the home should the need arise for the local sheriff, mayor, governor, call up a standing malitia? its a very practical tool to have at our disposal and in case you didn't know it, this is what the constitution is referring to when it says militia? every sheriff of every county has this authority to call upon a standing militia should the need arise, its just not been used to date in our history, that doesn't mean one day it may not be needed?

as far as your discription of "Assualt Weapons" this term make sme ill to no end, its about as fale a title as anything ever concocted, and has been used liberally, (pardon the pun) for decades by the anti-gunner movements. this term originates initially from the term, "black gun" a nick name given the rifle upon its first issue in the early days of Vietnam. this term has been bent out of shape and proportune over the years as a code word for any type rifle deemed dangerous and unworthy by the anti-gunner movement, and unfortunately even perpetuated by honest pro-gun people at times. this term needs to be banned, NOT the weapon itself. there are people who would happily ban and outlaw such rifles simply due to their looks,not due to anything related to their performance or specifications? i.e. if it looks really strange, ugly,dangerous, or just differant, well it MUST be an unlawful dangerous weapon that should be banned,destroyed and banished from civil society? well I have news for these do-gooders, these rifles, (and that is all they are is rifles) are no differant at all from any other semi-automatic rifle used every year, and every day on gun ranges coast to coast, state by state! a semi-auto is NOT a fully automatic rifle, no matter how scary it may look to some people? it holds a given amount of ammo and you cock it, aim and shoot, you get one shot for every pull of the finger, no differant than your average semi-auto .22 rifle you used as a kid? just a bigger round of ammo! no matter what anyone tells you and no matter how "ugly", or "scary" a rifle might look to you, its just a rifle like your average run of the mill deer rifle, no worse, no better, actually probably not as good a range and accuracy as your deer rifle? in the USA anyone with a clean record can apply for the appropriate tax stamps, (200.00)and application for and be granted the ability to buy, own and possess a fully automatic "machine gun" weapon, or a silencer for a give weapon...or any other rifle or hand pistol which does not fall within the standard "legal" requirements, such as a too short barrel, under 16 inches I beleieve? be it a shot gun, a short rifle, a pistol thats fully auto? many, many people have these required licenses and possess these types weapons all around you and you don't see them going berserk and "postal" just because they have them? its a fallacy perpetrated by the very far left and people like George Soros, and Micheal Bloomberg as well as their lefty buddies who would like nothing better than to shape and mold our country into some sort of European dictatorship with socialist ideals, whereas any person desireing to own and possess any type of a gun, ammo, even a knife would be subject to prosecution? these people wake up every morning dreaming of their little utpophia where only the very wealthy can afford to have body gaurds with automatic weapons and be assured their personal safety? they have wet dreams about gun confiscations and gun registrations as precursers to to their anti-gun laws and rules, as have been enacted in Canada, Australia, European Union, and most other parts of the world where free men and women do not exist! abd LET ME tell you the crime in these places by the stats has not only NOT gone down, it has gone way up to epic proportions!! where guns for the lawful have been outlawed, I can tell you ONLY the OUTLAWS have guns! how silly and insane is that?? even the police in many situa

May 05 2010 at 6:25 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
jay love

to ALL the bleading heart ultra-liberals who are confused as to just what the US constitution does say, and does not say on this subject...I submit your either not reading your own constitution, or your not understanding the intent in its entirety by the founders. you cannot have a free and Democratic Republic unless the civillian militia, i.e. me and you,are safegaurded the rights to defend our selves and our communities, even against a tyrant oppressive government, if need be? Also, since the PEOPLE have taken the initiative in recent years to demand their rights as promised, be preserved and fortified, the far-left wing who predicted anarchy and streets of bloodbaths, the wild, wild west, etc...has been proven wrong on every and all charges time and time again! over 38 states have enacted some form of castle doctrine, CCW laws,etc....and in every single case where liberty has won out over socialist agenda the stats VIA FBI,state and local L/E have proven our side of the argument is correct, crime down, streets safer, the wild, wild, west and shoot em up scenarios have yet to occure? crime stats down in every situation and case, state by state, city by city, neighborhood by neighborhood?? the Mayor Bloomberg doomesday scenario's have yet to ever take place and the air has been deflated from their balloons? the good guys are right and the socialist/commies proved wrong!!!

May 05 2010 at 5:13 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply


May 05 2010 at 2:16 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Just remember, there will always be a way for convicted felons and those with illegal access to guns.

I'd hate to see the "Right To Bear Arms" so abused by those who have to right to the access of guns.

I also believe that NO person needs assault rifles or automatic weapons, other than law enforcement.

A citizen has every right to carry/own a rifle, shotgun or handgun, to hunt or protect life, family, or property, but they don't need an assault weapon to do either of these things.

May 05 2010 at 2:08 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
3 replies to Mikki's comment

With each permit issued for a period of two years and then required to be renewed the same as a driver's license, the person must first pass a psychological examination and must be seen by the psychiatrist every two years for a re-evaluation.

A person may be mentally healthy when issued the initial concealed weapons permit, but can also undergo traumatic life experiences that might otherwise disqualify the person to be mentally healthy and then the permit can be revoked.

May 05 2010 at 2:04 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Larence Cabe

That was W that sighned that law. Obama can't take credit (if you want to call it) that for that law

May 05 2010 at 2:02 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Ah, the smell of knee-deep testosterone in the morning...

May 05 2010 at 1:59 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Thadamus wrote, "only a retarded highwayman would allow a citizen to get the drop on him." You need not repeat yourself, "retarded," "highwayman," and the difference is?

Ample research on the subject (extensive interviews with incarcerated robbers, thieves) has shown that the greatest fear felt by a would-be robber is the potential that a home-owner or other citizen may be armed. Criminals rejoice when the citizenry is disarmed.

You said, "If I were a robber" and made several assumptions based on that statement. In fact we really don't know how we would think and what we would do if indeed we were robbers. As a law-abiding citizens, our moral compasses prohibit any thought of potentially injuring or stealing from a fellow human. The principled brain does not operate as does a morally bankrupt, self-centered and lawless mind.

If what you suggest is the case, that gun toting citizens provide a bonus to the highwayman, law enforcement officers would be prime targets for thieves as well, seeing that these officers are generally armed. The enterprising robber would gain not only the cop's wallet, but his weapon as well.

Obviously, merely carrying a weapon without possessing the ability and knowledge to rightly employ it should the need arise is potentially more dangerous than not carrying a weapon at all. But to suggest that the majority of citizens who legally carry weapons are not also trained in their use is to make a a serious error in judgment. The vast majority of law abiding citizens who legally bear arms have also invested in some beneficial level of training in their use.

While there may or may not be a case for keeping weapons out of our nation's airports, to suggest that armed citizens are "sweeter peaches" (pun intended) to criminals than unarmed folks is unsupportable.

May 05 2010 at 1:59 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply