PDA

View Full Version : Atlanta Airport Carry: Brady makes a dumb argument


hoffmang
12-26-2008, 1:09 PM
Some of you may be following Georgia Carry's legislative and judicial efforts (http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/category/action-items/hartsfield-airports-firearm-ban/) to make GA CCW's useful at the Atlanta airport which Atlanta and the Antis just don't like.

Well, Brady filed an Amicus and I can't say it better than Georgia Carry:

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Georgians for Gun Safety have filed an amicus brief in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals case between GCO and Atlanta over whether any law prohibits GFL holders from carrying firearms at the Airport. Ostensibly in support of Atlanta, the amicus brief (http://www.georgiacarry.com/hjaia/Brady-GGS%20Amicus.pdf) does not cite any laws that prohibit such carry. It does say the state has no authority to regulate firearms at the Airport because federal law occupies this field completely, leaving no room for state regulation. The inescapable conclusion from the amicus brief is, because no federal law prohibits firearms in the unsecured areas of the airport, and because any state laws on this topic are preempted, no laws prohibit guns in the unsecured areas of the airport.

Exactly.
From their Blog (http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/2008/12/26/brady-center-and-georgians-for-gun-safety-file-airport-amicus/).

-Gene

383green
12-26-2008, 1:20 PM
:rofl2:

With enemies like those, who needs friends? :D

Annie Oakley
12-26-2008, 2:02 PM
Wow ! Put simply, they shot themselves in the foot. :)

AaronHorrocks
12-26-2008, 2:18 PM
That's hilarious!

Keep grabbing at straws, it's entertaining.

Captain Evilstomper
12-26-2008, 3:01 PM
when are they going to change their name to something more appropriate?
like The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Ownership

artherd
12-26-2008, 3:28 PM
Bloody Awesome(tm)

trashman
12-26-2008, 4:21 PM
effing brilliant.

N6ATF
12-26-2008, 11:58 PM
Two words:

Brain Damage

Theseus
12-27-2008, 1:21 AM
:tooth:

I don't know why...maybe after reading this I felt my mouth was dirty...

Warhawk014
12-27-2008, 6:27 AM
i loled a little

yellowfin
12-27-2008, 7:15 AM
The puzzling thing is how many times the Bradys can shoot themselves in the foot and still continue to stand.

BillCA
12-27-2008, 8:37 AM
The Brady Bunch really fell down on this one. They're claiming the Federal gov't has pre-empted local regulation by the breadth and number of regulations for airport security. Yet the code sections they cite have ZERO to do with regulating weapons outside the secure area or the portion of the non-secure area leading into the inspection points.

They cite the following "authorities", yet only one of them deals with any crimes involving explosives or weapons (and note where it's limitations lie).

49 C.F.R 1540 - CIVIL AVIATION SECURITY: GENERAL RULES
49 C.F.R. 1540.5 - Terms used in this subchapter
49 C.F.R 1540.105(a)(1) - Security responsibilities of employees and other persons
- no tampering w/security measures
49 C.F.R. 1540.111(a)(1) - Carriage of weapons, explosives, and incendiaries by individuals
- Prohibits weapons on person or accessible property in sterile area or when performance has begun of the inspection of the individual's person or accessible property before entering a sterile area... or boarding an aircraft [subject to passenger inspection]
49 C.F.R. 1542 - AIRPORT SECURITY
49 C.F.R. 1542.103(a)(ii) - Airport Security Program
- Air carriers must include in plans entities or activities on or adjacent to a secured area that affects security.
49C.F.R. 1542.113 - Airport tenant security programs
- responsibilities, boundaries, limitations, etc.
49 C.F.R. 1542.217(a) - Law enforcement personnel - qualifications of
49 C.F.R. 1542.305 - Public advisories - posting of foreign airports with lax security

49 U.S.C. 114 - Transportation Security Administration (defined & duties)
49 U.S.C. 40101 - Policy
49 U.S.C. 40117 - Passenger facility fees
49 U.S.C. 44903 - Air transportation security
- requirements, use of biometric security features, bio-chem abatement, sanctions on airport workers, etc.
49 U.S.C. 44904 - Domestic air transportation system security
- Assessing threats & security, submission of various plans for security.
49 U.S.C. 44912 - Research and development
49 U.S.C. ~ 44916 - Assessments and evaluations
49 U.S.C. 44942 - Performance goals and objectives
49 U.S.C. 44943 - Performance management system

The federal regulations are far from comprehensive. For instance, failure to pay for airport parking in most California airports is a municipal code violation. Nor do the federal regulations describe traffic control measures, pedestrian access, whether the airport may have smoking lounges or not, etc.

Federal restrictions on the carry of firearms applies only to the secured ("sterile") areas and that portion of the non-sterile area where inspection begins; or boarding an aircraft within a sterile area.

Local or State regulations may prohibit firearm carry outside the terminal or inside in the non-sterile area or both, however.

hoffmang
12-27-2008, 8:41 AM
Local or State regulations may prohibit firearm carry outside the terminal or inside in the non-sterile area or both, however.


That would seem correct, but thanks to the Bradys, well I'm with them! Federal law preempts all carry restrictions in the non sterile areas of the airport. :rolleyes: Want to join me in open carry loaded walks around SFO's sidewalk? :smilielol5:

(I'm being sarcastic above.)

-Gene

BillCA
12-27-2008, 8:54 AM
Gene,

If I'm not mistaken, even if the Brady Bunch is right, airports are not federal enclaves and state laws still apply. Thus, unloaded open carry should be legal unless otherwise prohibited by state statute. :cool:

bulgron
12-27-2008, 8:58 AM
That would seem correct, but thanks to the Bradys, well I'm with them! Federal law preempts all carry restrictions in the non sterile areas of the airport. :rolleyes: Want to join me in open carry loaded walks around SFO's sidewalk? :smilielol5:

(I'm being sarcastic above.)

-Gene

Not to rain on the parade, but what's to stop an Obama administration from claiming that the non-sterile areas of an airport are a 'sensitive area' and so carry is prohibited there?

The Bradys COULD just be looking down the road a few months, here, and laying the foundation for the first salvo in an Obama gun-control regime.

Of course, if they do that, then we get to go to Federal court and get a definition on what exactly a 'sensitive area' is. I suspect the Bradys won't much like the courts answer to that, but then again I suspect we won't like it either since the courts could very easily give a compromise answer that pleases no one.

To me, a sensitive area is a place generally opened to the public that is protected by armed guards and metal detectors. If someone doesn't think enough of the area to protect it to that level, then it ain't sensitive. Question is, will the federal courts see it my way. I'm feeling a bit cynical today, so I'm guessing the answer is 'no' because my definition allows for carry on most school grounds.

hoffmang
12-27-2008, 9:07 AM
If I'm not mistaken, even if the Brady Bunch is right, airports are not federal enclaves and state laws still apply. Thus, unloaded open carry should be legal unless otherwise prohibited by state statute. :cool:

Let me be more clear. Everyone except the Bradys and a results oriented District Court Judge know that the non sterile areas of the airport are controlled by state and local laws. My joke above was that it would be amusing to make the Brady argument (even though it's wrong.)

Not to rain on the parade, but what's to stop an Obama administration from claiming that the non-sterile areas of an airport are a 'sensitive area' and so carry is prohibited there?


There are quite a few problems with this. The first is the actual federalism argument. There are a whole bunch of states that would not look kindly on the Federal Government attempting to take control of their property (which is what the non sterile parts of the airport are.) Those states are proud of their state RKBA - you'll note that Georgia Carry has the support of a majority of the legislature in Georgia on this one. Second, TSA would have to at least try to promulgate a new regulation to do this. They could try, but they'd run up against Heller related push back - and push back from most local transportation authorities. I'm also doubtful that a failed regulation would inspire legislation. So far it looks like the Dems realize that anti-gun legislation isn't a smart move right now politically. Remember that there has to be a law to violate to get you arrested in the first place.

All that said, we'd prefer to not argue about non sterile areas of the airport right now. That said, I expect Georgia Carry to prevail at the appellate level since the arguments against are so poor. That will tend to clarify that the non sterile areas are under state and local control.

-Gene