Georgia State Senate Passes "Katrina Law"

[bk43]

You are wrong, sir, at least as far as Georgia goes, and I still challenge you to cite case law that gives an officer the right to confiscate a weapon from a citizen who is legally carrying "to secure the scene."

What you are looking for does not exist anywhere as specific items or classes are not excluded/included in the laws. This applies to Georgia also so if the officer believes it's necessary to take the gun, he takes the gun. Done deal. If you have any references that exclude firearms(or anything else) in Georgia, I'd sure like to see it.

Bob

 

[redlevel]

What you are looking for does not exist anywhere as specific items or classes are not excluded/included in the laws. This applies to Georgia also so if the officer believes it's necessary to take the gun, he takes the gun. Done deal. If you have any references that exclude firearms(or anything else) in Georgia, I'd sure like to see it.

Bob

Bob, did you take time to read the case from the Georgia Court of Appeals? You are telling me that a reference to back your opinion "does not exist" and I am showing you a case that illustrates my contention that a police officer can not legally take my weapon during a routine traffic stop without Reasonable Articulable Suspicion.

I carry concealed, usually in my pocket. Do you think an officer has the right to take me out of the car and pat me down without Reasonable Articulable Suspicion? I can tell you, according to the Supreme Court, he does not have the right to do that. We aren't talking about what happens when officers abuse their authority, we are talking about what they actually have the authority to do. That officer can't legally search me or my car just as a matter of standard procedure.

The officer has to have more reason to take a weapon than that he "believes it is necessary." He has to have a valid reason to believe it is necessary. A reason he can explain to the satisfaction of a judge and/or a jury.

Remember, we are talking about a simple traffic stop. If that officer pulls me over for a simple traffic violation, he has no reason to take control of my weapon, and at least in Georgia, he can't legally do that just as a standard procedure.

Please take time to read the case I linked to. The 4th Amendment has not been suspended.

 

[bk43]

Bob, did you take time to read the case from the Georgia Court of Appeals?

Yes I did. I have tried unsuccessfully to point out the difference between the New Orleans type seisure/confiscation(ala the Georgia case) and the Shreveport case of securing the scene. Your case is of the first type and has nothing to do with my point. Making a distinction between them and what is thus legal does not seem that complicated to me but I guess I'm wrong.

Bob

 

[redlevel]

Yes I did. I have tried unsuccessfully to point out the difference between the New Orleans type seisure/confiscation(ala the Georgia case) and the Shreveport case of securing the scene. Your case is of the first type and has nothing to do with my point. Making a distinction between them and what is thus legal does not seem that complicated to me but I guess I'm wrong.

Bob

Evidently you didn't. My case is a simple traffic stop. The officer said he suspected the driver of DUI. He said it was evident immediately that the driver wasn't drinking, but he went fishing anyway. The case I quoted is exactly what you are talking about--a simple traffic stop. The Georgia court ruled that the officer went beyond his authority when he took the guy's firearm. There was no emergency. It isn't me that can't make a simple distinction, it appears.


Now, the proposed legislation about which I started the thread is about emergency situations and the possibility of widespread confiscation.

Can you make that distinction?

 

[redlevel]

One more time--
Caselaw on GeorgiaPacking.org, THE STATE v. JONES, 289 Ga. App. 176 (2008)
The officer asserted that he stopped Jones because he suspected he might be DUI, but he quickly concluded that Jones was not intoxicated. The officer also testified that he did not fear for his safety, but asked to look at the rifle in the truck purely as a standard practice to see if it might be stolen. The officer therefore lacked justification to detain Jones, and his subsequent search was likewise unjustified. Id. at 793.

 

[luangtom]

ALL three of the pro-gun bills that passed the GA Senate this year have been declared "dead" for the remainder of this legislative year. They may get called back to the table second half of the current session, which is next year.

SB-26 was the Senate bill that dealt with Emergency Law (Kartina Law). It was passed in the Senate and sent to the House committee where it was returned to the Senate for reconsideration, in effect, a punishment for not hearing a House bill on taxes expediently.

SB-98 was the Senate bill that dealt with more definition of places legal to carry and its expansion to include allowing places of worship to determine their own rules on carry within their confines. It passed the Senate but did not get out of the House committee. Dead until next year.

SB-102 was the Senate bill that dealt with combining the aspects of the other bills into one for simplification. It basically died in House committee, after having passed the Senate.