They could just save a step and call it "city hall and court" like others are doing. Then it would be just like old times. Armed criminals could come and go as they pleased while the law abiding disarm before entering. Ah. the good old days.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Despite the passage and implementation today of Georgia House Bill 60, ordinary armed Augustans still can’t carry their weapons, concealed or otherwise, into the city’s municipal building, courthouse or sheriff’s office.
For Augusta Recreation, Parks and Facilities visitors the rules aren’t changing, either, and permit holders are allowed to carry weapons on city property.
“The only place guns specifically can be prevented is where there is literally a guard at the door,” said Recreation Director Bob Levine. “We don’t have that situation at any of our facilities.”
So visitors with weapons carry licenses may continue to carry at city community centers, pools and parks, as well as the Augusta Canal Authority National Heritage Area, where new signs remind visitors about another law that remains in effect – visitors are forbidden to discharge weapons, according to authority marketing manager Rebecca Rogers.
Avondale Estates City Hall is about as close to Mayberry as local government gets in metro Atlanta.
There’s no one stopping you when you come through the door, and the secretary always has a smile for you when you walk into the City Manager’s office.
But Georgia’s new gun law will change all that. During the July 23 City Commission work session, Police Chief Gary Broden explained how the city will have to change the way it does business because of House Bill 60, aka the Guns Everywhere Bill, which went into effect on July 1.
“The biggest thing is once we close those doors and make that a service window, that’s going to be a big change for everybody,” Brown said. “We have an open door policy. That’s going to be a tough one.”
The law is tough on law enforcement too, Brown said.
“With the new law that has passed, there could be someone walking around the lake on our pathway with a longgun strapped to their backs,” Brown said. “Police officers cannot go challenge them and say, ‘Do you have a permit?’ That is a lawsuit waiting to happen. You’ve got to have probable cause.”
Broden predicted that there will be revisions to the law in the upcoming session of the state Legislature.
“This has been a big discussion with the chiefs …,” he said. “You’re going to see a change by this time next year. There’s going to be change.”
Locally, the changes will come much sooner than that. Putting extra security in place and watching residents with cameras sounded more like Orwell than Avondale to the city commissioners.
“Where were the grown ups when this legislation was being considered,” Commissioner John Quinn asked.
Hey Avondale Estates.....
County discusses $75 user fee to cover $140,000 shortfall in ‘bare bones’ budget
The budget is up about $100,000 over last year. All of the new spending is to cover the costs of security at the courthouse and courthouse annex as part of the “guns everywhere” bill passed last year by the General Assembly.
County of Pierce once again:
It's gun bill's fault.
http://www.theblacksheartimes.com/articles/2014/08/13/news/doc53ea74e0736d4563759704.txt
Many of Georgia’s 538 cities are faced with allocating a meaningful percentage of their budgets to outfit their government buildings and staff with certified law enforcement to meet the requirements should they decide to ban guns.
Mattison said that he knows the new law brings with it a sense of heightened awareness. “There is a sense of fear that someone could walk in here with a sidearm and start firing but that same risk existed prior to this law. I’ve never seen that occasion here. I’m not there yet,” said Mattison.
Garrett told the council, “We do live in a different world. You never know what sets off a trigger for somebody.” Garrett asked the Council to think about it and give her an opportunity to look into it some more. “Hopefully this law is going to find a way to correct itself,” Garrett added.
“It is a substantial cost to the taxpayers,” said Mattison while explaining to Garrett that the money may be better spent on another officer on the streets.
Garrett said she was aware that some on the council are struggling with the idea of spending money on the security measures. She said she would like to continue to talk about it during the City’s upcoming budget season.