• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

Private Entity Leasing Government Property

The question remains, when public property is leased is the right to set conditions of use delegated ? I suspect so. If an organization leases a public building they can restrict on their own terms, say members only, or charge an admission fee.


Decision will have wide ranging results, as the current trend in gov't is to "privatize" as many functions as possible. Much of St. Mountain is leased (all of the "attractions"), some state parks and state park facilities.

Very dangerous decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BHJ
Seems like that would open the door for a city like Roswell to lease its parks for $1 per year to a " non- profit " of some sort and it's gun ban is back on.
Just one more reason that public property is a bad idea.
 
Land is either owned by the public (state, city, etc.) or it's private property. You can't have it both ways.

And as far as I know, the Atlanta Botanical Gardens do not have the ability to create law around the use of public land. If they did then certainly any city or town would be able to as well, and the state specifically bars that with the preemption law.

The way I see it, if they want to take this stand, they will need to buy the land from the city so it becomes private property.


It sucks that this will have to be appealed, but it's probably not a surprise.
 
I have carried in so many no guns allowed venues it's crazy, just keep it hidden, and I mean truly hidden. The art of true concealment is beyond so many people it is sad. I have carried in Braves stadium, Georgia Aquarium, Atlanta Zoo, Fox theatre, CNN center, Botanical Gardens etc. I know this isn't the debated part of this thread but seriously open carrying or being negligent about allowing it to be seen in these anti-guns places is on you.
 
If I remember correctly the guy who brought this case was a GA Carry member who open carried specifically to get this to trial...
 
They way I see it... The leasor (private) is to enjoy the rights of property as if they owned it..

It goes the other way if private property is leased for public use...
 
They way I see it... The leasor (private) is to enjoy the rights of property as if they owned it..

It goes the other way if private property is leased for public use...

Why? Our tax dollars make this land public land. The government further leases this land and gets paid by the leasor. We are not refunded any monies as compensation and the government gets the double dip. Public land is just that... Public land.

Anyway that's the opinion of a tax paying freedom loving American.
 
The problem is if I rent a property from you as long as it isn't ileagal I pretty much get to enjoy ownership rights..

I really don't like what happened in that case.. But if you buy/rent you are paying for your freedom to choose.. If you rented a house from me would you want me to say no forearms allowed?
 
Back
Top Bottom