I missed part of your logic. 16-12-123 and 127 are two seperate codes. Because you are exempt from one does not mean you are exempt from another.That said retired police officers and military people are in a difficult situation. 16-12-123 clearly says that they are exempt but 16-12-127 says "Any Person."
Following this logic I tend to believe that these people can carry on public transportation but I would be vary discreet while doing it, I wouldn't want to be test case. The penalty is such a severe felony!
Exactly, it means they wanted even fewer groups to be exempt from 123 than as listed in 16-11-130.It seems to me that the intent of this statute is to limit exempt people on public transportation to police, military, and security guards on-duty.
The legislature could have exempted everyone normally exempted in other statutes with 16-11-130, but they chose not to. This obviously limits who is exempt.
The shorter answer is really a question - Who is going to arrest them?Gunstar1 said:It is implied. Security Guards and Leos go through training and certifications to be able to have that kind of power over us common citizens.
Also the people in charge of security of a gun-free area are pretty much expected to carry firearms or other protective devices (as that is their job). If any company or law does not allow me or security to carry firearms for my defense, then I will not go there.
That includes places in Georgia (or England for that matter).