Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
12,226 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,194 Posts
It would seem that this ruling is in direct conflict with the idea that a person who is merely armed but otherwise not a danger to anyone cannot be legally detained.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,194 Posts
Since SB308, aren't GWL holders presumed to be innocent of committing a crime involving firearm carry? What impact does the passing of 308 have on the green-lighted practice of police initiating a hostile encounter with an armed citizen on the sole basis of knowing they're armed? What about the courts resistance to support a firearms exception to Terry in Florida v J.L?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
In GCO’s federal lawsuit against MARTA, the parties have stipulated that MARTA is the defendant liable for the Privacy Act violation
Source: http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/categor ... -with-gun/

SB 308 changed the language making the possession of a license an element of the crime, which requires that a LEO must produce PC or RAS that you are/have been/will be up to no good. Of course, they can ask you for it if they want to - you just don't have to consent to showing it to them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,194 Posts
If an armed citizen possesses a weapon's license, to what crime is the GWL an element? I confess that I've always been confused by the concept of "element of the crime."
 

·
Yukon Cornelius
Joined
·
11,867 Posts
moga said:
If an armed citizen possesses a weapon's license, to what crime is the GWL an element? I confess that I've always been confused by the concept of "element of the crime."
with old law anytime you carried openly it was an element of the offense. this means the officer needed to know youre prohibited, unlicensed etc in order to detain you

if you were concealed it was an affirmative defense meaning that day on marta they could have completely arrested him and he would have to present his GFL(at the time) to defend himself against the charges...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
moga said:
If an armed citizen possesses a weapon's license, to what crime is the GWL an element? I confess that I've always been confused by the concept of "element of the crime."
The crime of carrying a firearm without a license. It used to be an "affirmative defense" in some circumstances (I think that only applied to concealed carry, but that's water under the bridge now) which meant that any LEO could ask for your permit; upon showing it, you prove that you are legally carrying and you may go about your business (at least until you meet the next LEO, then you had to show him, too).
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,485 Posts
GooberTim said:
moga said:
If an armed citizen possesses a weapon's license, to what crime is the GWL an element? I confess that I've always been confused by the concept of "element of the crime."
The crime of carrying a firearm without a license. It used to be an "affirmative defense" in some circumstances (I think that only applied to concealed carry, but that's water under the bridge now) which meant that any LEO could ask for your permit; upon showing it, you prove that you are legally carrying and you may go about your business (at least until you meet the next LEO, then you had to show him, too).
affirmative defense. (1837) A defendant's assertion of facts and arguments that, if true, will defeat the plaintiff's or prosecution's claim, even if all the allegations in the complaint are true. • The defendant bears the burden of proving an affirmative defense. Examples of affirmative defenses are duress (in a civil case) and insanity and self-defense (in a criminal case).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,194 Posts
Wouldn't an element of the crime of carrying a concealed weapon unlawfully be the non-issuance of a carry license to the accused? Following that logical end, the possession of a weapon license would be an exception to the crime of carrying unlawfully, no?

As the discussion pertains to affirmative defense, before SB308 passed into law, the person accused of carrying without a license could be arrested and indicted in spite of presenting the license to the arresting LEO? My understanding of affirmative defense is that the accused doesn't dispute that their actions constitute a violation of law. The affirmative defense is a permissible situation or condition that is acceptable grounds to ask a jury for an exemption to the law. So, for instance, in my former state of residence, an affirmative defense to homicide could be a set of conditions defined in the statutes of that state and, if the particulars of the crime for which the accused is the defendant falls within one of those categories, they may be excused from a murder charge. An example: victim of deadly attack while in the home and no other alternative to using deadly force, etc. But still, plan on getting arrested and going to trial before it's resolved.

Thanks for indulging me fellas.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,239 Posts
That's correct. Prior to SB-308, a leo could arrest you, charge you with carrying a concealed weapon EVEN IF YOU HAD A LICENSE. A judge could then in theory set a bail too high for you to pay and hold you until trial at which point you could present your license as an affirmative defense.

Now, since the the existence or lack of a license is an element of the crime, having a license on you means no crime was committed.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top