Judge refuses to block ban on guns in church; case moves forward.

A federal judge on Monday declined to block enforcement of…

A federal judge on Monday declined to block enforcement of a new Georgia law that bans guns in places of worship, but he also rejected a request to dismiss the suit brought last month by a group seeking to make the state less restrictive on guns.

“It’s not at all discouraging,” said John Monroe, the attorney who filed a lawsuit on behalf of GeorgiaCarry.org and the minister at a Thomaston church.

U.S. District Judge C. Ashley Royal, in a 30-minute hearing, said he would base his decision on the outcome of the lawsuit only on the writings submitted by Monroe and the attorney for the state and Upson County, where Thomaston is the county seat.

Whatever his decision, not likely to come during the summer, it will be taken to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and that decision also is expected to be challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The lawsuit was filed in early July, almost two weeks after the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the Second Amendment’s guarantee of an individual right to bear arms applied to state and local gun-control laws. The court said the Bill of Rights ensured a person could have a gun in the home for protection. The justices, however, left open to state and local governments as to where the lines could be drawn beyond the home.

Source: Rhonda Cook for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Load Comments
  • Eric

    Again, the denial response as part of “magical” thinking on the part of the legislature simply amazes me. The idea any House of Worship — Church, Mosque, Temple, Egalitarian Commune or Atheistic/Environmentalist/Marxist University Campus (i.e., academic political religions)— is immune from violent psychotics is preposterous, especially given the cases across time, circumstance, and over various societies. In fact, given the ideological and religious conflict apparently inherent to many members of our species, Houses of Worship and Centers of Learning appear to be primary targets to fanatics and attention-craving psychotics (the most dangerous of hostage-takers!). In contrast, it is amazing how some otherwise intelligent people have a challenge of determining “friend-from-foe.” By this I mean, the ability to make rational, situational judgments regarding who is likely to commit an act of violence and who is not and when it is likely to occur? So many seem unable to utilize what Clint Smith describes as a vital common-sense (that is, “really good logic”) skill. Perhaps every “easy living” causes this skill of our ancestors to deteriorate because of non-use? The late Jeff Cooper provided sage advice on this in his PRINCIPLES OF PERSONAL DEFENSE, especially with regard to the ideological and political changes regarding how we view personal safety, awareness, and the ethics of dealing with danger. What is the answer? Perhaps it is simply the healthy acceptance of the reality of the simultaneous potential for Good things, Bad things, and mostly mediocre things to materialize in the environment any of us are in. Perhaps the Color Codes, calmly applied, is truly the best realizable way without generating paranoia on one extreme or complacency on the other. In truth, only individual human judgment can deal with situational reality where violence can unfold. No laws are a substitute for this. They are just an abstraction to guide conduct of those (the majority) who willingly follow them. For those who choose to ignore these social guidelines, they have the free will (despite some academic denials of free well) to generate local chaos at their decision. Self-defense is simply a reaction to such antisocial decisions when they generate local chaos at the lethal threat level, which can occur on any ground, in any situation because of the variability of the “human factor.” Free will means freedom for both Good and Evil and mediocrity — anywhere, any time. This is our “Mortal Reality.”