Monday, March 28, 2016

Perversion Legislated © 2016 by Phillip Evans

In Massachucetts, two state Democrat lawmakers have authored H1577, a bill which would legalize the use of the same public restroom facilities and showers by males and females at the same time, regardless of the ages of either.

Public schools are not exempted. That means that when your little 11 year old daughter goes to the restroom in a middle school, for example, two 13 year old boys could legally come right on in, if this bill becomes law. Or your 16 year old daughter in high school showering after gym class could suddenly be in the presence of naked young men showering along side them. The text of the bill can be read by clicking here.

What are these politicians thinking?!

The authors of this bill are Byron Rushing and Denise Provost. Let's see, these Democrats believe it's perfectly okay to deny people the right to protect themselves from criminals in public with firearms as they go about their daily business, but subjecting your children to opposite gender nudity in close quarters is just fine and dandy? Really?

Oh, but it's not opposite gender nudity, wink wink. These are merely people who identify as being of the opposite gender, reality be darned. So, a person is perfectly male, for example, but believes himself to be a female trapped in a male body. Instead of providing him needed psychological help, we pretend the emperor has no clothes (no pun intended), and cow-tow to his delusion by proposing a law no less, that declares such to be legitimate! One could almost wonder if it's these legislators who are in greater need of mental health services.

Monday, March 14, 2016

Georgia's Private Colleges - Beefing Up Security? © 2016 by Phillip Evans

Emory University in Atlanta, Mercer University in Macon, and Savannah College of Art and Design are all private institutions. 

I'm sure they take seriously the protection of their students, staff, and faculty from armed criminals and terrorists. The first two universities have their own police department. SCAD, if I am not mistaken, only has their own security personnel but not police department.

Ask any student of these campuses how long the wait time would be in the case of an active shooter or multiple shooters on campus. Try and get a specific answer, at least to the point of whether it would be measured in seconds or minutes. Ask what maximum wait time would be acceptable.

Then ask that student if he or she had the opportunity to be armed if and when an attack occurred, would they like to have the opportunity to be able to shoot back.

Some politicians will say that virtually no one will be trained enough and brave enough to run toward the location of active shooters, and therefore being armed would be useless. Really? How about if students huddled together in a room are not completely helpless? Perhaps firing a few bullets of their own by intended victims to stop an armed gunman bursting in could help put a stop to the carnage?

Folks, here's the bad news. HB 859 which will go into effect as law July 1st, 2016, only restores the right of self-defense using firearms to licensed students, staff, and faculty of PUBLIC colleges and universities in Georgia.

Private colleges and universities? Sadly, you are on your own.

Oh wait! Per HB 60 passed in 2014, if you are carrying a firearm in an unauthorized location, and you use that firearm in self-defense, you CANNOT be charged with any crime, even the crime of carrying in an unauthorized location.

Now, I'm not telling students, staff, and faculty of private colleges and universities who are licensed to carry, to carry their guns anyway contrary to the law. But I can tell you this, the charge would only be a misdemeanor if caught. It would be nothing if used in self-defense. I would rather live to face a jury of 12 than be carried by six and put six feet into the ground. But it's your life, and you ultimately decide how carefully you guard it.

You only have just the one life. Odds are, nothing will ever happen to you on campus. But wisdom that comes sometimes only with years of living says it's better to play the stakes, than to play the odds.

Perhaps it's only fair for human lives to be just as safe on private campuses as public campuses? I would say so. Be safe out there wherever you are. It's quite a gamble to depend on someone else to come to your rescue.

Georgia Welcomes You!

University of Georgia, Georgia State, Kennesaw State University, Georgia Tech, and others are excellent choices to get an education. Come July 1st this year, all students, faculty, and staff who are licensed to carry firearms either via a Georgia Weapons License, or via a reciprocal carry license from another state that you maintain legal residency in, may carry their concealed pistol in all campus locations of these public universities, except for dorms, frat houses, and at athletic events.

Friday, March 11, 2016

Georgia Campus Carry VICTORY! © 2016 by Phillip Evans

Thank you to our friends in the Georgia General Assembly, and thank you to Georgia Carry!

HB 859 passed its final hurdle by a Senate floor vote of 37 to 17 today. It now goes to Governor Deal's desk, who has promised to sign it. 

Moms Demand Action is not giving up though. They foolishly believe that if they flood the Governor's office with phone calls that he will go back on his word. Not a chance!

College students, staff, and any other adult licensed to carry, may now exercise their right of self-defense and carry a concealed firearm for the protection of themselves and others around them on any public college campus in our state. 

Only dorms, frat houses, and athletic events will remain off-limits. Once the General Assembly sees how well the new law will work, I'm sure even those gun-free zones will be rightfully eliminated.

If you are about to enter college and are 21 and over, consider coming to Georgia where you can get an education and don't have to surrender your liberty to protect your own life against armed criminals or terrorists.

Carry in campus parking lots has been legal since 2010 with SB 308, and we've had no shooting duels over parking spaces, even though that was predicted by the fearmongerers.

Likewise, this new law will see none of the parade of horribles prophesied by the gloom and doom anti-freedom merchants.

One thing was revealed in all its nakedness, however, in the debate of this bill. And that is the low view that Democrat lawmakers and their groupies have of college students. To hear them tell it, adult students are drunkards, druggies, mentally ill, suicidal, immature, and willing to murder over grades or touchy subjects discussed in class.

Perhaps these students may have a good idea now who to vote for next time!

*** Private colleges may wish to beef up their security, since criminals and terrorists will likely move from public college hard targets to easier gun-free zone targets. ***

Thursday, March 10, 2016

Florida Open Carry - Express Your Displeasure! © 2016 by Phillip Evans

RINO Senators Miguel Diaz de la Portilla and Andy Gardiner proudly killed HB 163 and SB 300 in committee. 
I bet they are now laughing at us and patting each other on the back at denying our Second Amendment and First Amendment Rights to openly carry our firearms in public as a deterrent to crime, and as a public support and exercise of our rights.
In Florida, you can get a little revenge by completely legally doing some provocative protesting. Here’s how:
Besides openly carrying while fishing, camping, shooting, and hunting, here's what else you can do:

Photo above from by Bob Mack/The Times-Union
1. Openly wear your spare magazines - this is at a minimum legal anywhere you can conceal carry your pistol.
2. Carry your spare magazines (or nothing) inside a pistol shaped holster that closes with a lid, such as one designed for the P38 pistol, sold on Amazon. Not prohibited by any state law. 
3. Wear a hat and/or t-shirt stating you are lawfully armed. This is your First Amendment Right!
4. Conceal your pistol in a fanny-pack that has a graphic of a pistol on it. Again, 1st Amendment!
5. Do these things on public property where you cannot be trespassed merely for being armed, at large festivals, parks, concerts, shows, etc.
6. Wear voice recorders and have friends video with their cell phones in case your rights are violated - and file a lawsuit if they are!
7. Post your protesting experiences on Youtube and comment here with the link!
Embarrass the lawmakers that denied your right to openly carry! How DARE they lord over you with their disdain and mistrust peradventure free citizens actually publicly exercise their RIGHTS! 
Time to act like free men and women!

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

Local Alabama Officials Love Their Useless "No Guns" Signs © 2016 Phillip Evans

Those city and county officials are a hoot, aren't they? 

The front door of Clay City, Alabama's city hall had a sign back in January prohibiting guns

Then, along came Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange who released a statement telling Marion and Dallas counties that their signs on public buildings and at public parks did not comply with the law, since Alabama has state preemption with regard to the possession and carrying of firearms. Local governments are forbidden to ban firearms at any place which state law does not ban them.

The only way publicly owned properties (if not otherwise off-limits under state law) can legally ban firearms with a sign, is with the continuous posting of guards and the use of other security features, including, but not limited to, magnetometers, key cards, biometric screening devices, or turnstiles or other physical barriers.

We'll Just Wait As Long As We Can

Clay City Manager Ronnie Dixon heard of the AG's statement to Marion and Dallas counties, and agreed to take down their gun-buster signs if he could confirm that he had heard accurately. 

"We've just been waiting on (AG Luther Strange) to put it out. I've been expecting it, but I haven’t seen it. If that’s the ruling, they’ll come down. It’s not anything that we've enforced anyway,” Dixon said.

So let me get this straight, a city manager who should have already been at least a little familiar with state law with regard to firearms, if he is going to post signs prohibiting them, apparently was ignorant of the law? After all, Alabama has had firearms state preemption for several years now. 

Do not city and county governments have competent legal counsel to keep local officials accurately informed of state law? If not, why is taxpayer money funding those city attorneys? I guess good help is hard to find.

Just For Appearances

Since Dixon admitted the signs were not enforced anyway, just what was the purpose in leaving them up? Did he not have the budget to take them down? Were they viewed as beloved works of art, that he just didn't have the heart to remove them?

Do local officials really have to wait until the AG tells them to behave before they agree to obey state law? Mere citizens don't have the luxury to wait and decide to follow the law. 

Surely, no one is naive enough in Alabama city or county government to truly believe that a sign prohibiting guns would stop armed criminals from coming in to do harm, are they?

But it is completely reasonable to believe that many law-abiding citizens would heed such signs and leave their guns in their vehicles over concern of getting in any trouble.

When good people disarm, and bad people don't, what is the result? However you shake it out, it's not good. Do not people like Dixon understand this? 

The Real Reason

Here's what I believe: Local government officials place a high value on the exercise of their authority. They want to show their citizens their power to throw their weight around, even if it is contrary to state law. Even when they know and understand the law, they do not like to back down. They still wait until ordered by a higher government authority before changing course and admitting they were wrong.

The prerogative of citizens to exercise their rights, even to protect their own lives, takes a seat far in the back to the desire of local officials to show their power to rule. When caught, these officials either claim ignorance of the law, or blame the law itself even when it is crystal clear, or they just claim they want to do it anyway, because they think they should be able to. Their arrogance and impudence knows no bounds.

Citizens have a mechanism to file a complaint with which to get the attention of the AG to tell local government officials to obey the law. The fact that such a mechanism exists proves my point precisely. Here is the link to the form:

Still Intransigent

Even to this date you can find prohibitions of firearms on the websites for various public zoos, botanical gardens, libraries, museums, and other city and county owned properties in Alabama. Looks like AG Strange has a lot more statements to send out. 

I wonder if he could send just one that would say, "Hey, EVERYBODY follow state law!"

I suppose there's still a boatload of government officials that haven't received the memo on the state's motto: "Audemus Jura Nostra Defendere" (We Dare Defend Our Rights).

If you live in Alabama and cherish your rights, please consider joining

Whether you live in Alabama or another state that has had trouble with local officials following state law, please comment on your experience here, and how you or others got them to comply.

Saturday, March 5, 2016

North Carolina Weapons Carry - Petition of Redress © 2016 by Phillip Evans

Make no mistake, North Carolina from its beaches to its mountains is a beautiful state. I'd love to visit there sometime, but even though my Georgia Weapons Carry License is valid there, too many off-limits locations exist which simply does not make much sense to me.

I'm sure plenty of law-makers in their General Assembly feel the same way, and so in hopes that genuine progress can be made, I have submitted the following petition via email to their entire body of law-makers in the House and Senate:

None of the issues below should present any real difficulty for those who are champions of our rights, so we shall see how it goes this year - if there is truly a hunger to restore the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Dear North Carolina General Assembly Members,

This is not a cut-and-paste email - every word is authored by me here as a sincere plea to all of you to address the following, for the safety and security of all law-abiding citizens.

1. Firearm state preemption - this is in great need of strengthening!

A. Currently, local governments with merely a sign can ban carry in virtually any public building, such as a library, museum, visitor center, etc - even for those who are licensed to carry. "Government building" needs to be defined as any public building that has full-time screening with metal detectors and guards, in order to stop this abuse of our rights.

B. State Park offices and visitor centers - Need to be removed from off-limits for those who are licensed to carry.

C. State Fairgrounds - Need to be removed from off-limits for those who are licensed to carry.

D. Cities and counties should not be authorized to ban carry in any recreational facility.

E. Merely openly carrying a firearm should specifically be excluded from the "carrying to the terror of the public" statute.

F. Cities and counties should not be authorized to ban open carry on public streets.

G. Sheriff discretion in signing off on paperwork to own fully automatic firearms and silencers should be eliminated for licensed citizens.

2. All knife types and designs should be legal to carry for those who possess a firearm license.


Do law-abiding, licensed carriers of weapons really present a danger to society by carrying in unsecured government buildings, libraries, museums, recreational facilities, State Park offices, visitor centers, and fairgrounds? 

I'm sure some of you are dedicated to restoring the self-defense rights of citizens, especially in today's world when we see how "gun free zones" are nothing more than victim zones.

Will those of you who are champions of the Second Amendment Right to keep and bear arms put forth a bill to address these issues in the coming legislative session?

Forcibly taking away from citizens the right to carry under penalty of incarceration merely because they wish to maintain the ability to effectively defend themselves is simply immoral. 

Please show the country how the great state of North Carolina will vindicate the right to carry during this legislative session. 

Thank you and God bless you,


Phillip Evans

Correction: From Paul Valone, President of Grass Roots North Carolina, "For clarification, "going armed to the terror of the people" is not a statute. It derives from common-law, making it somewhat more slippery because it rests on variable court decisions over two centuries. We do have, however, a North Carolina Supreme Court decision (State v. Dawson, I believe) which stipulates that merely carrying a firearm does not constitute the offense."

Complete House and Senate Email List:

Thursday, March 3, 2016

Getting Schooled - Guns on Georgia Public Campuses © 2016 by Phillip Evans

Some of the comments submitted by readers of the AJC article "Will guns on campus scare away high school students and their parents?" indicate these commenters need a little extra education in critical thinking, and at the very least, need to pay attention to basic facts regarding HB 859 that recently passed in House of the Georgia General Assembly.

They made it so easy to respond to their arguments, that at first I felt a little guilty, as if I had been taking candy from a baby. But that did not last long. I realized that all of these commenters were probably adults who would rather see you and I be arrested and go to jail merely for being armed with a pistol on a college campus for the purpose of preventing rapists, robbers, and murderers from harming us and others.

In their eyes, even women who have already been victimized by rapists should be denied their human right of self-defense using firearms just because they happen to be on a college campus.

How do I know this? I know it because I know that they know that victims of rape attend college, and these opponents to college carry make no exception for them to carry a firearm on campus.

What makes a college campus such a hollowed ground that carrying a pistol for self-protection is such an unholy act?

I've quoted some of the comments here and my responses to them: (one comment below dealt with a different law regarding police asking about a "permit", but was still fun to answer)

Um, Just Cuz It's Bad!

Mack68 - "My kids are also learning. But they do not need to pack heat on campus. This is a very bad idea."

Mack, I see what you slyly did there. Under HB 859, only licensed ADULTS 21 and over may carry a firearm on campus.

These are the SAME people that can legally carry now in public parks filled with parents and children, the SAME people that can have a beer, wine, or whiskey in a restaurant while carrying legally (legal since 2010 no less, with no wild west shootouts in those places), and the SAME people that can legally carry in 97% of all other public places, with no rash of licensed 21 year old KIDS shooting up places.

When you can get past the fear-mongering, maybe then you can see that it is immoral to put adults in jail merely for wanting to have a firearm for protection from evil-doers on college campuses that would rape, rob, and murder innocent UNARMED victims.

We Don't Need No Stinking 4th Amendment!

jerryeads - "Do I remember the legislature being so incredibly stupid as to pass a law preventing police from even ASKING if someone had a conceal permit? If that's the case, what's the point requiring the permit? What's next - a law preventing police from asking to see one's driver's license to see if he or she is 21?"

Ah, the old problem of not actually reading the bill rouses its ignorant head.

Jerry, nothing in that bill in any way prevents an officer from asking if a person has a license to carry. Just as nothing in the bill in any way prevents an officer from asking where you bought those snazzy shoes from.

What HB 60 (from 2014) does, is to make it crystal clear and confirm CURRENT U.S. Constitutional law that officers are ALREADY subject to.

Which is, citizens may not be detained under color of law unless Reasonable Articulable Suspicion (R.A.S) of a crime is afoot.

The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that merely being armed does not give rise to an exception of the 4th Amendment.

Now, with R.A.S. or probable cause of a crime, then yes, officers may at any time DEMAND to see that weapons carry license under color of law. HB 60 in no way prevents this.

Officers are free to observe, investigate, question, etc... But may not detain a citizen without circumstances which exist to overcome Constitutional Rights. And as our highest court has already ruled - being armed without other circumstances which suggest criminal activity leaves 4th Amendment protections firmly in place.

Should your wishes become reality, such that the mere act of exercising a Constitutional Right, even while licensed, subjects you to being stopped and detained by police against your will any time an officer observes you being armed, just what do you think happens to all other licensed activities you participate in?

Do you have a Constitutional Right to drive a car? Well, it does require a license. Hmmm, maybe you are driving without a license. I believe any time you drive, a police officer should be able to pull you over merely to check and see if you have a drivers license. Cuz, you know, some people out there do dangerous things with their cars, and we want to make sure at any time anyone drives, that they are licensed to drive. 

It doesn't matter to you how many times I am stopped during my day by an officer to question me about my gun license, so I won't care how many times you are stopped on the road, just so an officer can check if you are licensed to drive. See how that works? 

Laws That Restore Liberty Make People Commit Crime!

Denise285 - "...This bill states that only individuals that are over 21 years old will be allowed to carry on campus. Realistically, can the supporters of this bill actually believe that students 18 through 20 will stand idle and not bring weapons on campus also?..."

Denise, if HB 859 does NOT pass, do you actually believe that students 18 to 20 (or anyone of any age) bent on committing crime will choose to leave their guns at home, for fear of breaking the law?

Please explain to me how the current prohibition of firearms carry on college campuses is keeping armed robbers from bringing their guns on campus? 

Perhaps it's because college campuses with all of their learning haven't figured out the best way to author an effective sign that keeps them away?

Wild, Wild West! Aaah!

MarshallK - "Of course parents will be excited that there can be old-fashioned shootouts on campus in the near future.  The clear way to protect one's self is to fire back; and, of course, students, faculty, or staff with anger issues would never pull a gun on someone just because they were angry.  Heck, put guns in church, airport, trains, Everywhere.  What a safe world we can envision."

Well Marshall, it sounds like you may be familiar with HB 60 from 2014 which some have called, "The Guns Everywhere Bill". 

Please tell me how many "old-fashioned shootouts" have occurred by licensed gun carriers committing crimes since July 1st, 2014 when this bill became law.

Also, it has been legal to drink alcohol and carry a firearm in restaurants since July 1st, 2010 in Georgia. 

How many wild west shootouts have occurred as a result of licensed carriers committing any crimes in those restaurants?


You know, fear-mongerers are good at fear-mongering, but when they try to be prophets of doom, they are shown time and again that they are false prophets.

Dueling Parking Spots!

jerryeads - "...Duels in the lots over parking spots..."

Jerry, you guys are making this too easy!

Psst, did you know that since 2010 with SB 308 it has been LEGAL for licensed-to-carry college students to bring a pistol onto a college campus parking lot in his car, as long as he leaves it locked in the car?

Please tell me how many duels over parking spots have occurred by licensed carriers since 2010?

Crickets chirping...


Board of Regents Just Jealous It Doesn't Address Private Colleges!

OriginalProf - "This is why our Board of Regents opposes any 'campus carry laws' so strongly. Only the USG schools would be affected."

Not quite. The Board of Regents would just as much oppose a law allowing firearms carry both at public and private colleges. 

Don't believe me, look at past campus carry laws that applied to both. The B.O.R. roared at them.

How Can Police Know Who The Good Guy Is?!

patriotdog - "...Never mind the fact that when police show up to find the suspect, and they are looking for an 'armed and dangerous student' how do they know if the student(s) with the gun is the bad guy or a good guy looking for the bad guy?..."

Please tell me how responding police know the difference between good guys and bad guys when crime occurs outside college campuses?

Does stepping over a college property line suddenly make police go stupid?

No More Students or Professors At Georgia Colleges!

Ralph-25 - "Not only will thinking High School students be looking elsewhere, any sought after Professor will not even give Georgia a second thought..."

Ralph, wishful thinking got you tied in knots?

Alabama, Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Oregon, Wisconsin, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Texas all have legal student campus carry.

Are they having a shortage of students and professors? Please explain.

They Should Protest By Calling In Sick!

sim_namore - "If this bill becomes law, every teacher in the state should call in sick."

You know, that is an EXCELLENT idea. Have the hoplophobic professors falsely call in sick. They then get fired and replaced by professors with common sense, who then help nurture common sense in their students.


I bet you didn't realize just how much your idea would improve the future of our society.

Armed 18 Year Old Kids! Aaah!

redweather - "No more absurd than thinking an 18 year old college student will have the requisite training and skill to fend off a maniac armed to the teeth."

Red, please pay attention. You have to be at least 21 in Georgia to get a license to carry a firearm.

And who do you suppose will better be able to fight back against an armed criminal - a person with a gun, or a person without a gun?

Do you suppose young adults have been unable to use their firearms successfully outside of college campuses? You seem to imply that.

I can think of a young college student in the news not many years ago who went to buy some soda at a grocery store in Georgia. He was licensed to carry, and I believe 21 years old at the time.

He was attacked by two men. One held a knife to his throat. With his pistol, he killed the knifeman, and the other ran away. Google it sometime.


In fact, the defender was 22. Details on the incident above are at the following links:

Georgia Campus Carry Train Comin'! © 2016 by Phillip Evans

Hysterical hysterics were in plentiful supply at Georgia's Gold Dome Capitol Building, March 2nd, during the first Senate hearing for House Bill 859, a bill which would decriminalize carrying a concealed pistol for self-protection on public college campuses. In other words, you would not be subject to going to jail as a criminal just because you wanted to preserve your life from criminals. Nice! When put in those terms, one wonder why it became illegal in the first place.

To the GA Board of Regents, Bloomberg's Moms Demand Action, leftist elitist professors, and their amateur groupies, colleges are peaceful, warm fuzzy places where unicorns prance around farting out rainbows, where the presence of firearms would put a poo-poo of evil-spellishness over these little kingdoms of light turning them into darkness, and their Spring into Eternal Winter.

Oddly enough, these same groups view colleges as cesspools of drunkeness and sexual predators, filled with mentally ill students, filled with students with "under-developed brains", filled with students ready to do violence over emotionally charged topics in the classroom or over the grades they receive, and all constantly stressed with college life to the point that one more trauma involving an assignment or romantic breakup could push them to snap.

The more they press their reasons for not allowing adults to carry firearms on college campuses, the more they make the case for us to do precisely that.

Were I a college student, I would want to carry my firearm to defend against thugs coming in to commit rape, robbery, and mass murder. After hearing from these campus carry opponents, I'd have an additional reason to carry - my fellow classmates, if I was influenced by their rhetoric.

The way college students are being maligned en masse as being the dregs of society at worst and emotional misfits at best, I'm surprised they are not in an uproar over their vilification and infantilization regardless of where they stand on the position of campus carry.

Imagine that it's those of us who are pro-campus-carry who actually treat college adults with the adult respect they deserve!

A little tidbit of history was served at the hearing by "Mike From Philly 3", a member of the Internet forum He pointed out that another "sensitive place", churches, were protected by a law in Georgia back in 1770 which required all able-bodied males to be armed with guns while attending services.

The astute Senator Vincent Fort posed Mike a "gotcha" question. He inquired from whom were those armed church-goers defending against. Were the literal, historically correct answer to be given, Native Americans, Fort would have retorted, "Have you seen any of them lately attacking churches?"

What Fort perhaps is unable or unwilling to grasp is that people bears arms to defend against any threat that would seek to harm and kill innocent victims. Certain groups of Native Americans in 1770, or crazed mass murderers today. As Hillary would say, "What difference does it make?" Senator Fort, please take a clue from Ms. Clinton, okay?

When campus carry was recently debated in the Florida Legislature, Representative Greg Steube pointed out that data shows that overall, adults with a license to carry are six times less likely to commit crime than police officers. Is this because too many 21 year old impulsive, immature, psycho, under brain-developed kids are being given uniforms, badges and guns?

It shouldn't have to be pointed out, but all major wars in the history of our country were largely fought on the front-lines by "kids" 16 to 21 years old. And the majority of those who survived came back into society and led well-adjusted, normal lives.

Surely, college is not nearly as stressful an environment as war, and the proposed bill in the GA General Assembly only applies to licensed adults 21 year old and above. 

Attorney Ed Stone, one of the founders of Georgia Carry and a former police officer, was recently a panelist at Georgia State University discussing campus carry. He was surprised to learn that a professor knows that some students currently carry firearms in class. Perhaps these students are law enforcement officers that can legally carry under current law. 

To be honest, if I was a student or professor at any college, I would also be glad to know that some students carried firearms in class. They certainly would not have me crying about it to the authorities if they were not among those who wear a badge. 

Unfortunately, police are often not true first-responders anyway. That's not to take away from the sacrificial work they do; it is merely a simple fact. First-responders are the ones on the front-line of any criminal attack the very moment it happens. Arming would-be victims makes them effective defenders and first-responders indeed, instead of sheep for the slaughter.

Back to the Momz for a moment. A few of them at the hearing wanted a photo with Lt. Governor Casey Cagle. Why? Perhaps because they hoped a photo which would go public would influence the Lt. Governor into siding with them against HB 859, or merely because they genuinely like him. Who knows?

What simply happened is that Lt. Gov. Cagle decided to not be rude to them and obliged with the photo - which, when all is boiled down, does not matter. What was he to do, not act like a gentleman?

In any case, Governor Deal has come out in support of the bill, which should tell you that it is going to pass and be signed into law. It will take effect July 1st.

Students who carry on campus will be required by the new law to conceal their firearms, but that is not to say they must remain silent as to their victory and exercise of a fundamental liberty. They also have the right of free speech.

There is a way they can proudly proclaim they are carrying a firearm for the safety of themselves and others without disrupting class. They can wear the GCO (Georgia Carry dot Org) lapel pin with the logo of an American Revolutionary Sentry who stands guard to protect the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I suggest that all college and university students in Georgia who qualify to legally carry a firearm first join Georgia Carry, and then purchase and wear this beautiful lapel pin every day on campus:

Edit: Hold the presses! Alert!... Maybe that photo mentioned above and maybe Governor Deal's public "support" of the bill were signs of clouds on the horizon. Is the fix in again?

Seems there is now a news story of Governor Deal speaking of "softening" the bill. I personally thought it was taken out of the oven already a little soft, as gun possession was still banned in on-campus living quarters. Really?

Anyway, what further "softening" could be done? I mean, a student either carries or not carries. It there a such thing as "somewhat carry" or "almost carry"?

Maybe they are thinking of putting in a provision to ban carry in campus libraries. Hey, that would keep good guys AND bad guys from bringing guns there, and would solve the problem with all those recent robberies in the GSU Library. See my sarcasm font?