Gun law concerns Colquitt County officials
Published 10:43 pm Monday, May 12, 2014
County officials expressed concern this week with the implications of a new state gun law that goes into effect, namely how it would affect safety and budgets.
Colquitt County Attorney Lester Castellow raised the issue to county commissioners during the board’s Tuesday meeting. Castellow also this week sent a memorandum to commissioners outlining the provisions of HB 875, passed earlier this year by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Nathan Deal, that apply to government buildings.
The law — the Safe Carry Protection Act — goes into effect in July. It makes carrying a weapon into the following a misdemeanor for those who do not hold gun licenses: a government building, courthouse, jail or prison, place of worship unless the church elects to allow guns, within 150 feet of a polling place or on property of nuclear plants. License holders may be fined $100 but are not charged with a crime in cases where they carry guns in these prohibited areas. They also are given the opportunity to leave without repercussions if requested to do so by security personnel.
However, it is the provision that allows license holders to carry guns into government buildings during regular office hours — unless everyone entering is screened by certified security personnel — that could present problems, Castellow and Colquitt County Sheriff Al Whittington said.
Under their interpretation of the law, everyone entering through one of the five entrances at the courthouse, for example, would have to be screened in order to prevent the carrying of firearms into the building.
Guns would remain prohibited inside court security areas. Courtrooms, one each at the courthouse, courthouse annex and Colquitt County Justice Center, along with the jail there, are the only areas currently screened among the county’s facilities. The screening area in the courthouse is on the third floor where the courtroom is located, with the area covered located in the basement of the annex building.
“I bring this to your attention, because it could have some severe budgetary issues for the county and the city, for that matter,” Castellow told commissioners. “We have a lot of public buildings that do not have restrictions.”
Screening for weapons would require more metal detectors, which cost about $3,500 apiece, Whittington said during a Wednesday telephone interview.
“It’s not only going to take scanners, it’s going to take personnel,” he said.
Currently the courthouse is the only building other than the justice center facility that has permanent law enforcement presence during business hours. In the past one former senior Superior Court judge had requested that kind of security at buildings where court was held, but Whittington said it was decided that was too expensive.
“Courtrooms, it’s no problem,” he said of security. “Courthouses? Look at the entrances in that one building. This is a dilemma for us.”
Ultimately the commission will have to weigh the options and make a decision.
Sheriff’s and police agencies were divided over the new law, with some in each camp for and against.
In addition to the concerns about government buildings, Whittington said that other provisions also raise issues. That includes guns in places where alcohol is served.
“We do have these pool rooms, restaurants and lounges,” he said. “Alcohol and firearms, to me, I just feel that is a deadly mixture. I certainly feel that is a recipe for disaster.”
State Rep. Jay Powell, R-Camilla, who voted for the law, said that he thinks concerns about government buildings may be overblown.
“People get mad at banks who are foreclosing on their property and there’s no police there,” he said. “Are government buildings more prone (to violence) than privately owned buildings?”
Powell said that overall the law clarifies some procedures, such as making some provisions less onerous on license holders. It also is geared to make sure people with mental health histories do not get gun licenses.
“I know there were some things that churches didn’t like, and they were changed to where they have to opt in instead of opt out,” he said. “I agreed with probably 95 percent of it (bill).”