News from the NRA: TSA Considers Airport Carry Ban

[seamusTX]

A recent story in USA Today (to read the story, please click here: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/ ... -ban_N.htm) reported that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) may weigh in on the issue of legal carry in the unsecured areas of airports.

It was reported that TSA “may allow airports to ban firearms from terminals, parking lots, roads and other airport areas where many states currently allow passengers to carry . . .” Such a policy would not only interfere with self-defense rights, but could also interfere with the possession of legal firearms by hunters and other travelers who plan to check those firearms in their luggage.

Please be sure to contact TSA to let them know that their interference with local Right-to-Carry laws is unwanted and an unneeded infringement on the right to self-defense.

You can contact TSA at https://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/DynaForm.aspx?FormID=10; or by mail at: Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220.

[Pinkycatcher]

Do they have the authority to do that?

[seamusTX]

There's a lot of vague stuff in the USAPATRIOT Act and elsewhere that gives TSA the power to prohibit things on their own authority. For example, I'm sure there's no federal law that directly regulates taking grooming products aboard commercial aircraft.

Some states prohibit carrying in the unsecured areas of airports, and some explicitly allow it. The Georgia Legislature and Governor are emphatic about allowing it.

If TSA tries to do this, I foresee a federal states' rights case making its way to the Supreme Court.

- Jim

[jimlongley]

Do they have the authority to do that?

Probably not, but that doesn't mean that they won't try.

The title is a little misleading, TSA isn't considering this on their own, it's actually Atlanta that's asking them to do it because they cannot do it themselves.

Considering the lack of violence committed by legal concealed carriers in the past, it's a stretch for them to use safety as a reason for denying access to those law abiding citizens.

I'll write a personal letter to Michael Restovich, he owes me and I'll remind him of that.

[KaiserB]

Do they have the authority to do that?

Probably not, but that doesn't mean that they won't try.

Technically the TSA secures the AOA (Airport Operations Area). TSA could expand its authority area by declaring the entire terminal part of the AOA.

[srothstein]

I don't think it stands much chance of passing TSA review. TSA would have a lot of problems with it and with enforcing it if they did. How would you get your luggage in with a checked weapon? You would still be in possession of the weapon and the luggage until you got to check-in?

And their decision could violate state laws, such as in Texas. The law here forbids most airports from banning CHL's with weapons. Non-CHL's are already not allowed to carry (except LEO's and a few other minor groups like travelers). I think TSA is going to say it is a state issue.

Interestingly enough IF I understand the rules correctly (which is not really likely), TSA can do it for Hartsfield in one way that lets the airport fight the issue. TSA controls the airport security plan and approves it. If Hartsfield just requests a change to the plan to ban firearms from airport property, TSA could approve the change. This lets Hartsfield fight the battle and keeps TSA out of it. They just say it is up to the airport to create a security plan in accordance with applicable state and federal laws. They only approve the plan or say it is insufficient.

I wonder how the airport is going to handle the GA side of the airport. I keep trying to point out to people that there is no such thing as a truly secure airport as long as I can fly a general aviation airplane to or from it.

[KBCraig]

Do they have the authority to do that?

Ha! There's no constitutional authority for TSA to even exist in the first place!

Might doesn't make right, but it does make might. They do it because they can get away with it.

[FlynJay]

I don't think it stands much chance of passing TSA review. TSA would have a lot of problems with it and with enforcing it if they did. How would you get your luggage in with a checked weapon? You would still be in possession of the weapon and the luggage until you got to check-in?

And their decision could violate state laws, such as in Texas. The law here forbids most airports from banning CHL's with weapons. Non-CHL's are already not allowed to carry (except LEO's and a few other minor groups like travelers). I think TSA is going to say it is a state issue.

Interestingly enough IF I understand the rules correctly (which is not really likely), TSA can do it for Hartsfield in one way that lets the airport fight the issue. TSA controls the airport security plan and approves it. If Hartsfield just requests a change to the plan to ban firearms from airport property, TSA could approve the change. This lets Hartsfield fight the battle and keeps TSA out of it. They just say it is up to the airport to create a security plan in accordance with applicable state and federal laws. They only approve the plan or say it is insufficient.

I wonder how the airport is going to handle the GA side of the airport. I keep trying to point out to people that there is no such thing as a truly secure airport as long as I can fly a general aviation airplane to or from it.

Please Don't get GA involved. We have enough problems securing access to airports as it is.

[Mike1951]

GOA also claiming it could affect other airports:

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

You may not have been watching the battle that is brewing over concealed
carry in the Hartsfield-Jackson airport in Atlanta, Georgia, but it may end
up affecting you where you live.

Because of what's happening in Atlanta, the Transportation Security Agency
could decide to allow airports across the country to ban firearms in areas
that currently allow for self-defense.

It all began when Georgia passed a new law allowing permit holders to carry
guns onto state parks, into restaurants that serve alcohol, and onto mass
transit (such as the non-surveillance areas in airports).

The Hartsfield-Jackson airport responded by defying the state law and
banning firearms throughout the entire airport, including areas where
drivers pick up passengers.

This has resulted in a court battle, where presently, a federal judge ruled
in favor of the airport's ban. Now, the TSA may step into the fray by
permitting airports across the entire country to ban firearms in those
locations that are outside of the boarding areas.

Federal law prevents passengers from bringing firearms past airport
checkpoints. But in many states, passengers are allowed to bring guns and
knives into areas such as the pick-up points and the main terminal. This is
what could change very soon.

"Any decisions we make that affect (Atlanta) could affect every other
airport in the country," said TSA spokesman Christopher White to
USA Today
(8/7/08).

What's at stake here is not the ability to take guns past surveillance
points. What's at stake is the right of self-defense outside of these areas
-- especially where drivers are either dropping off or picking up
passengers.

In other words, drivers who have permits are the ones who would be affected
the most because they would now have to leave their guns at home -- thus
contradicting the very reason they got a concealed carry permit in the first
place... the fact that they wanted to carry their guns outside of the house.


ACTION: Please urge President Bush to put the squeeze on the TSA. This
president should certainly understand the bad-politics of imposing a gun ban
right before an election.

[Excaliber]

The primary thrust here seems to be a back door gun ban attempt to create additional requirements and legal risks to nullify the value of a CHL. If a large enough patchwork of places you can't carry can be created, you'll end up having to leave the gun at home because you won't be able to go about in public without violating one special area or another.

We've already got too many of these, and certainly don't need any more. This infringement on freedom should be fought vigorously.

[FlynJay]

Just because the TSA may "allow" airports to ban the carrying of weapons that doesn't mean the state leglistratures have to "allow" it as well.
I see this as more of a states rights issue, both the TSA and federal courts are going to "allow" the state to fight this out internally because they have do not have the right to "disallow" it.

Now I am not a lawer, but an engineer. Therefore my grasp of physics and mathmatics far outweights my grasp for the law and english language.

[boomerang]

Do they have the authority to do that?

They can do whatever they want.

Maybe the supreme court will eventually notice the unconstitutional trampling of human rights but Kelo v. New London and Wickard v. Filburn show they often don't. More recently we can look at Heller to see what a supreme court ruling means in practice when they rule in favor of the constitution. Even after the ruling the JBTs wouldn't let Dick Heller register a 1911 in DC. I can only imagine how they are mistreating American citizens who weren't a party in the case.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I have to admit I have not followed this thread closely, so the information I'm about to give may have already been posted in this or another thread.

It is my understanding that this issue arose not because of a change in Georgia law, but because a group of people decided to walk around the airport openly carrying handguns. If this is correct, it's an example of the reaction I fear here in Texas. I must admit that open-carry in an airport is about the worst possible place one could choose, except perhaps for a school. Airports are full of people from all over the country and the world and the chance of someone reacting differently than might be expected in the local community is high.

Chas.

[seamusTX]

It's my understanding that Georgia state law changed a couple of months ago, allowing GCL (their equivalent of CHL) holders to carry in the non-secure area of airports (as they can do in Texas).

http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/categor ... rearm-ban/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

[Charles L. Cotton]

It's my understanding that Georgia state law changed a couple of months ago, allowing GCL (their equivalent of CHL) holders to carry in the non-secure area of airports (as they can do in Texas).

http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/categor ... rearm-ban/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

That's correct, but I think the catalyst for the request to TSA was not the passage of the legislation, but the open-carrying in the Atlanta airport by a group of people "just to prove that we can do it." It's not the first time an "in your face" attitude has caused a problem. We lost National Park carry a couple of years back because of just that ill-advised tactic.

Chas.