A county judge in Georgia has tossed a lawsuit challenging the city of Savannah’s ordinance requiring gun owners to keep their vehicles locked when they have guns stored inside after determining that the plaintiff doesn’t have standing to sue.
The decision allowed Chatham County Superior Court Judge Benjamin Karpf to bypass the main argument brought by Clarence Belt and his attorney that the city’s ordinance squarely violates Georgia’s firearm preemption law, but Belt’s attorney says the issue isn’t going away any time soon.
Belt’s attorney, John R. Monroe, argued during a September court hearing that Savannah’s ordinance violates a state law prohibiting local governments from restricting “the possession, ownership, transport, (or) carrying” of firearms.
Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, a Republican, made the same argument in a May letter to Savannah officials stating that “no local ordinance can regulate firearms.” City officials ignored Carr’s warning that they could face civil liability for enforcing the ordinance.
“It’s just a matter of time that this ordinance is going to be struck down,” Belt’s attorney, John R. Monroe, said in a phone interview Monday.
Monroe said he and Belt haven’t decided whether to appeal the judge’s ruling dismissing the case. He said Belt, who lives in Jesup, Georgia, about 66 miles (106 kilometers) southwest of Savannah, keeps a gun in his vehicle and is at risk of being cited during frequent visits to the city.
“He has trouble walking and his car doesn’t have power locks,” Monroe said of Belt. “To comply with the ordinance, among other issues, he’d have to get out and walk around the car to lock it manually. That extra walking is hard on him.”
Because Belt isn’t a resident of Savannah and has not been cited for leaving his firearm in an unlocked vehicle, Judge Karpf determined that Belt has no cause to challenge the ordinance, despite Monroe’s argument to the contrary. Monroe was also the attorney of record for a Georgia man named Deacon Morris who was being prosecuted for violating the ordinance, but the city agreed to drop the charges last month. The Firearms Policy Coalition, which supported both Clarence Belt and Morris, hailed the city’s decision back in early November.
“Governments often rely on steamrolling criminal defendants and coercive plea bargains, but Deacon Morris had excellent counsel, a strong defense, and FPC in his corner. We are delighted that Mr. Morris can finally walk away from this outrageous prosecution and we can now turn attention to our Belt v. Savannah lawsuit, which we hope will end enforcement of Savannah’s unlawful ordinance once and for all,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.
For now, anyway, the ordinance remains in effect, and Savannah Mayor Van Johnson has shown no sign of backing off enforcing the measure. In fact, the city’s attorneys maintain that the ordinance doesn’t violate Georgia’s preemption statute, which forbids localities from adopting any ordinances dealing with the possession, ownership, transport, carrying, transfer, sale, purchase, licensing, or registration of firearms. They’ve argued that while the ordinance mentions firearms, it’s “regulating what citizens are to do regarding unoccupied vehicles—i.e. locking the vehicle and hiding objects (specifically firearms) that are attractive to criminals,” not firearms themselves.
If the ordinance required every resident and visitor to lock their unattended vehicles, the city might have a point. But despite the arguments to the contrary, the measure is aimed specifically at regulating the possession and transport of firearms, which does put it at odds with the preemption statute.
Savannah officials claim that 203 of the 244 guns stolen in the city last year came from unlocked cars. If those numbers are correct, that is a problem. It doesn’t mean, however, that the solution is to violate state law. Instead of criminally charging citizens who forget or neglect to lock their doors, the city could, for instance, run a public service campaign raising awareness of the issue and reminding gun owners of the importance of keeping their firearms stored in a way that they’re not easily accessible to thieves. More importantly, they could make it a priority to target thefts from vehicles rather than blaming the victims of those crimes.
Monroe is probably right when he says it’s only a matter of time before the ordinance is taken off the books. Sadly, though, it’s likely going to take someone who’s been charged with violating the measure to bring it down. Until then, the city will continue to enforce its illegal ordinance, and gun owners should be wary of the fact that city officials see them as the problem and not the thieves stealing guns from cars, trucks, and SUVs.
Read the full article here