My home state of Georgia may well be poised to finally pass constitutional carry. At least assuming certain lawmakers don’t scuttle the bill again this year. Considering that both the current governor and his primary challenger both back the measure, it seems likely that it’ll pass.

So now the media in the state is starting to ask whether such a bill will benefit the state, particularly with regard to violent crime.

As cities across the nation grapple with an uptick in violent crimes, gun laws are being revamped.

More than 20 states do not require permits to carry guns and Georgia could join them soon, as a constitutional carry bill moves through the General Assembly.

Some say if this bill passes, it could put even more lives in danger.

“That permitless, it’s going to cause more problems for the police, yeah, and EMS,” said Columbus resident Eric Glover.

With the Georgia state Senate passing the Constitutional Carry Act, some say if this becomes law, it’s a move that could be deadly.

The legislation ditches the need for Georgians to have a permit to carry a concealed firearm in public.

“Now, anybody can carry one and everybody don’t have the right state of mind to have guns. Period,” added Glover.

Wow, what keen insight from Glover.

Of course, there’s nothing in the permitting process in most states that determines whether people have the “right state of mind to have guns.” Particularly since this removes the carry permit requirement as Georgia has no purchase permits.

But at least the local news asked some random dude what he thinks, so now we’re at the heart of the matter, aren’t we?

Isn’t it a mystery why trust in the media is at an all-time low? It’s quite the conundrum, isn’t it?

What Mr. Glover doesn’t understand is that under the current system, you have to go down to the probate court and apply, go and get fingerprinted, then wait for your permit. If you’re under a particular threat, you may well be dead before your permit arrives.

I’m sorry, but how is that acceptable?

“But this will let criminals carry guns,” he might reply. If not him, someone else will because I’ve seen it too many times.

However, this is false. Convicted felons are still prohibited from possessing firearms. That doesn’t change because of a change in state law. Since we know that most people who represent a threat are known to law enforcement and the reason they’re known is their past felony convictions, I don’t see how this is a problem. If the cops see someone they know is a felon and he’s carrying a gun, they can still make the arrest. Georgia may not like gun laws, but we don’t like armed criminals either.

This really isn’t difficult.

Yet I can’t help but wonder how someone like Mr. Glover here would feel if there were some restriction on his right to speak to the press about topics he knows little about? Would he take issue with such a law?

I’d imagine he would. To be frank, he’d have grounds to be upset, too. Our rights shouldn’t be up for debate, either in Georgia or elsewhere.

Our gun rights, however, are rights as well. That includes the right to bear arms, a right that has been infringed upon for far too long in this state. It’s time to change that, finally.

Maybe the next time the media wants to discuss whether constitutional carry will do any good, they might do well to speak to people who actually know something about the subject rather than random people on the streets.

Then again, if they did that, they might not like what they learn.