This week Brian Kemp, Georgia’s Republican governor, signed into law a bill that made the Peach State the first in the nation to repeal its citizen’s arrest statute.
“Today we are replacing this Civil War-era law, ripe for abuse, with language that balances the sacred right of self-defense of person and property with our shared responsibility to root out injustice and set our state on a better path forward,” Mr Kemp said, as reported by the globalist BBC.
When this law was proposed and discussed in the state last year, I wrote a letter rebutting many misconceptions, deliberate omissions, and misrepresentations. The letter was not published in any of Georgia’s newspapers, although I have been a Guess columnist in the Macon Telegraph for many years. My rebuttal still holds because the misrepresentations and frank mendacity reported by the media about this politically correct but misguided law are still being bandied about as if they were truths written in stone. It is worth repeating my points here as I wrote and submitted them back to the press, July 14, 2020:
Dear Editor of The Georgia Recorder,
I read with interest Stanley Dunlap’s article on the Georgia Citizen’s Arrest law. Let me categorically state that the killing of Ahmaud Arbery had nothing to do with the citizen arrest law. There is no evidence the killers were attempting to arrest Arbery, but the incident had more to do with plain thuggery, and there are laws already in the book to punish hate crimes and murder. The incident is being used to attempt to change or repeal the law for ulterior motives related to citizen disarmament and gun control through the back door.
Murder is murder. The Waycross prosecutor who cited the law as justification for the actions of the men who pursued and killed Arbery in Brunswick was trying to score political points rather than seek justice for the young black man.
Clarification will be used to declaw the measure, but it seems repeal is the ultimate goal of the Democrat state lawmakers as well as by the Mercer law professor cited in your article, “I think it’s a good idea to repeal the statute altogether but at a minimum it really ought to be clarified because it is not helpful for a private citizen trying to understand what the law authorizes.”
Repeal of this law will leave citizens, who have nothing to do with this crime, helpless, and at the mercy of criminals at home and in the streets; and if cornered, would be left with having to resort to more drastic actions. Repeal of the Citizen’s Arrest laws may have unintended consequences, such as the killing of suspects, who otherwise would have been arrested and handed over to the police.
It was very wise that our legislators enacted the Castle Doctrine and the Stand Your Ground laws. They help to stem crime at home and in the streets. With the citizen’s arrest law, citizens will not have to resort to more drastic measures in protecting their homes and loved ones.
And since “criminal justice reform,” racism, and “Civil War-era” history were brought into play, let me also say that gun control was passed in the South after the Civil War to deprive black citizens of their rights to keep and bear arm, a civil right that was incorporated in the 14th Amendment.
The inconvenient fact —namely, that blacks were deprived of their Second Amendment rights for needed self, home, and family protection in the post-Civil War-era — was not mentioned in your report. That of itself is quite telling and reveals selective omission, in other words, bias and misinformation. Perhaps, since I bring a much needed contrarian point of view, my little letter may resonate with at least some of your readers. Sincerely, Dr. Miguel Faria
In Georgia, citizens’ arrests are not uncommon. In fact in June of 2017, two escaped convicts, dangerous criminals in my own county in Baldwin County in Georgia killed two guards and broke from jail. After a crime spree on the run they were finally apprehended by an armed citizen at his doorsteps.
A friend commented and asked me: You already have in Georgia, “Stand Your Ground,” the “Castle Doctrine,” protected self-defense, etc. Why do you need this law?” To which I replied, What do you do if your home (Castle) is broken into by two mean and large burglars in daytime, who are nevertheless unarmed and want to carry await your wive’s jewelry and any of the home possessions and valuables that strikes their fancy. You will have to let them take what they want. As we have seen with the COVID 19 and George Floyd riots, the police have not been either prompt or reliable, and in many jurisdictions, they have been unwilling or unable to protect citizens, homes or businesses; in others, they have been defunded. While you call the police and risk your life and those of your loved ones, not to mention bodily harm— the criminals are free to do as they like, take what they want, and leave. What do you say now?
Miguel A. Faria, M.D. is Associate Editor in Chief in socioeconomics, politics, medicine, and world affairs of Surgical Neurology International (SNI). Clinical Professor of Surgery (Neurosurgery, ret.) and Adjunct Professor of Medical History (ret.) Mercer University School of Medicine. Author of Cuba in Revolution — Escape From a Lost Paradise (2002). His most recently released book is America, Guns, and Freedom: A Journey Into Politics and the Public Health & Gun Control Movements (2019).