• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Governor signs bills on guns, abortion

People being strapped in a bar could have a positive effect on the gene pool.
 
Jerry said:
Keep in mind that individual establishments can still ban firearms from their property.

This is like a smoking ban being lifted. Now the business owner can decide to allow it or not.

How is that anything other than a pro-choice position?
Click to expand...

Correct.

There are two arguments in this thread, one is for the government intervention in healthcare / abortion... and the other is for gun owners rights.

One is the government reaching for more power, and the other is the government letting go of power / giving it back to the citizens / businesses.
 
Goobieman said:
If you cannot drink while carrying, why does it matter?
Click to expand...

You aren't supposed to drink and drive either, but people do.

I'll compromise and just say that if you are caught carrying while drinking I hope they treat it as harshly as a DUI.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Keep in mind that individual establishments can still ban firearms from their property.
Click to expand...

Ok, then I will change my opinion on that then. If the owners can still decide that they don't want firearms in their establishments I am ok with that then.
 
TheNextEra said:
You aren't supposed to drink and drive either, but people do.
Click to expand...
Yes... and?

If you're going to base your argument on the assumption that people are going to break the law, then the entire discussion is meaningless -- if people are just going to break the law, they're already carrying guns into bars.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Let's see, gun fights in the street from concealed carry is about as ignorant as allowing people to get ****faced drunk and pack a weapon around. You go sit in the bar with them.

Let me clarify, it is common ****ing sense. I would never had thought that concealed carry would have caused any problems, but in a bar? You must be kidding.
Click to expand...
Really, and knowing they lose their right to carry if discovered drunk won't create a deterrence?
 
stevenb said:
Correct.

There are two arguments in this thread, one is for the government intervention in healthcare / abortion... and the other is for gun owners rights.

One is the government reaching for more power, and the other is the government letting go of power / giving it back to the citizens / businesses.
Click to expand...

Ahh so you're arguing against the waiting period to buy a pistol?
 
Jerry said:
Ahh so you're arguing against the waiting period to buy a pistol?
Click to expand...

<3 :)

I knew there was a reason I liked you on this forum.
 
American said:
Really, and knowing they lose their right to carry if discovered drunk won't create a deterrence?
Click to expand...

He's already conceded his position. :)
 
TheNextEra said:
Ok, then I will change my opinion on that then. If the owners can still decide that they don't want firearms in their establishments I am ok with that then.
Click to expand...

And they can now arm their bouncers to enforce that policy if they choose.
 
American said:
Really, and knowing they lose their right to carry if discovered drunk won't create a deterrence?
Click to expand...

For some no, just like knowing people can lose their license or get jailed doesn't stop them from drinking and driving.

As I amended though, I would be willing to compromise and say if the CCW people get caught carrying while drinking it be treated harshly like a DUI.
 
TheNextEra said:
For some no, just like knowing people can lose their license or get jailed doesn't stop them from drinking and driving.

As I amended though, I would be willing to compromise and say if the CCW people get caught carrying while drinking it be treated harshly like a DUI.
Click to expand...
Well you say while drinking because they're allowed to carry in a bar. That would be like the state setting them up.
 
TheNextEra said:
For some no, just like knowing people can lose their license or get jailed doesn't stop them from drinking and driving.

As I amended though, I would be willing to compromise and say if the CCW people get caught carrying while drinking it be treated harshly like a DUI.
Click to expand...

And it should be, carrying a firearm is much like driving.. it carries a lot of responsibility with it.
 
TheNextEra said:
For some no, just like knowing people can lose their license or get jailed doesn't stop them from drinking and driving.

As I amended though, I would be willing to compromise and say if the CCW people get caught carrying while drinking it be treated harshly like a DUI.
Click to expand...
To compare:

South Dakota Codified Laws
22-14-7. Reckless discharge of firearm or shooting of bow and arrow--Leaving trip device--Possession of loaded firearm while intoxicated--Misdemeanor. Any person who:
(1) Recklessly discharges a firearm or recklessly shoots a bow and arrow;
(2) Sets a device designed to activate a weapon upon being tripped or approached, and leaves the device unmarked or unattended by a competent person; or
(3) Has in personal possession a loaded firearm while intoxicated;
is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
Click to expand...

And here's DUI:
South Dakota Codified Laws
32-23-2. Punishment for prohibited driving--First offense. If conviction for a violation of § 32-23-1 is for a first offense, such person is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor, and the defendant's driving privileges shall be revoked for not less than thirty days. However, the court may in its discretion issue an order upon proof of financial responsibility, pursuant to § 32-35-113, permitting the person to operate a vehicle for purposes of employment, 24/7 sobriety testing, attendance at school, or attendance at counseling programs. The court may also order the revocation of the defendant's driving privilege for a further period not to exceed one year or restrict the privilege in such manner as it sees fit for a period not to exceed one year.
Click to expand...

***
For celerity, you could still go in and have a beer while carrying, just like you can have a beer and still legally drive.

You just can't be intoxicated.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
To compare:



And here's DUI:


***
For celerity, you could still go in and have a beer while carrying, just like you can have a beer and still legally drive.

You just can't be intoxicated.
Click to expand...
I think you're allowed to shoot one person per hour as long as you have a meal with you drink. :mrgreen:
 
Many, probably most people consider the unborn to be people. One of the cornerstones of Law in the Western World, is the protection of the weak and defenseless. The historically recent legalization of abortion is an aberration.

If law is not for the protection of the most vulnerable, then what good is it really? Better to return to the Rule of Strength, which at least has the benefit of improving the genetic stock.
 
Oftencold said:
Many, probably most people consider the unborn to be people. One of the cornerstones of Law in the Western World, is the protection of the weak and defenseless. The historically recent legalization of abortion is an aberration.

If law is not for the protection of the most vulnerable, then what good is it really? Better to return to the Rule of Strength, which at least has the benefit of improving the genetic stock.
Click to expand...

define most people.

There are a lot of people, including myself, who define the baby as a baby (or person) once it's formed a neural cortex / actually started developing.

I don't consider a clump of cancer that doesn't think a life... why should I consider another clump of cells that are dividing in a host's body a life?

I realize the ramifications of this rationale.. and I don't believe women should partake in late-term abortions... but it's not my choice to influence how they treat their bodies.

I hope I'm clear as mud. :p
 
The guns and bars topic was already beaten to death in another thread.

Bar owners can still post against CCW.
CCW guys with guns cannot legally drink unless they put their gun up.
CCW permit holders have an established record of being far FAR more law-abiding than Joe Average.
Scofflaws already enter bars with guns, AND drink.

Yes, guns and booze in the same person are a bad mix. This bill does not authorize that. It authorizes CCW permit holders to carry in a restaurant that serves alcohol, or a bar, IF the place isn't posted and IF they refrain from drinking. This should not increase drunken shootings one iota, since it isn't CCW holders who are engaging in drunken shootings NOW, to any significant degree.

I'm working towards this is my home state. We need it as SC does not distinguish between "restaurants that serve alcohol" and "bars" legally.

Getting hysterical about it is just as silly as the original hysteria that shall-issue CCW would mean Dodge City gunfights on every street. Didn't happen, and won't happen with this.
 
tlmorg02 said:
If you honestly believe that only DD's will carry guns into bars then you are naive.

Even bar owners do not want such a bill.
AZ May Allow Concealed Carry In Bars - WBAL Radio - wbal.com
Click to expand...

So what part of the following did you deliberately refuse to understand?

"The bill gives bars discretion to keep gun-toting patrons out, and anyone with a weapon would not be allowed to drink. But the bill has angered bar owners who believe booze and guns are a recipe for disaster."

So, let's see....bar owners can tell people, "Yo! Leave your guns outside," and beyond that, it's illegal for gun owners to carry both a drink and a gun.

So what's the complaint?

Oh, the complaint is that some people will bring guns into the bar.

What's stopping them from doing that now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom