S.308 (restaurant carry) debate from 4/17/13 - Page 7
Page 7 of 60 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 596

Thread: S.308 (restaurant carry) debate from 4/17/13

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The first state to secede!!!!
    Posts
    325
    Are these committee meetings open to the public?

  2.   
  3. #62
    I wouldn't favor a curfew but accept and support a restriction on drinking. Instead of a curfew on CCW, they should have a curfew on when the bar must close. If they are trying to keep guns away from drunks, they should instead try to keep drunks away from guns.

  4. #63
    Rumored to have passed out of committee: Blog

  5. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Real Gun View Post
    I wouldn't favor a curfew but accept and support a restriction on drinking. Instead of a curfew on CCW, they should have a curfew on when the bar must close. If they are trying to keep guns away from drunks, they should instead try to keep drunks away from guns.
    There already is a restriction on drinking.

    "(B) It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance to use a firearm in this State."

    More information:
    South Carolina Law Enforcement Division
    You can have good intentions and not be right.

  6. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigcarlover View Post
    There already is a restriction on drinking.

    "(B) It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance to use a firearm in this State."

    More information:
    South Carolina Law Enforcement Division
    Indeed. In addition to that, S 308 also made it illegal to carry a gun in a restaurant and drink alcohol. This still isn't enough for some anti-gunners, and in fact, some gun owners as well. It never ceases to amaze me how many people really want the government to tell them what to do and how to do it.

    Oh well. I don't think it really matters now until at least next year at about this time. I dare the House and Senate to prove me wrong.

  7. Quote Originally Posted by John Canuck View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigcarlover View Post
    There already is a restriction on drinking.

    "(B) It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance to use a firearm in this State."

    More information:
    South Carolina Law Enforcement Division
    Indeed. In addition to that, S 308 also made it illegal to carry a gun in a restaurant and drink alcohol. This still isn't enough for some anti-gunners, and in fact, some gun owners as well. It never ceases to amaze me how many people really want the government to tell them what to do and how to do it.

    Oh well. I don't think it really matters now until at least next year at about this time. I dare the House and Senate to prove me wrong.
    In 2009 approximately 35,000 people were killed by car accident. Of those, approximately 10-11,000 were caused by a drunk driver. In that same year 31-32,000 people were killed by a firearm. If you factor out the approximate 20,000ish suicides by guns that is included in that figure (simply because in most cases, had guns not existed those deaths would have most likely still occurred), you're left with between 11-14,000 gun deaths each by either homicide or accidental shooting. This tells me that, not including suicide, drunk drivers are killing people at almost the same rate as guns, and cars in general are killing people at triple the rate of guns.

    Yet you can drive to a restaurant, drink it up while you're there, and you haven't broken any laws until you get back in your car, and even then your likelihood of being caught isn't very high. With a gun, however, they won't even let you in the door whether you're going to drink or not? If these hearings are open to the public, I wanna hear someone make this argument please!

  8. Quote Originally Posted by John Canuck View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigcarlover View Post
    There already is a restriction on drinking.

    "(B) It is unlawful for a person who is under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance to use a firearm in this State."

    More information:
    South Carolina Law Enforcement Division
    Indeed. In addition to that, S 308 also made it illegal to carry a gun in a restaurant and drink alcohol. This still isn't enough for some anti-gunners, and in fact, some gun owners as well. It never ceases to amaze me how many people really want the government to tell them what to do and how to do it.

    Oh well. I don't think it really matters now until at least next year at about this time. I dare the House and Senate to prove me wrong.
    Is it even possible to make it past the House floor and then the Senate again by the deadline...assuming it goes as quickly as possible?

  9. #68
    Well, it's difficult to imagine it happening. S 308 needs to get two more readings in the House. Assuming no lengthy discussion takes place, the earliest I see a vote happening is Friday, although my money would be on next Tuesday. It's not on today's House Calendar.

    That means that the Senate would have until next Thusday to either concur with the changes, or to go through the conference committee / free conference procedure (I have no idea how long this takes, but I cannot imagine it being less than a few days). If the Senate drags their feet a little, the end of the session may come without any further progress.

    The question then will be, who is going to continue to support the two groups (perhaps more) that pushed for this change and effectively killed this bill.

    Again, I hope the Senate gets a move on and proves me wrong.


    An additional thought. Your comparison of drunk driver caused fatalities to gun fatalities (subtracting out suicides) is valid. Also of note is that the DOJ has stated that somewhere between 70-80% of all gun violence happens in 3% of the counties. These are areas of high gang activity.

    I know I have a copy of the document, but cannot find it right now. However, in concept, the majority of fatalities caused by guns are repeat criminals or young gang members (part of a criminal ennterprise so whether it's their first offense or not matters little) already committing other crimial acts. They have nothing to do with Joe Public and our day to day lives.

    Subtract out this number, and you have an even greater discrepency in numbers between impaired drivers and gun owners before they drink at all.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by John Canuck View Post
    Well, it's difficult to imagine it happening. S 308 needs to get two more readings in the House. Assuming no lengthy discussion takes place, the earliest I see a vote happening is Friday, although my money would be on next Tuesday. It's not on today's House Calendar.

    That means that the Senate would have until next Thusday to either concur with the changes, or to go through the conference committee / free conference procedure (I have no idea how long this takes, but I cannot imagine it being less than a few days). If the Senate drags their feet a little, the end of the session may come without any further progress.

    The question then will be, who is going to continue to support the two groups (perhaps more) that pushed for this change and effectively killed this bill.

    Again, I hope the Senate gets a move on and proves me wrong.


    An additional thought. Your comparison of drunk driver caused fatalities to gun fatalities (subtracting out suicides) is valid. Also of note is that the DOJ has stated that somewhere between 70-80% of all gun violence happens in 3% of the counties. These are areas of high gang activity.

    I know I have a copy of the document, but cannot find it right now. However, in concept, the majority of fatalities caused by guns are repeat criminals or young gang members (part of a criminal ennterprise so whether it's their first offense or not matters little) already committing other crimial acts. They have nothing to do with Joe Public and our day to day lives.

    Subtract out this number, and you have an even greater discrepency in numbers between impaired drivers and gun owners before they drink at all.
    Well to be fair I wanted to keep my number as liberal as possible. The only reason I subtracted out suicides is because the method in which they chose to take their own life is irrelevant to the act itself. Had guns not been available then it would have probably been a razor blade, OD, a rope, or possibly even a car.

    But I am unfamiliar with the process in which the senate will have to go through to concur with the house's changes. Is it lengthy or do they just do a single vote and be done with it?

  11. From my NRA bulletin:


    South Carolina: Self-Defense Bill Passes House Committee, Goes to House Floor for Vote
    Contact your state Representative in support of Senate Bill 308




    Yesterday, a critical self-defense bill, Senate Bill 308, passed in the House Judiciary Committee. S. 308, introduced by state Senator Sean Bennett (R-38), would remove the prohibition on a Concealed Weapon Permit (CWP) holder carrying a concealed firearm into a restaurant licensed to serve alcohol.

    Under S. 308, a CWP holder would still be prohibited from consuming alcohol while in the restaurant if he or she is carrying a concealed firearm for personal protection.

    S. 308 is now eligible for consideration on the House floor. With only a couple of weeks left in the 2013 legislative session, it is critical you contact your state Representative NOW and urge him or her to take up this important restaurant carry bill.

Page 7 of 60 FirstFirst ... 567891757 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast