Charleston City Council might want to re-think that decision to not hire extra police for the downtown “entertainment district.”
Apparently it's more dangerous down there than we think.
The state Legislature, in a fit of shameless pandering, is trying to pass a law that would let civilians carry guns into restaurants and bars — because there could be bad guys lurking in them.
The lawmakers pushing this return to the Wild West say they want to give more freedom to the “good guys.” They argue that allowing holders of concealed-weapons permits more latitude to pack heat would cut down on crime. You know, so regular folk could stop robberies and the like.
Yeah, nothing could go wrong with that.
There is even a debate within the debate over whether to allow these people carrying guns to actually drink while they are in the bars.
Well, what else would they do in a bar?
Makes you wonder what they're drinking at the Statehouse.
Locked and loaded
Ever since the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, this country has gone gun nutty. Little surprise that South Carolina is leading the way.
In addition to the guns-in-bars bill, lawmakers also are moving legislation that would allow state residents to keep any gun they now legally own, no matter what the federal government says. State Sen. Tom Corbin, a Republican from Greenville, says this measure is designed to protect the “unorganized militia's” weaponry. In case the governor declares war on somebody.
“It's not the gun's fault, it's never the gun's fault,” Corbin says. Yeah, but the Colorado movie theater guy probably couldn't have taken out a dozen people with a butter knife.
Aside from the fact that this proposal is a tad unconstitutional, the question is: When are we going to need an unorganized militia — emphasis on “unorganized”? If we take on the federal government again, all the guns in the state would be no match for the U.S. military.
Guess we'd better legalize the right to bear nukes.
We didn't need any more examples of how dangerous the world is when a woman who shouldn't have had a gun allegedly used one to threaten Ashley Hall school officials last week.
U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, like many gun-control opponents, has argued that we don't need new laws, we simply need to enforce the laws we have. Then this woman might not have gotten a gun.
Well, that cuts both ways. If we don't need more laws to control guns, we certainly don't need more to make them easier to haul around. If an unstable person can get a gun, what's to say they can't get a concealed-weapons permit?
Even some gun owners think this is dangerous. The cops do too. Look, the Second Amendment is safe; we don't need this.
You know, gun-control opponents say that any new gun law is a “slippery slope” to more gun laws. Well, this idea is just a slippery slope to the “Death Wish” movies.
Unfortunately, there are a lot more Charlie Browns than Charlie Bronsons out there.
Reach Brian Hicks at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.