Restaurant Carry Bill.??

John Canuck said:
I would also remember who was responsible in years past from keeping restaurant carry from getting out of committee, and who his enablers were.
Click to expand...

this is where "we" drop the ball.

please make the list, remember i have CRS. if the nation had their lists, dem and rep, it would help us remember who did what. personally i think these kinds of bills are being put off till the election years. thats when it will pass in some form(silver bullets) and the aholes that have heald it up will claim to be heros, to get reelected.

as ive said before, this would scare the hell out of them. "vote out every incumbant for the next 20 years"
 
I will be reminding restaurants here in rock hill need to get on board and help pass this. until it passes they will be losing business to NC restaurants
 
Nothing will happen until the General Assembly reconvenes in January. That's when we need to be sure our representatives are on board to support this.
 
Looks like Senator Scott is playing delaying games. He has proposed three amendments and it looks like the first two were rejected. I don't know the status of the third yet.
 
Good news, I think...
I also didn't follow along today. I was so annoyed (I chose this word to not be too obnoxious) with the useless diatribe by Sen. Scott and others that I just turned it off for today.
Let's hope for a quick trip back through the House and on to the Governor.
 
Post and Courier is reporting that it should sail through the house with no issues --- and get signed by Haley.

I would have liked to have seen the language preventing someone carrying from having ANY alcohol whatsoever stricken from the bill. I lived in Florida for many years, and having a beer with your dinner was never a problem while carrying. Granted --- guns and alcohol don't mix --- but, I like to think that most people can be adults about it and understand where to draw the line. Like I said --- never a problem in all of my years living in a state that allowed it.
 
BATFE = choose only two? :lol:

well, not really:

alcohol + tobacco OK
alcohol + firearms X
alcohol + explosives X
tobacco + firearms OK (except reloading...)
tobacco + explosives X
firearms + explosives OK

Personally, I'm OK with the alcohol and time limit provisions (c'mon, if you're going to a restaurant serving alcohol after 12, you're just going to a bar) but I get where you're coming from.

How did the amendments/language to change the 2-year misdemeanors into 1-year, so you don't forever lose your 2A rights if you make a carry mistake... come out? Are they in the bill as presented or were they quashed last year?
 
I think time limits are a joke as I work in a restaurant and sometimes don't leave until after midnight..so once midnight came around I'd be breaking the law...also being 205lbs...it takes 3+ liquor drinks (maybe 2 on empty stomach) to get a buzz...if I wanted to have a glass if wine with my meal that's not ok...
 
If you are *working* in a restaurant you should have permission from your employer, and then time limits do not matter as you're on private property with the permission of the owner.

I know I'm not a moderate on the alcohol issue - I'd prefer European limits on driving too (any BAC, tested by blood draw so no mouthwash errors) and many other activities. Spent a long time in the USAF with a no-drinking-12-hours-prior order, with only 8 hours crew rest (ie, no drinking except on your days off) and seen too many friends die from DUI accidents, both sides. I'm not a non-drinker, but I can see it from where I live. :)

Regardless, it should only come into effect as an add-on charge. IE, you shoot someone, the courts/police make a judgment as to whether it was justified self-defense or not. If not, then the alcohol question should come into play. If it's justified, it's justified, and I remember an exception for that somewhere.
 
HA!

I love these clowns. "Veto this anti-buisness bill!" Wait a minute. Let me process this here.

These clowns want Haley to veto a bill which gives business owners the choice to allow or disallow (by way of a IMO redundant provision specifically notings owners can post a sign in accordance with the law) folks carrying in their establishment. It gives buisness owners a choice. It removes a lack of choice. But the bill is the anti-buisness entity here?

Dowut?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Random media

1B5F406D-4444-4575-97F8-4170CAF96768.jpeg
1725504928272.png
IMG_3298.JPG
1704293056973.jpeg
Springfield 9mm - 002.JPG
1911-6-1024x604.jpg
IMG_1605.JPG
Back
Top