|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
SC: Officials Fear Open Carry Gun Law Could Impact Grand Strand’s Image
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://libertyparkpress.com
|
There
are 3 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A bill that supporters argue would strengthen Second Amendment rights could be a disaster for the image of the Grand Strand, officials in multiple jurisdictions said.
On Tuesday, Myrtle Beach Police Chief Warren Gall said a measure under consideration in the general assembly could make law enforcement’s job more difficult, because it would be legal to carry a weapon openly as long as a user doesn’t intend to use it for an unlawful purpose. But police can only prove someone intended to use a gun unlawfully after a crime has occurred, he said. |
| Comment by:
netsyscon
(5/1/2017)
|
| Duh, that is the way crime happens, and it does now. So what changes? |
| Comment by:
dasing
(5/1/2017)
|
| If people don't intend to use a firearm unlawfuly what is the problem. Isn't that how the law works, innocent until proven guilty, you can't judge a person until they have broken the law?!! |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/1/2017)
|
"But police can only prove someone intended to use a gun unlawfully after a crime has occurred, he said."
Sorry, bud. That's the way liberty works. That argument is used in every attempt to defeat the Doctrine of Prior Restraint, and it fails every single time because constitutionally, the government can't broadly attenuate fundamental rights based on the presumption that they MAY be used to commit crimes.
Rehashing this issue is a waste of time, and those who continue to do so should be told to shaddup and siddown. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
