FLMason
Regular Member
imported post
Will be coming to SC did the restaurant carry bill pass ? thanks
Will be coming to SC did the restaurant carry bill pass ? thanks
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
School/Restaurant Carry....
- Thread starter 340mopar
- Start date
hp-hobo
Regular Member
imported post
FLMason wrote:
FLMason wrote:
Nope, not yet.
Robert Butler
Regular Member
imported post
PT111 wrote:
GrassRoots is supporting this bill. In fact, GrassRoots drafted this bill.
GrassRoots supports all pro gun bills - period.
GrassRoots does not support bills that give away some rights in order to get other rights.
Rob
PT111 wrote:
While GrassRoots would like to see all of our rights restored in one fell swoop, we recognize that such is probably never going to happen. So, yes, GrassRoots has, does, and will continue to support incremental victories if that is the best we can get.
GrassRoots is supporting this bill. In fact, GrassRoots drafted this bill.
GrassRoots supports all pro gun bills - period.
GrassRoots does not support bills that give away some rights in order to get other rights.
Rob
Robert Butler
Regular Member
imported post
PT111 wrote:
GrassRoots has wanted to get pro gun bills introduced in the Senate for years. The problem is that there have not been any senators willing to introduce and fight for pro gun bills.
With the election of Sen. Shane Martin in 2008, we finally have a pro gun senator who will introduce pro gun legislation. Interestingly, during the Republican primaries in 2008, the NRA supported the incumbent who had never introduced or co-sponsored a pro gun bill while GrassRoots supported the pro gun challenger Shane Martin.
If the "A no compromise attitude is not going to work here" comment is directed at GrassRoots, it is misplaced. The only reason this bill was introduced is because GrassRoots helped get Sen. Martin elected. And, GrassRoots drafted this bill for Sen. Martin to introduce.
Rob
PT111 wrote:
GrassRoots has wanted to get pro gun bills introduced in the Senate for years. The problem is that there have not been any senators willing to introduce and fight for pro gun bills.
With the election of Sen. Shane Martin in 2008, we finally have a pro gun senator who will introduce pro gun legislation. Interestingly, during the Republican primaries in 2008, the NRA supported the incumbent who had never introduced or co-sponsored a pro gun bill while GrassRoots supported the pro gun challenger Shane Martin.
If the "A no compromise attitude is not going to work here" comment is directed at GrassRoots, it is misplaced. The only reason this bill was introduced is because GrassRoots helped get Sen. Martin elected. And, GrassRoots drafted this bill for Sen. Martin to introduce.
Rob
Robert Butler
Regular Member
imported post
AllAmerican wrote:
When I point out that H. 3003 only incorporates half of the language from a section of law being moved, and that the entire section of law needs to be moved to give us the same protections we have now, a half way intelligent person would see that the "alternative language" you keep demanding to see is simply to incorporate the entire section of law being moved instead of only half of the section of law being moved.
So, you have already been provided what you have asked for, you just are not capable of seeing it because of your dislike of me.
Your statement about GrassRoots leadership not wanting open carry is wrong at best and a lie at worst. It gets tiresome listening to people like you making false claims that GrassRoots leadership does not support open carry when we have specifically stated we do support it, while listening to others claiming GrassRoots leadership is too extreme because we support Vermont carry and an elimination of virtually all "gun free" zones and all mandatory training as a prerequisite for carrying a firearm.
Rob
AllAmerican wrote:
I wish you were smart enough to understand what I wrote, but I guess that is asking too much.
When I point out that H. 3003 only incorporates half of the language from a section of law being moved, and that the entire section of law needs to be moved to give us the same protections we have now, a half way intelligent person would see that the "alternative language" you keep demanding to see is simply to incorporate the entire section of law being moved instead of only half of the section of law being moved.
So, you have already been provided what you have asked for, you just are not capable of seeing it because of your dislike of me.
Your statement about GrassRoots leadership not wanting open carry is wrong at best and a lie at worst. It gets tiresome listening to people like you making false claims that GrassRoots leadership does not support open carry when we have specifically stated we do support it, while listening to others claiming GrassRoots leadership is too extreme because we support Vermont carry and an elimination of virtually all "gun free" zones and all mandatory training as a prerequisite for carrying a firearm.
Rob
Hef
Regular Member
imported post
Robert Butler wrote:
Robert Butler wrote:
That's funny. I recall asking for support from Grassroots a couple years ago to get 16-23-465 amended to permit restaurant owners, managers, and licensed employees with permission to be exempted. That would have been an incremental victory. Grassroots told me they weren't interested.
hp-hobo
Regular Member
imported post
Robert Butler wrote:
I think your point would be much better made if you refrained from the ad hominem attacks and strawmen. They serve no valid purpose andmake everyone involved look unprofessional. As the Vice President of GRGR you represent all of the organization's members. As one of the few active GRGR members I personally don't appreciate anyone who casts a negative shadow on the group as a whole, especially when they're ina leadership position. I have told you this before on the GRGR "forum", but you chose to ignore me then, so I expect the same now.
Besides, if this was so important to you, why didn't you respond over six months ago?
Robert Butler wrote:
I think your point would be much better made if you refrained from the ad hominem attacks and strawmen. They serve no valid purpose andmake everyone involved look unprofessional. As the Vice President of GRGR you represent all of the organization's members. As one of the few active GRGR members I personally don't appreciate anyone who casts a negative shadow on the group as a whole, especially when they're ina leadership position. I have told you this before on the GRGR "forum", but you chose to ignore me then, so I expect the same now.
Besides, if this was so important to you, why didn't you respond over six months ago?