| Author | Post |
|---|
FLMason
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 21st, 2009 06:14 pm |
|
| Will be coming to SC did the restaurant carry bill pass ? thanks
|
hp-hobo
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 21st, 2009 06:45 pm |
|
FLMason wrote: Will be coming to SC did the restaurant carry bill pass ? thanks
Nope, not yet.
|
Robert Butler
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27th, 2009 10:32 pm |
|
PT111 wrote: GrassRoots Position: GrassRoots strongly supports this bill.
I am suprised they are supporting this bill as normally they do not support a limited action bill such as this.
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
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27th, 2009 10:42 pm |
|
PT111 wrote: The interesting thing about this bill is that it was introduced in the Senate rather than the House.
...
A no compromise attitude is not going to work here.
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
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27th, 2009 11:03 pm |
|
AllAmerican wrote: The answer is that GRGR needs to get its "leader" of his ass and write the language as it should be. But he wont because GRGR is geared toward the CWP crowd even if they will not admit it.
The reason they support this bill is because it is specific to CWP.
There will not be alternative language on H3003 because the "leadership" doesnt want open carry.
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
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28th, 2009 12:30 am |
|
Robert Butler wrote: So, yes, GrassRoots has, does, and will continue to support incremental victories if that is the best we can get.
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
|
Posted: Fri Aug 28th, 2009 01:17 am |
|
Robert Butler wrote: ...I wish you were smart enough to understand what I wrote, but I guess that is asking too much...
...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...
Rob
I think your point would be much better made if you refrained from the ad hominem attacks and strawmen. They serve no valid purpose and make 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 in a 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?
|
dadpharm
Regular Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 6th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 7th, 2009 05:07 am |
|
| Ok, Ok bottom line can a restaurant carry bill become law in 2010/ thanks
|
Current time is 06:44 pm | Page:   1 2 |
|
