|
|
|
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:
Uber Bans Drivers From Carrying Guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Uber drivers can no longer carry guns while on duty, according to a new policy rolled out this month.
The San Francisco–based company said Friday it has banned all firearms in cars providing rides through its app, the Associated Press reported. The new policy, which went into effect June 10, also applies to Uber affiliates and replaces a practice of deferring to local laws. |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(6/20/2015)
|
Good luck with that one.
Two things will now happen:
1) UBER drivers will ignore the policy, or
2) Many UBER drivers will simply quit. |
| Comment by:
stevelync
(6/21/2015)
|
| I won't bother giving my money to Uber. Regular ol' taxis have worked just fine for me when I've needed one. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
