|
|
|
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: After Dylann Roof, S.C. could loosen gun laws
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The bills were crafted to not curtail the rights of legal, responsible gun owners, only to make it harder for those who shouldn’t possess such weapons. But they did not meet the General Assembly’s annual crossover deadline, meaning no new law is possible this session. Besides, Gov. Henry McMaster had not signaled whether he would sign it.
What did make it in time to be considered for passage this year? A bill that would make it legal for residents to carry guns – concealed or openly – without a permit or training. It passed the House and is being considered in the Senate this week. McMaster said he would sign it if it reaches his desk. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(4/18/2017)
|
| And the problem is.....? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
