|
|
|
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:
Regal Theaters Checking Purses, Bags to Ensure Law-Abiding Citizens Unarmed
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Regal theaters have said, “backpacks and bags of any kind” will be subject to searches for theater goers’ safety. At the same time, The Wrap reports the theater chain admits their policy “is not without flaws.”
Of course, those “flaws” will result in law-abiding citizens paying a price for being unarmed—a price that those denying the exercise of Second Amendment rights are largely immune from paying.
But this is the path society goes down when businesses begin denying the natural rights of their patrons. First, they deny the rights of law-abiding citizens and then, when criminals ignore the denial, they punish law-abiding citizens by searching their purses, their bags, and their backpacks. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(8/20/2015)
|
| I suspect the teens entrusted with this task by Regal will soon tire of being harassed by whatever patronage continues to show up. More likely these kids will be tasked to purloin the healthy snacks and juices thoughtful parents and kids put in "diaper bags", backpacks, etc thus avoiding the theater chain's "high-profit" concessions. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
