|
|
|
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:
FL: Legislators ignore campus concerns about guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It's an image that pretty much sums up the way business is done in the Florida Legislature, where a picture is worth a thousand shrugs.
To no one's surprise, last week the Senate Higher Education Committee cavalierly approved a measure to permit the carrying of concealed weapons on the state's public university campuses. As back-room deals go, this fix was more preordained than the Black Sox scandal.
|
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(3/21/2015)
|
The "campus concerns" are based upon thin air, completely unsubstantiated.
Since there is no evidence whatsoever that the campuses that allow licensed carry have produced the projected imagined detrimental issues, there is no "compelling interest" to attenuate a natural right of the people.
And per the strict scrutiny rules that govern the attenuation of core rights, the opposition's arguments don't pass constitutional muster. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
