|
|
|
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:
AK: Alaska Senate Passes Campus Carry for ‘Firearms, Knives’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
On April 7 the Alaska Senate passed campus carry legislation that also allows persons with concealed carry licenses to carry their firearms in dormitories.
The legislation–Senate Bill 174–passed by a vote of 13 to 5.
According to KTVA, SB 174 takes aim at the University of Alaska’s anti-gun policies. Bill sponsor senator Pete Kelly (R-Dist. A), said, “The policy of the University of Alaska is to say, OK, concealed carry is available to the rest of the state, but not on our campus. And for them to do that, they do it in a manner to achieve, they have said, the safety, it’s a safety issue with them. But of course we have seen that declaring an area a gun free zone and achieving safety are not connected in any way.” |
| Comment by:
stevelync
(4/10/2016)
|
| It's about time. If they are going to take public money, then they need to live within the laws that the public lives in. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
