Naifeh Update
Update: The bill was killed in subcommittee. Naifeh won. How do we get this guy impeached?
Naifeh on the guns in bars bill:
I will do all I can to stop this bill
And that includes cheating to get what he wants. Also, Espo takes the KNS to task for leaving out the, you know, actual important part of the story.
Bill Hobbs, who also has a good round up, says:
Everyone at WSMV involved in producing their story last night should be ashamed. They produced an inaccurate, false and biased report. The truth is out there, thanks to blogs – but no thanks to WSMV.
Yes, they should be.
Update: The TFA is on the story too.
May 4th, 2005 at 2:28 pm
Okay, Uncle, you know damned well I support gun rights, but (i know, you ought not add “but” to any discussion of rights) I can’t get worked up about what seems to me a reasonable bright-line rule that you can’t have guns in a bar. Yes it is over inclusive, but no more overinclusive than a ban, say, on guns in the Courtroom.
Let me know if Im wron here but I dont see it.
(Procedural irregularites ought not be frogiven, but the substance of it)
May 4th, 2005 at 2:32 pm
I myself am not too happy about the law. But essentially the current law states that no guns can be taken any place that serves alcohol (even family restaraunts that serve it) for on-site consumption (used to read any place that sells alcohol, so your trip to the Kwik E Mart meant you couldn’t pack). This change would state that if you’re not drinking, you can carry into a place that serves alcohol. The benefit of this law (to me) is that fewer guns will be stolen out of parked cars.
I personally think that the law should be similar to drunk driving in that if you are drunk and pack, you go to jail. As the law is, I can go out and get hammered then walk down the street with a gun in my pocket. I think that’s crazy.
I’m actually more concerned about the speaker of the house cheating to win.
May 4th, 2005 at 3:52 pm
Forget about impeaching him.
Tennessee has no recall provisions in it’s election law, and he did not commit a felony.
Unless he gets hit accidentally with a low flying safe, you are stuck with him.
May 4th, 2005 at 4:00 pm
Loosely interpreted, article 1, section 1 of the state constitution:
Could mean we have the right to get rid of all of ’em 🙂