So bar entry to police and armed security guards as well?Craven Moorehead wrote:This is just my opinion on the bar/51%. I've been to many bars, saloons,pubs, taverns, and clubs through my life. Not all but many I've seen people with issues after they have had a few drinks. People that normally wouldn't hurt a flea. But after they get a few drinks under their belts their personalities take a change for the worse. Anyone that goes into bars on a regular basis knows the type. And it happens to both genders. So I guess you can tell where my thoughts are on the subject. It's like an accident waiting to happen. I would leave that part of the current law alone. If I where a bar owner I would have a sign posted not allowing firearms regardless of the law. The liability for serving drunk drivers is bad enough. I wouldn't want to add drunk shooters to the mix. This is a common sense issue as I see it. IMHO I agree that this bill would move faster if that part of the current law was left in and I'm about as pro gun as you can get.
Search found 2 matches
- Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:42 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: HB308
- Replies: 230
- Views: 95232
Re: HB308
- Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:30 am
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: HB308
- Replies: 230
- Views: 95232
Re: HB308
So if bars were allowed by this bill, what happens to 51%?
I also feel like the whole bar thing is an unnecessary redundancy as its already against the law to be intoxicated while carrying.
I also feel like the whole bar thing is an unnecessary redundancy as its already against the law to be intoxicated while carrying.