Smoking is equally as legal. If the Sheriff came by and told her to quit smoking or asked her to leave because she had "deadly" cigarettes I be just as mad.
And what if there's a ban on smoking in the park?
Smoking is equally as legal. If the Sheriff came by and told her to quit smoking or asked her to leave because she had "deadly" cigarettes I be just as mad.
why is legislation against one okay - but against the other it's not?
Legislation is not ok for either one! Where did you get the idea that it was?
You're asking nonsmokers to stand up and actively fight for smokers. Do you see the problem here?
Sure you should have the choice and ability to smoke if you want. I support your right to do so. I'm not going to waste my time advocating against smoking bans other than voting "no" on a proposition to ban it. There are bigger fish to fry.
As for Hamilton I see your point, however the states rights advocates feared a strong central government.
So then why should you expect the same consideration when it comes to 2nd amendment rights?
I DON'T expect non gunnies to be passionate about the RKBA. I don't even expect them to be in favour of it at all. I hope they are, but definitely don't expect it.
As I said in my previous post, do you actively campaign for prostitution, and gay marriage? If not, well, then you're a pot calling the kettle black.
I DON'T expect non gunnies to be passionate about the RKBA. I don't even expect them to be in favour of it at all. I hope they are, but definitely don't expect it.
The entire point of this website is to spread the word about the RKBA, and to help keep it preserved. How would I be surprised at this 'revelation" that most people are fence sitters? The very reason I'm a member of this forum is to help educate and hopefully turn a few of these fence sitters to our side. I don't see what you're getting at, at all.
Well sir, you have more free time than I do, if you can actively campaign for so many things. Kudos to you.
You're asking nonsmokers to stand up and actively fight for smokers. Do you see the problem here?
There does seem to be a bit of a contradiction there...
Big difference between "working towards" and "expecting" something to happen. I'm a cynical bastard.
The LEO was completely out of line. I don't think that what this woman having her firearm out where people could see it was "being an arrogant/selfish prick" or in any way comparable to blowing smoke in people's faces. Aside from the fact that it's her right to carry openly, you don't even know if that was her intention...or how "open" it was...perhaps her shirt that was covering it rode up and exposed part of the holster, perhaps she had a coat on and removed it without thinking (since she was carrying legally). The fact is is that she was within the law and I'll bet that had the officer approached her and said something to the effect of "excuse me mam', I'm sorry to bother you, but your open carrying is making other parents/children nervous or scared, would you mind please covering it up?" she probably would have happily done so. It is completely absurd that people are so easily scared by the mere presence of a gun, especially in an oc/cc state. This woman in particular was at her kids soccer practice where the other parents likely were familiar with her at least on a level to know she wasn't a threat, it sounds like it was merely some catty, bitchy, woman **** going on.
you make a lot of assumptions there...
Great - so where's the line?
Marina Del Rey - you cannot even BUY a pack of cigarettes in the entire city. You can't smoke in public ANYWHERE - whether it's in a "special area" or not. Because you MIGHT harm someone with your 2nd hand smoke.
So - why not the same with guns?
If we want to apply that logic - then there is ABSOLUTELY no reason under that line of thinking that anyone should be allowed to carry a gun. If you can only exercise your right safely in certain environments, and public space is not one of those environments - then by simple logic there is no reason for you to carry your gun in public space, Unless it is to or from a designated area where you can use it.
This should be regularly included in most of these kind of cases. In most jurisdictions, perhaps all, malicious prosecution is a felony and should be filed as a criminal charge in the State courts.Meleanie Hain alleges in a suit filed in a Harrisburg federal court that Lebanon County Sheriff Michael DeLeo violated her Second Amendment rights and prosecuted her maliciously when he took away her permit in September... [emphasis mine] ..