Merlinspop said:
Yeah, I hear you and again, agree mostly. To take the specter of race out of it and give a topical example with a much larger segment of the population than CCW folks... take the recent spat of states enacting no smoking laws. In this case, business owners (mostly bars) are arguing that the law forces them to exclude customers. To deaf ears, of course.
A good point... but even that, there are valid arguments in both directions. Health risks from second hand smoke are fairly substantial, and smoking sections do little to actually contain the smoke. Of course, there are plenty of chain restaurants that don't allow smoking of their own accord, so you could go there instead and just leave it up to the establishments.
But most drinkers will want to smoke, so most bars will have smoking if left to their own devices... now what if I want a drink, should I have to endure smoke?
At the same rate... drinking is known to be bad for your health; so it's okay to get drunk, causing liver and stomach problems, and possibly get in your car, risking every one's lives and drive home... but it's not okay for someone to have a smoke with their beer?
It's a tough one, and I personally am unclear on where I'd draw the line between the business owner's right to run their business as they wish, and ensuring everyone has the same basic services available to them.
As far as the smoking issue goes; drinking and driving is illegal, so there SHOULDN'T be any effect on others by my having a drink. But if you're sitting next to me smoking, my health is being effected. I spent a little time in CA after they put the smoking ban into affect; I don't think the bars have a valid argument on banning smoking hurting their business. Everyone would be in the same boat, and people to go bars to have a drink and socialize, not smoke; the main driving factors are still there... they just have to step outside into the smoker's area now. Personally, I can deal with the smoking; I don't go to bars that often, and smoking has taken a downturn in the last decade or more. But I don't think the bars have a good argument on this one.
Of course, does anyone have a good argument on why you shouldn't be allowed to carry at a gun show? I would personally think, that's the LAST place someone would try doing something more stupid than normal. Of course when it comes right down to brass tacks... Other than Government buildings and airplanes/airports how many off limits locations really make sense? Someone hell bent on laying waste to 30 kids isn't going to get a CPL so he can get his pistol into the school. He'll just walk in and go to town. However, someone with ill-intentions (read: home-grown terrorist) could in theory, obtain a CPL allowing them to carry in gov. buildings (if they were not off-limits) which otherwise may have metal detectors at security check points stopping or at least slowing them down.
In the end, you could debate with pretty good effectiveness either for or against most of the more common laws pertaining to firearms which are
currently on the books. Which I believe is why national gun control laws really have changed very little in the last 20+ years (Even the AWB was nothing more than smoke and mirrors for the most part). It's at a point now where the common sense legislation has gone about as far as it's going to go; the vast majority of the population feel laws are fine as-is.
Okay, I'm going to stop rambling and bordering on hi-jacking this thread!
