Skip to comments.Louisiana; Last State to Remove Ban on Legal Gun Carriers Eating in Some Restaurants
Posted on 05/17/2014 3:17:35 AM PDT by marktwain
It appears that Louisiana will be the last state to allow people with gun permits to eat in the same restaurants as less law abiding members of society. New York, California, and Massachusetts, those staunch promoters of restrictive firearms law, have never barred the practice, nor have they had any of the problems imaginatively projected for southern states that have recently reformed their law, such as North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
The states show considerable variation in those laws. Laws in highly restrictive states, such as New York and New Jersey, do not have any restriction on permit holders drinking while they are carrying. States such as Arizona and Tennessee do not allow permit holders to carry in restaurants and consume alcohol while doing so.
Arizona, Alaska, New Mexico, and South Carolina require the firearms to be carried concealed; Montana requires that they be carried openly.
This article in the Washington Post does not mention that legal carrying in restaurants that serve alcohol has been the norm in most of the nation for decades. The writer may be ignorant of the fact that it has always been the law in the restrictive North Eastern states.
The comments indicate similar ignorance from many readers. They excoriate the "South" for instituting policies that the Northeast has followed for generations.
"Thank God I fled the Deep South, America's armpit"
No, it's armpit is West Virginia. The South is its butthole.
Ah, the tolerant and inclusive crowd have arrived.
That’s good news. I think it’s been fewer than five years since Virginia (of all states!) has allowed carrying in restaurants that serve alcohol. They still do not allow drinking while in these restaurants, which I consider to be a reasonable restriction.
Texas has the 51% restriction.
The public policies here are different, and the article deliberately misses that. Would you want to live in a State that trusts 80 % of its people 80% of the time (LA), or one that trust 5% of its people 95% of the time (NY, NJ, CA)?.
Yes, the states that you mention tend to issue permits to those that are politically connected, celebrities, the local elites, politicians, and retired police.
There is no evidence that those people are *any* more responsible than those who get permits in “shall issue” states.
There certainly is anecdotal evidence that because they believe themselves to be in favored status, they are sometimes less responsible.
Concealed means concealed.
What other folks don’t know or can’t see, won’t matter IF it stays concealed. Yeah, I know; it’s the law.
Sorry NYFriend, TRUST has nothing to do with it.
Keep your facts straight.
NYC, Westchester, Rockland and LI Counties are infected by the Sullivan gun laws, don’t issue concealed carry unless you are deemed “worthy” by some d-bag judge. Oh, if you are connected, rich or otherwise “more deserving”, you get one too.
Everyone else, and this is only very recently occurring, gets target/home use only.
If you live far enough away from “The Peoples Republic of NYC” you are treated as an individual, as a person, as a constitutionally recognized member of this republic. You are issued a carry permit if you have a history clean of criminality.
Dutchess, Orange and counties north are part of the United States with a respected 2nd amendment.
It ain’t trust my friend, it’s exclusionary politics.
Oh, BTW, guess which counties are growing the fastest in NY State? It has to do with freedom-seeking people searching for room to grow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.