Arrogance is in the eye of the gunholder
Which is more arrogant: A governor exercising a right that is granted to him by the state constitution, or someone insulting him for doing so? I accept that Tennessee Firearms Association executive director John Harris isn’t pleased that Governor Phil Bredesen vetoed the guns-in-restaurants bill yesterday, but I think describing the governor’s veto as “futile” and “arrogant” is silly.
The General Assembly has every right to override the governor, but I’ll be curious to see whether it actually does. Though the bills were far less controversial, the legislature declined to override Bredesen’s five previous vetoes.
In my opinion, this is a bad bill that makes Tennessee less safe and creates opportunities for more loss of life, not less. Now that the governor has said the same, I hope members of the General Assembly will agree.
May 29th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
I can understand one’s concern about this bill, but I think it is more of a 2nd Amendment issue than it is a “gun in a place where they serve liquor” issue.
Georgia has a law that is very similar, and studies have shown the bill allowing firearms in such establishments has not caused a spike in violence.
This bill allows permit holding people to carry those handguns into restaurants like O’Charley’s, Logan’s, etc…I think everyone has a vision of this being people carrying guns in a bar, and shooting the place up, when my opinion is the bill was made for just the opposite reasons.
May 29th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Thanks for commenting, John. I hope that, if the bill is passed, it will somehow make things safer, but I’m skeptical. I expect that most legitimate gun owners have good intentions about being able to defend themselves and others, but I’m concerned about how things will play out in practice if this bill becomes law.