A hundred new jobs and another
company headquarters in the county? Yes, please.
News this week that gunmaker PTR
Industries is considering Horry County as it gets ready to leave Connecticut is exciting news for our area,
which is recovering from the recession, but not as quickly as we would like.
Dozens of new well-paying jobs (averaging $20-21 an hour) would be a noticeable
and welcome boost to our area.
Thursday’s editorial wades into the
national debate on gun control in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., school
shooting, offering what we hope are some common sense thoughts on the
hot-button issue:
Let’s get one thing straight, right
off the bat. Nobody’s seriously talking about getting rid of all of the nation’s
guns, at least nobody who’s spent more than a scintilla of time looking at the
issue of gun violence in our country.
The horrific, senseless violence
visited last week upon the innocent children of Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn.,
defies easy answers. Yet confronted with tragedy such as this, two questions
naturally follow: Why did it happen, and how to we keep it from happening
again?
Thursday’s editorial gives you the facts and the arguments on the concealed carry legislation up for consideration in Columbia and encourages you to make up your own mind on the topic:
Bubbling slowly but steadily on the legislative stove this session has been the proposal to drastically expand the state’s concealed carry laws. One in 27 adults in South Carolina now has a concealed carry permit, and it’s a change that would have far-reaching effects in our state.
The bill (H. 3292) is currently in the House Judiciary Committee, where it has been since January, though it moved from a subcommittee to the full committee in February. Legislative watchers say there’s still a good chance the bill will move forward this session, although that likelihood diminishes with each passing day. Law enforcement agencies have been mostly against the idea, with the notable exception of the current director of the State Law Enforcement Division. Those for the change have largely been traditional gun rights advocates and firearms organizations.
Wednesday’s editorial highlights the tragedy behind Mylissa Bellamy’s project and the good work she does:
The pain of a life-changing tragedy is evident in Mylissa Bellamy’s voice as she tells a group about The Matthew Bellamy Project – a gun safety program that offers free gun locks to anyone as part of an appeal to adults for responsible unloading and storing of firearms. Her story begins with the accidental death of 11-year-old Matthew Kenneth Bellamy, the younger son of Mylissa and Chip Bellamy of Little River.
Thursday’s lead editorial suggests that Georgetown schools have too many challenges
already to be distracted by the concealed-weapons issue.
Aside from law enforcement
officers, does anyone really have a valid reason to carry a gun onto a school
campus?
Yes, the S.C. General Assembly has
apparently decided, based on a law enacted in June. People who have concealed
weapons permits – in other words, people older than 21 who pass a safety course
and a criminal background check – should not be penalized by having to leave
those guns at home. Permit holders are said to pose no threat to students, so
when they lock their guns in a car's glove compartment or trunk, the new law
says they can bring them onto school property without fear of prosecution.
From the Second Amendment Foundation ... The gun rights interest group interprets the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision Thursday in the District of Columbia v. Heller case:
BELLEVUE, WA – With this morning’s ruling on the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, America has begun “its long march back toward liberty under a Second Amendment that means what it says,” the Second Amendment Foundation said.
“Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court should forever put to rest any contention that the right to keep and bear arms is not a fundamental, individual civil right,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb. “For six decades, anti-gun rights extremists have engaged in a monumental fraud that has been unfortunately perpetuated by activist judges who erroneously insisted that the right to keep and bear arms applies only to service in a militia.
From the afternoon e-mail ... Paul Helmki, president of the Brady Center and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violenace, said the following about the Supreme Court's decision Thursday in the District of Columbia gun-ban case:
“Our fight to enact sensible gun laws will be undiminished by the Supreme Court’s decision in the Heller case. While we disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling, which strips the citizens of the District of Columbia of a law they strongly support, the decision clearly suggests that other gun laws are entirely consistent with the Constitution.
“For years, the gun lobby has used fear of government gun confiscation to thwart efforts to pass sensible gun laws, arguing that even modest gun laws will lead down the path to a complete ban on gun ownership. Now that the Court has struck down the District’s ban on handguns, while making it clear that the Constitution allows for reasonable restrictions on access to dangerous weapons, this ‘slippery slope’ argument is gone.
Ripped from the wires ... Texas writer Rowland Nethaway explains what the 2nd Amendment dispute now before the U.S. Supreme Court for resolution is all about.
By ROWLAND NETHAWAY
WACO, Texas -- The U.S. Supreme Court should allow Dick Heller to keep a handgun in his home. Dick Anthony Heller is a 66-year-old security guard who carries a handgun to protect the employees and property at the federal building where he works in Washington, D.C.
Because Heller also is a resident of the District of Columbia, he is prohibited from having a handgun in his home for self-protection.
Heller sued to overturn Washington's 1976 gun-control law that also requires all rifles or shotguns in D.C. homes to be disassembled or kept under trigger lock. Heller sued claiming that the D.C. law violated his Second Amendment rights.
Recent Comments