View Article
26
A legislator looked at a bill, winched, looked at another legislator and said, ‘Well, if I don’t vote for it I guess I’ll land in a primary.’
 
‘You think,’ the second legislator said, ‘that Republicans in your district are for people carrying guns in bars?’ The bill allowed people carry guns in bars, restaurants and on college campuses (as long as the gun is in a locked box).
 
‘Looking at the emails I’m getting,’ the first legislator said, ‘I’d say they do.’
 
‘How many emails are you talking about?’
 
‘Over a hundred.’
 
‘And how many Republican voters are in your district?’
 
‘About 20,000.’
 
‘So, because you got a hundred emails, you think you’re hearing the voice of 20,000 Republicans saying they support people carrying pistols in bars?’
 
The first legislator bristled. ‘You think that’s wrong?’
 
‘I think if you want to know what voters think you should take a poll.’
 
The first legislator, his mind made up, scratched his head. ‘You ever try that?’
 
‘Yep.’
 
‘What did it show?’
 
‘It said Republican voters have more common sense than legislators give them credit for.’
 
Actions: E-mail | Permalink | Comments (10) RSS comment feed |

Comments

dap916
# dap916
Friday, April 26, 2013 5:59 PM
I know that your post here, Carter, is more about what our politicians do to remain in office than it is about the actual topic of "guns in bars". But, I would like to speak to the "guns in bars" issue anyway.

I am a concealed carry holder and have been for a while now. People that are sanctioned to carry concealed weapons are NOT allowed to carry concealed handguns in bars and are ABSOLUTELY not allowed to have a concealed handgun on their person or anywhere else concealed (such as in a car glove box) if they are intoxicated. It's NC law and, IMHO, it's a good law. I served for eight years in the military and served a year in a war zone and have been to more military bases and NCO/officer's clubs than I care to mention. Weapons on those bases and anywhere within the military complexes that serve alcohol is not allowed. It's just good policy. If you've spent as much time around drunks as I have, you'd know why that is true. This is bad legislation. Current law is good law. No need to change it.
clarence swinney
# clarence swinney
Saturday, April 27, 2013 10:15 AM
JOBS PER YEAR
Clinton-2,900,000
Carter---2,600.000
Johnson-2,300.000
Reagan--2,000,000
Nixon----1,700,000
Kennedy-1,200,000
Truman---1,100,000
Ford---------745,000
Eisenhower-438,000
GhwBush---625.000
GW Bush---375,000
clarence swinney
# clarence swinney
Sunday, April 28, 2013 12:12 PM
DEBT INCREASE/DECREASE
% OF GDP BY TERM

INCREASE
GwBush-+7.1%--+20%
GhwBush-+ 15%
Reagan-+11.3%--+9.3%
Nixon2/Nixon Ford--+0.2%

DECREASE
Roosevelt/Truman---24.4%
Truman—21.7%
Eisenhower—11%—5.2%
Kennedy/Johnson—8.3%
Johnson---8.3%
Carter—3.3%
Clinton—0.7%--9%
Nixon—3.0
SC Harrison
# SC Harrison
Sunday, April 28, 2013 2:53 PM
I believe the word is "winced", Carter. Unless the bill in question is so heavy it would require a mechanical apparatus to lift it. Which is possible, but unlikely.
SC Harrison
# SC Harrison
Sunday, April 28, 2013 3:36 PM
I believe the word is "winced", Carter. Unless the bill in question is so heavy it would require a mechanical apparatus to lift it. Which is possible, but unlikely.
Reaganite
# Reaganite
Sunday, April 28, 2013 5:50 PM
Polls don't remove the primary threat. Carter, you should be well aware that poking a well organized group in the eye with a vote against them just encourages that group to recruit a primary challenger. Once the challenger gets in the race, they will assess the race and choose issues to run on, which may or may not include the issue that prompted the challenger to get in the race in the first place. In the example you gave, that vote might well prompt some 2nd Amendment groups to endorse the challenger, who will then be presented to the voters as the endorsed candidate who most strongly supports the 2nd Amendment. When it comes to broad issues like that in a primary, they can very well get traction and should worry an incumbent.
Anonymous User
# Anonymous User
Thursday, May 02, 2013 1:51 PM
http://carolinastrategy.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/hagan-burr-and-guns/
Anonymous User
# Anonymous User
Thursday, May 02, 2013 1:51 PM
http://carolinastrategy.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/hagan-burr-and-guns/
dap916
# dap916
Wednesday, May 15, 2013 8:04 PM
Oh, my goodness. We've got a truck driver acting as the "vocabulary police" here on the front page. I've seen this guy SC Harrison make dozens of mistakes in his rantings on Bluenc.com. If that's all he can add to the conversation here about this subject, he is of no consequence in the first place.

Go make a nice cup of coffee for James, Steve. This site is above your head.
Anonymous User
# Anonymous User
Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:38 PM
http://www.politicsnc.com/hagan-burr-and-guns/

Post Comment

Only registered users may post comments.
Copyright (c) Talking About Politics   :  DNN Hosting  :  Terms Of Use  :  Privacy Statement