Fred Sheheen, whose funeral was today.
Here’s what I’m seeing. Step up if you can do better:
- Obama Endorses Hillary Clinton for President — No shock there, but everybody’s leading with it. Hillary is thrilled. And The Fix has a nice piece on why POTUS was so eager to do this even while “Sanders’s body, politically speaking, was still warm.” More interesting is that, while he’s softening, Bernie Sanders has not quite quit yet. It’s weird. He says he’ll work with her to help defeat Trump. But Bern, there’s only one way to do that…
- No constitutional right to concealed guns: US appeals court — If he’s not already in the house, somebody run get Bryan. Of course, this was the 9th Circuit, so consider the source, he might say…
- ‘He loved every minute’: Sheheen eulogized as family man, public servant — Vincent delivered the fond, funny eulogy for his Dad.
- Haley vetoes study to move military museum, Confederate flag — I hope this also means she’d veto actual proposals to waste money on the flag itself.
- Europe to America: Your love of air-conditioning is stupid — This is weird. Both The State and the Miami Herald are running this like it’s new, but according to The Washington Post, it was initially posted on July 22, 2015. Whatever. I’m just sharing it to say to Europe: Interesting. Come see us next month and we’ll talk about it — say, in lawn chairs in the middle of Gervais Street at 3 p.m.
Related Posts
As is the typical way of things, the Northeast and the West Coast will stride forward. Eventually the rest of the country will catch up.
It will continue to be a bumpy ride…
Lead the way on what? Are you talking about the 9th Circuit?
Great job.
Now law abiding gun owners who wanted to follow the law as written won’t be allowed to carry concealed and will comply because they abide by the law
And those that don’t care about gun laws in the first place will continue to do what they want to do.
Smooth move.
Thank goodness we are South Carolina.
It is. Stand Your Ground will be next. I’ve got nothing against the Castle Doctrine; but the other loosenings of gun sanity are way too much.
And yes, Barry, SC can always be counted on to advocate for a prior century’s knee jerk reactions. I say this as someone committed to SC’s advancement. We all know great patience is required.
Hopefully you have to be 400 years patient (and I think you will) and of course I don’t think that is “advancement.”
The ruling has nothing do with South Carolina – and nothing to do with open carry.
The ruling just prevents law abiding citizens from being able to conceal a pistol unless they can prove to their local sheriff that they need to carry a concealed weapon – which of course will almost always been denied regardless of the issue.
I have never been in favor of open carry. But with rulings like this, I think South Carolina will soon be an open carry state.
Congrats.
“be denied” – in liberal areas- in liberal states.
almost all sheriffs regardless of political party in South Carolina are openly for concealed carry- and even promote it for law abiding citizens who have completed the requirements.
but if they want South Carolina to be an open carry state- ok.
I’m in favor of open carry, actually.
If you don’t see that it is the idea of Stand Your Ground which is what is really at issue here than you are likely missing the big picture.
It isn’t about concealed carry per se, it is about the mindset that develops from that false sense of invincibility that gun owners (concealed handguns I’m talking about) – and what results when a handgun is drawn.
To me, responsible gun owners are those who keep their weapons at home; in a gun safe. Most people agree with that, by the way. Across the country if not among your “community”.
I am glad my definition of responsible is different than yours.
Oddly enough, over 300 judges in California carry concealed weapons – including almost 100 in Los Angeles.
The idea that carry concealed gives a sense of invincibility, I think, is silly.
South Carolina will be an open carry state within a few years.
This is from a few days ago, but I thought it was interesting. Charles Murray proposes, in the Wall Street Journal, getting rid of federal entitlements and replacing it all with a “universal basic income”.
An excerpt to give you the idea:
In my version, every American citizen age 21 and older would get a $13,000 annual grant deposited electronically into a bank account in monthly installments. Three thousand dollars must be used for health insurance…, leaving every adult with $10,000 in disposable annual income for the rest of their lives.
People can make up to $30,000 in earned income without losing a penny of the grant. After $30,000, a graduated surtax reimburses part of the grant, which would drop to $6,500 (but no lower) when an individual reaches $60,000 of earned income….
The UBI is to be financed by getting rid of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, housing subsidies, welfare for single women and every other kind of welfare and social-services program, as well as agricultural subsidies and corporate welfare. As of 2014, the annual cost of a UBI would have been about $200 billion cheaper than the current system. By 2020, it would be nearly a trillion dollars cheaper.
Theory is fun.
The idea strikes me as odd, and not all that helpful to the needy.
I mean, I’ll bet it WOULD be cheaper than “Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, housing subsidies, welfare for single women and every other kind of welfare and social-services program.”
After all, it’s just $13,000 a year.
I’ll pass. Just as Switzerland did this week…