SC Pro-Gun Law Defeated

GOP-LED COMMITTEE KILLS PRO-SECOND AMENDMENT LEGISLATION A “Republican-controlled” S.C. Senate subcommittee killed a pro-gun bill that would have permitted South Carolina residents to carry firearms without having to receive a government permit. The law – sponsored by S.C. Sen. Lee Bright (and supported by Gov. Nikki Haley) – was defeated…


A “Republican-controlled” S.C. Senate subcommittee killed a pro-gun bill that would have permitted South Carolina residents to carry firearms without having to receive a government permit.

The law – sponsored by S.C. Sen. Lee Bright (and supported by Gov. Nikki Haley) – was defeated by a 17-4 margin in the Senate’s judiciary committee. The four lawmakers voting for the legislation were Bright, Tom Corbin, Shane Martin and Katrina Shealy.

With the exceptions of Senators Chip Campsen (RINO-Charleston) and Vincent Sheheen (D-Camden) – both of whom were absent – every other member of the judiciary committee voted to kill the bill.

That includes Larry Martin – the “former” Democrat who chairs the committee – and another “former” Democrat, Luke Rankin.

Other “Republicans” who voted to kill the legislation were Sean Bennett, Greg Gregory (by proxy), Greg Hembree, Shane Massey, Paul Thurmond and Tom Young.

Shame on all of them …

And props to Bright, Corbin, Martin and Shealy for standing firm on behalf of gun rights.

“I spent many hours of my time touring the state and listening to testimony – and that testimony overwhelming showed me that people don’t want to ask government permission to exercise the rights they have already been granted,” Martin told FITS. “And they shouldn’t have to.”

Exactly …

Seriously … that’s it exactly.

There’s an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that makes no exceptions regarding the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms.

No exception whatsoever …

For that reason, we will continue to advocate for the civil disobedience of any state statute or federal law which infringes upon this constitutional right. And we will continue to call out those elected officials (especially so-called “Republicans”) who insist on making citizens come begging to them for freedoms they already own.

Related posts


S.C. Attorney General Leads Parental Rights Coalition

Erin Parrott

South Carolina Attorney General Addresses Title IX Changes


It’s Getting Hot In South Carolina

Will Folks


Robert February 19, 2014 at 9:27 pm

Good, maybe there is some intelligence in our government.

FedUp February 20, 2014 at 2:34 pm

There were 4 demonstrations of that.

SparkleCity February 20, 2014 at 11:26 pm


Sad to say that 3 of 4 who voted in favor of this matter are TEA Party ass kissers from Spartanburg who never served a day in the military but talk smack about guns all the damn time.

I would bet they would piss themselves the first time the shit really hit the fan

Corbin is my present state senator who represents the northern portion of Spartanburg County and dosen’t know/care a damn bit about Spoartanburg County ( I know – I had a 15 minute telephone conversation with him about a month ago about the Militia bullshit and more importantly, the condition of state roads on the northern Spartanburg/Greenville County line – he could care less about real matters that require hard work.

Bright is a dickhead plain and simple who threw the citizens of Northern Spartanburg County under the bus when he was our state senator BEFORE he helped pull a ‘switch-a-roo” and got himself away from folks who knew how big a traitor he really is.

Shane Martin comes across as an asshole

TEA Party ass-kissers all

Nuff Said and the evidence speaks for itself

Saturday Night Special February 19, 2014 at 9:32 pm

Our masters don’t want people protecting themselves, especially from them.

Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 19, 2014 at 9:56 pm

Pro 2nd Amendment? More like pro-murder amendment…or did you forget about Zimmerman or the theatre popcorn shooter or the loud rap music shooter or any one of a number of examples of fearful white folks packin’ heat and killing people.

Jay Ellington February 19, 2014 at 11:40 pm

Do you have a link to this list of fearful white folks packing heat and killing people?

southmauldin February 20, 2014 at 12:24 am

That guy in Florida who was convicted on 2nd degree murder….

Smirks February 20, 2014 at 7:27 am

Zimmerman had his day in court and was found not guilty.

Dunn was convicted of multiple second degree murder attempts but the murder/manslaughter charge was mistrialed due to jury indecision.

Not sure what came of the popcorn incident, not too familiar with it.

Either way the law was applied via trial, and it doesn’t overshadow legal gun owners legally defending themselves. People that unbalanced would likely carry illegally anyways.

Uh huh February 20, 2014 at 8:06 am

I’m sure there’s a list floating around somewhere out there, the question is will there be another list showing fearful black folks packing heat and killing people, and will we be able to compare the two on a per capita basis.

Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 9:00 am

And it should also include justifiable homicides, for all involved.

CorruptionInColumbia February 20, 2014 at 2:16 am

Yeah, so much better when criminals don’t have to fear armed citizens. Makes us all safer, doesn’t it?

(sarcasm font out)

Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 20, 2014 at 5:53 pm

I dunno, but I would tell you to go and ask several other western democractic nations who have strong gun control if not outright bans AND lower gun crime rates as a result. Australia would be a good place to start.

The NRA crowd can scaremonger and rabble rouse as much as they want but personally I’m into stats and figures and hard data on th subject. The picture that emerges is that the more guns there are in a society, the more gun crimes and gun deaths. It’s just that simple.

CorruptionInColumbia February 20, 2014 at 6:09 pm

Yeah, good ol’ Australia, where home invasions and other crimes jumped considerably after they confiscated shitloads of guns from citizens. Good place to start!

Or how about England, where violent crime increases to the point they are starting to wake up and smell the coffee, and arm factions of their previously unarmed police forces.

I would feel safer any day, in a society where even convicted criminals were legally armed (because they will be armed if they want to anyway, laws be damned) than somewhere where only the police (and criminals) were armed.

Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 20, 2014 at 6:10 pm

I’ll show you my stats if you show me yours :-)

CorruptionInColumbia February 20, 2014 at 6:15 pm
Jay Ellington February 21, 2014 at 9:08 am

You can’t handle the stats.

FedUp February 21, 2014 at 12:25 am

If you’re into stats and data, you’d better research your own answer. You have pontificated all over yourself while not stating a single fact!!

Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 20, 2014 at 6:29 pm

websites all my friend. I might as well send you to the Brady Center on
gun control for my stats…but I choose independent, third party style.

And that’s just an appetizer.

examining the evidence and choosing to ignore it in pursuit of a pro
gun agenda is fine, just admit as much, but don’t disparage the data
like some sort of NRA lackey.

Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 10:16 pm

Wow, a link to Wiki. That’s precious.

Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 20, 2014 at 10:20 pm

Read it and weep I suppose.

FedUp February 21, 2014 at 12:32 am Reply
CorruptionInColumbia February 21, 2014 at 8:30 am

You didn’t specify which sites I could obtain my data from. The figures seem to be in agreement from site to site, for the most part, and are likely factual and from official sources, whether you like the sites I furnished or not.

I cannot see the post I made with the sites at this time. Discus must have hiccuped, eliminating my view of my response to your invitation to show you “my” stats.

Smirks February 20, 2014 at 7:23 am

That’s a poor argument.

There is no state in this union where possession of a weapon in the commission of a crime isn’t illegal.

Don’t confuse legal gun owners with people who are mentally unbalanced, plz.

SparkleCity February 20, 2014 at 11:55 pm


I really do think said examples are a manifestation of the bullshit that has been swirling around for the last 5 years or so.

It’s only going to get worse and innocent people will die because of the irrational emotion of the far right.

Hell, that’s why .22 ammo is so damn expensive now

Oh, I forgot, FEMA is buying up all the .22 ammo because they need to shoot squirrels and rats when the famine hits to feed the low information masses.

That’s why—My mistake………..

EJB February 21, 2014 at 8:53 am

Because you choose to ignore the millions of times guns are used to stop violence doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, it means you choose to live in ignorance. Don’t blame you though, life is tough and there are bad people out there. Guns do far more good in our civil society than harm, please go hide in your basement with your fears and let the rest of us alone.

SparkleCity February 22, 2014 at 8:04 am

I’ll quit hiding in my basement in ignorant cowering fear when you quit masturbating with your gun.

How about that????

Jay Ellington February 21, 2014 at 9:07 am

You’re right about one thing, the last 5 years has been a swirling bowl of shit.

You're not insane February 20, 2014 at 9:33 am

“Pro Gun Law? More like pro-murder law”

I could substitute “pro knife” law and say the same. Then “pro car”, etc.

Lala February 19, 2014 at 10:20 pm

Anything for a “hit.” Only in Lalaland does 4 people of 23 gain kudos for being outliers in a democratic institution.

Only in FITS world.

euwe max February 20, 2014 at 1:20 am

There should be no such thing as a “gun free zone!”

Comrade1917 February 20, 2014 at 6:07 am

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
– Thomas Jefferson

“I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.”
– Thomas Jefferson

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
– Thomas Jefferson
“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
– Thomas Jefferson

euwe max February 20, 2014 at 8:34 am

Guns are a gift from God. They are a sacred trust. Keep at least 3 loaded semi automatic weapons in your household per male at all times. A rifle above the door, and in the gun rack of a truck is the mark of a free man. – Thomas Jefferson

When the angel of God passes over a house, and there is a gun hanging from the eave, the first born of that house will be spared. Otherwise, great will be the wailing and the grieving of that household. – Anarchists cookbook, dust jacket.

Emotional Scorn February 20, 2014 at 9:31 am

Mr. Moh strikes again.

euwe max February 20, 2014 at 5:04 pm

Beasts weep as they hear my prose.

SparkleCity February 20, 2014 at 11:47 pm

Where’s my hankie when I need it??????

CNSYD February 20, 2014 at 9:55 am

Is this the same Jefferson who stayed at home with his yard children slaves screwing Sally Hemmings while Washington, etc actually fought the British so he could?

Jackie Chiles February 20, 2014 at 11:16 am


Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 9:48 am

You truly are the king of ad hominem.

euwe max February 20, 2014 at 10:50 am

Don’t hate me because I’m talented.

EJB February 20, 2014 at 3:54 pm

“ad hominem”

Is that one of them there fellers that “likes” other fellers?

Or is that when they soaks the corn kernels in water for a time afore they cooks it for dinner?

EJB February 20, 2014 at 7:03 am

The criminals give themselves permission to carry firearms and are therefore armed when they choose to be while the law abiding are denied such by those that think they know better than all others and are left to the mercy of those that would harm them. All I want is a fighting chance when the poop hits the fan.

SparkleCity February 21, 2014 at 12:03 am

You will get your fighting chance right before you disappear in a pink mist taking on even a standard Humvee when the shit hits the fan.

Let alone the energy-directed weapons coming down the pike in 5-10 years

EJB February 21, 2014 at 8:46 am

Aren’t you one of those people that says we should turn and run in Iraq and Afghanistan because the stone throwers and cave dwellers are kicking our ass and we just can’t win?

SparkleCity February 22, 2014 at 7:59 am

I don’t recall writing that.


I did 3 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan plus Gulf I & Bosnia and a Vietnam Era vet as well

Because I am also a Vietnam Era vet (active duty 1971-1974) and vividly remember the fall of Saigon, I did post that you could see the handwriting on the wall as early as 2004 that what happened in Saigon would eventually happen in Iraq (sadly it is coming to pass) and that the South Vietnamese army of 1975 could kick the shit out of the present Iraqi Security Forces.

You don’t need to be the National Security Advisor to say that or that Iraq was NOT the threat that Bush II and his ass kissing cronies claimed it to be which is what I said prior to the invasion of Iraq.

But nobody listens to a dumb Master Sergeant.

I agreed with Bush II about the War on Terrorism but not the bullshit his advisors lied about Iraq and dipshit conservatives (maybe like yourself) lapped up like a kitten drinking milk.

But it was my duty to go and I did.

The blood of the men and women who died in Iraq (whose bodies and PIECES of bodies I loaded onto my plane) rest plainly on the shoulders of Dick Cheney, Condeleza Rice, Rush Limpballs,Sean Hannity and pukes like them and maybe you as well if you cheered those pukes on and proudly claimed you loved to eat “FREEDOM Fries” and NOT French Fries.

Remember that little act of “patriotic” jingoism???

Smirks February 20, 2014 at 7:19 am

I believe in the permit system in that it does institute a number of checks against the person carrying, including extended background checks, written/range tests, and learning gun laws. I also believe that just letting anyone carry anywhere regardless of ability or responsibility is going to end badly. I don’t want some jerk off who bought a big gun they can’t shoot straight and no knowledge of the law trying to dispense “justice” like a fucking moron.

As long as permits are given out timely and not withheld unduly I don’t feel it is infringing on anyone’s right.

I’m also not a big proponent for open carry, for a number of reasons, but that is a discussion for another time I suppose.

Finally, your civil disobedience line is one I hope nobody follows. It is a good way to land in jail and have your right to have a gun stripped away, assuming you aren’t shot by a trigger-happy officer. It will not under any circumstances move pro-gun legislation forward, not in this day in age. The gun control movement is a dumb movement, but shit like molon labe or whatever just gives them ammo. Showing a law abiding citizen following the rules and asking for more leeway reasonably goes a lot further, without risking life or liberty doing something that is quite frankly stupid.

TL;DR: Keep permits. Downvote if you want, I don’t give a shit.

EJB February 20, 2014 at 9:49 am

“As long as permits are given out timely and not withheld unduly I don’t feel it is infringing on anyone’s right.”

When and where does that happen? Presently if you get your CCP license it is on the last day of the 90 days called for in the law. Try to renew your CCP and lord knows when you will get it, not on time. They do nothing in the CCP process that isn’t done in the background checks of firearms purchases and you can walk out of the gun store with your firearm within minutes of giving them your money. I bought a silencer last July (silencers are considered firearms), supposed to have paperwork processed within six months, they were telling me then it would probably be seven months, went in to check last week and they are telling me now it may be a YEAR. There is no common sense gun laws, they only restrict and disadvantage the law abiding not those who would do harm. Your fears are your problem but they infringe on me. Your rights to swing your elbows end at my nose but you ignore that and push your fears into my life and force me to live as you do. Please leave me alone.

SparkleCity February 20, 2014 at 11:11 pm

Why in the world would anyone except an assassin or Special Ops want a silencer????

Oh, I know………

“Cause By God I can BUY one that’s why!!!!!”

“Oh, what fools there mortals be……”

EJB February 21, 2014 at 8:43 am

Because you can’t think of a reason someone would want a silencer doesn’t mean there aren’t good reasons to want one. For myself I want it for target shooting and squirrel hunting. I hunt very early, sunrise. There are homes near where I hunt so this prevents noise that would wake them. You are another person who wants to push your fears off on me, I want only to be left alone, please cower in your home with your fears and leave me be.

SparkleCity February 22, 2014 at 7:38 am

That’s fucking lame and you know it

If you are that close to someone’s house and shooting a firearm you are breaking the law.

Get yourself a good pellet rifle and go at it.

The 3 wars I served in and carried a firearm every fucking time sure do make me want to hide under my bed and cower with fear.

Jerk-off gun nuts like you that are hiding behind a gun because they have irrational fears is the reason there is an ammo shortage.

s0beit February 23, 2014 at 4:47 pm

Are you a fucking idiot? Using a silencer for it’s intended purpose is “fucking lame”?

It’s meant to reduce the decibels caused by the power in the bullet so you can shoot without hearing protection and so the sonic boom doesn’t piss everyone who lives within a mile of you off. That is it’s intended purpose.

You show me REAL instances of people using silencers in these imaginary spy scenarios of yours, because I can certainly show you thousands of videos on youtube and many more citizens who use them all the time. No special ops.

s0beit February 23, 2014 at 4:48 pm

“Why in the world would anyone except an assassin or Special Ops want a silencer????”

This is the most retarded shit I’ve read all week

GrandTango February 20, 2014 at 9:55 am

Yet: you you P!$$ all over yourself if a voter is asked to verify their identity.

As we see w/ Obama’s election, the corrupt ballot is FAR, FAR more dangerous weapon than any firearm.

One lumps or two? February 20, 2014 at 10:00 am

Holy sheeeet! I agree with you. Even a broken clock.

GrandTango February 20, 2014 at 10:34 am

I get the “Broken Clock” analogy used on me about 24 hours, each day. I’m sure the “Blind Hog” cliché can’t be too far behind.

One lumps or two? February 20, 2014 at 10:43 am

“I get the “Broken Clock” analogy used on me about 24 hours”

I don’t think that surprises anyone here.

FedUp February 20, 2014 at 2:32 pm

Obviously you’re completely blind to what permits are all about. Why give away liberty we are afforded by the Constitution for some lame propagandist rhetoric that you just spewed.

GrandTango February 20, 2014 at 8:20 am

Lesson One: Democrats are LIARS…(“If you like your plan, you can keep it. And it will cost less”)….

Former democrats calling themselves Rs is a MAJOR problem in SC politics. They screw up, because they are Ds at heart…then everybody looks at the failure, and blames it on the Rs…because they seemingly have the majority.

Ds and Liberal-tarians are why the Republican Brand is suffering. Rule like Conservatives (Republicans) and you’ll be re-elected w/ praise, over and over. And the country and the state will be very free, proud and successful.

Nölff February 20, 2014 at 8:36 am

Well call me a commie and downvote me. I don’t care. Some people shouldn’t carry guns. Who? Insane Clown Posse fans, Grand Tango, etc… Why? prior convictions, People who have mental problems such as schizophrenia, street thugs, etc…

Any chance for a do over? February 20, 2014 at 9:29 am

“Some people shouldn’t carry guns.”

“Why? prior convictions, People who have mental problems such as schizophrenia, street thugs, etc..”

Something you might want to consider, 99% of the people you named above don’t give two shits about the “law” saying they can’t carry a gun.

It is not in the realm of reality to suggest they would or that the small number of them being caught doing so would have a substantial impact on crime.

Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 9:51 am

For anyone not familiar with ICP fans, behold…

Mike at the Beach February 20, 2014 at 10:28 pm

You just royally insulted ICP fans and thugs everywhere by association. Shame be upon you.

MyDaddyIsRich February 20, 2014 at 9:18 am

none except it need be a well regulated militia.

EJB February 20, 2014 at 9:59 am

There is a comma in there. The Founders were protecting two principles, the right to carry arms and the right for citizens to form their own militias. In reading the Federalist Papers you’ll see that Hamilton, Madison and Jay used the same writing technique/style throughout.

idiotwind February 20, 2014 at 10:07 am

look, you can’t be a constitution hard-liner (there’s a comma) and also cite outside papers. it’s really one or the other. the constitution is either gospel or it isn’t. and we’re either humans with judgement powers or we aren’t.

Jackie Chiles February 20, 2014 at 11:18 am

The “outside papers” were written to explain what the drafters of the Constitution were thinking when they drafted it. The two arguments are not inconsistent.

EJB February 20, 2014 at 1:11 pm

First of all it is entirely appropriate for a “constitution hardliner” to refer to documents other than the Constitution to understand proper implementation of the Constitution. Having been more than two hundred years since said document was approved by the American public some words may have changed meaning giving rise to those that claim “to bear” arms means that we may own them but not necessarily carry them upon our person. Reading the Federalist Papers and other correspondence by the Founders and others of that period allows one to see that bearing arms did in fact mean carrying them at our pleasure. It is also entirely appropriate to reference the Federalist Papers as I did to encourage other readers to understand how things were written to better understand the intent as well as the letter of the Constitution. I wasn’t relying on the Federalist Papers to tell people what to do but to read them to understand what the people were ratifying when the Founders placed this document before them. To understand the concerns of the people that had suffered at the hands of oppressive government and what they had hoped to avoid themselves in the immediate future but also help future generations avoid. When asked “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?” Ben Franklin replied “A Republic, if you can keep it.”. He knew what was coming, what we are in fact dealing with today.

NSJS February 20, 2014 at 12:30 pm

Should the Constitutional freedom only apply to “arms” that existed when it was written? Or is the Constitution a “living, breathing” document that can be read to permit machine guns? I’m serious. I support the second amendment but don’t think it should apply to weapons the founding fathers didn’t know about.

Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 12:57 pm

Fully automatic weapons (ie: “machine guns”) are already illegal for most American’s to possess.

EJB February 20, 2014 at 1:16 pm

Actually there are few people that can’t own and use fully automatic weapons. Only those that are prohibited from any firearm ownership/usage are prohibited from having them. However, to own a fully automatic firearm you have to pay the $200 fee and wait however long for the paperwork to clear, same as for a silencer (anybody that can legally own a firearm can own a silencer, it just takes money and paperwork).

Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 2:14 pm

You’re correct, I should have clarified, illegal without jumping through the necessary hoops.

CorruptionInColumbia February 20, 2014 at 2:15 pm

I was just having a conversation last night with a good friend about the silliness of the National Firearms Act (circa 1934 or 36?) and why certain things are still so heavily regulated under it. I would be completely OK if we could legally possess automatic weapons without all of the red tape, cost, and scrutiny, but I can also understand some peoples’ apprehension if they were in too widespread a circulation and were used daily in crimes.

That said, the rules on silencers and short barrel rifles and shotguns is just ludicrous. Contrary to popular misbeliefs, as you shorten the barrel on a shotgun, rather than becoming a more effective and devastating “killing machine”, it becomes less effective a greater distances. Loss of choke also has impact on that factor to a degree, if you “saw-off” the barrel.

Some criminals may saw off the barrels of double-barrel and single-barrel shotguns to make for an intimidating appearing weapon to use in an armed robbery or the like, but the effectiveness of the weapon and its range are likewise diminished. A great “offensive” weapon, it does not make.

I have had the opportunity to handle some of the shorter pump shotguns (14″ barrel) that some LE agencies now have and they are great things to have in a car or other tight places. In addition to being handy, they make great defensive weapons and I fail to see how regulating them so stringently makes the public, in any way, “safer”.

Ditto silencers (aka “suppressors”). They are growing in popularity and while they would not be my first pick of a Class III item, were I inclined to purchase one, I can see the cool factor, especially if one wanted to practice in an indoor range and not need to wear hearing protection.

CorruptionInColumbia February 20, 2014 at 2:01 pm

Using your “logic”, then “freedom of the press”, should only apply if using a Gutenberg or like press, not high speed automatic presses and especially not radio or TV broadcasting, since those did not exist back then.

Using your “logic”, the police should be able to search your automobile, your computer, or your cell phone, “just because”, since such things did not exist back then.

Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 2:15 pm

Expounding on that logic, we should limit our military to fight wars with cannons, swords and black powder rifles.

CorruptionInColumbia February 20, 2014 at 2:52 pm

Excellent point, Jay!!!!

euwe max February 20, 2014 at 5:00 pm

we should fight wars with politicians.

SparkleCity February 21, 2014 at 12:07 am


There would never be another war!!!!

Unless it was a war of words that is……….

Mike at the Beach February 20, 2014 at 10:24 pm

Come on, bro. You know better- don’t take the dude’s logic to wacky extremes. Using YOUR logic, we should also be able to carry hand grenades (a very popular small arm used by militias worldwide, and they existed in a few forms during the Revolutionary War). You can be a Second Amendment guy, which I am, without being fringy. You can’t open a newspaper without a business license, or even post homemade handbills if they are prohibited by local ordinance- NEITHER is an infringement of First Amendment rights. That’s what’s so great about our system and the Constitution itself- the courts massage it (although admittedly almost to the breaking point, at times) and keep it up to date. The bill in question, while well-intended, had some issues (lots of moving parts in there). They’ll try again and maybe get it right.

SparkleCity February 20, 2014 at 11:45 pm

Using your “logic” shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles (called “MANPADS” in military jargon), grenade launchers,fully automatic machine guns,(all the stuff I got my jollies off in Uncle Sugar’s toy box) should be readily available for every citizen

I will gladly pay money to see you to go up against even a gun jeep (like the one I crewed on in 1972) let alone an up-armored Humvee with your bad-assed Glock,Mossberg or S&W.

My point is if some of you think having some pea-shooter will help fend off these imaginary “jack-booted thugs” who are going to take away your 2nd Amendment right to fondle said “pea shooter” you’ve got another thing coming.

If some of you have such a hard-on then you need to be studying on how to be a suicide bomber because that is the only chance you will have to make a true statement.

Good luck with that

CorruptionInColumbia February 21, 2014 at 8:14 am

First of all, my primary reason for wanting to be armed is in case it becomes necessary to deal with the criminal element which is becoming more and more bold and vicious. The news media regularly reports on those who were not prepared to deal with human vermin and who paid the price, often with their lives, for not being so prepared.

As for dealing with jack-booted thugs, I imagine the Jews and other persecuted groups in Nazi occupied countries would have fared much better against the crews sent to round them up, had they had firearms. Even if they took out only one or two Nazis per home visit, it would have slowed the roundup efforts down considerably. Even if the victims had been shot down for their efforts, they would have at least died with dignity and quickly, rather than being stripped naked and forced to walk around in the cold and/or being starved to death or otherwise tortured. I don’t know about you, but I would gladly take a bullet during combat than to go as many of those poor souls went.

Of course, if you want to just bend over and grab your ankles for them, that would be your prerogative.

SparkleCity February 22, 2014 at 8:07 am

Looks like you never read/heard of the Warsaw Uprising……….

Read about it sometime so you won’t make such a fool of yourself next time.

GrandTango February 20, 2014 at 12:54 pm

FITS, you dropped the ball AGAIN:

The Federal Communications Commission is looking to insert its officers into newsrooms around the country. The FCC says that it has identified eight “underserved populations” and is now looking for ways to make sure that those communities get more new coverage.

If you are ignoring this. you need to get out of trying to be in communications…

anon. February 20, 2014 at 3:15 pm


Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 20, 2014 at 5:55 pm

If we’re really interested in strict Constitutional application of the 2nd Amendement then we should all go out, find a black bear and chop off its arms to keep em at home. We’ve got a right to do that since we have a right to “bear” arms.

Jay Ellington February 20, 2014 at 10:19 pm

Hey look, another ad hominem guy.

Limbaughsaphatkhunt February 20, 2014 at 10:23 pm

I think you mean homonym bro.

Jay Ellington February 21, 2014 at 9:01 am

No, it’s hominem, bro. Look it up on wiki.

Mike at the Beach February 21, 2014 at 6:37 pm

Evidently having Limbaugh up in his head rent free makes the cunt guy kinda stupid… I’d post this in Latin for him in honor of your use of a really widely known (among educated folk) Latin phrase, but he’d spit it back to us in Pig Latin.

SparkleCity February 21, 2014 at 7:57 am

I fully support the right to arm bears!!!!!!!!

bubbax February 20, 2014 at 9:03 pm

We need to eliminate guns from our society. In china they had a nut who couldn’t get a gun so he got a knife and wreaked havoc. A bunch of people were wounded. In England they had a a perfectly fine society and even the police did not routinely carry guns. We should eliminate guns from civilians and after a while our police could put them away. Guns would just be for the occasional hunter and the police to break out once in a while when a nut goes off. A lot fewer grieving parents and orphaned kids. Less fear all around. Then maybe we could afford to repaint all the worn out lines in the roads and fix the pot holes.

CorruptionInColumbia February 21, 2014 at 8:23 am

Oh yeah, people were so peaceful before guns were invented and certainly would be so if they ceased to exist. People didn’t use knives, swords, clubs, spears, or bows and arrows, before guns were invented. People were not lynched by mobs and burned alive or otherwise tortured to death.

Some a-hole invented guns and the world suddenly became a violent place.

vicupstate February 21, 2014 at 8:17 am

So if this law passes will I be able to bring an automatic weapon into a public school Kindergarten even if I have been diagnosed with Paranoid Schizophrenia?

Has anyone thought to ask what Law Enforcement thinks of this law?

CorruptionInColumbia February 21, 2014 at 8:19 am

Comprehension issues, much? I don’t believe there was anything written into this bill which would have allowed for paranoid schizophrenics to carry automatic weapons into schools.

John Thomas Badcock March 29, 2014 at 9:57 am

As a Georgia license holder prohibited from carrying in SC (They wont even honor a non-resident permit from a state they otherwise grant reciprocity to), all I can say is “Kids, were spending another vacation (and $$$) in the Sunshine State (Fla).”

Oh Well…


Leave a Comment