“rescind the current exception that allows law-enforcement officers and commonwealth’s attorneys to carry concealed weapons and consume alcohol”
I vote for rescinding the exception. And I belong to the VCDL. We all know that guns and alcohol do NOT mix; I don’t care who you are.
From a purely political tactics perspective, mixing guns and alcohol is a loser for 2d amendment advocates.
The reality is that alcohol is the #1 correlation with gun problems ... and the #1 negative experience most people have with those with a gun.
Of course, alcohol is also the #1 correlation with knife fights and fist fights and domestic violence and swimming and boating incidents and snowmobile incidents and car crashes and falling down the stairs and similar accidents in the home.
I see a distinction between having a couple of beers or glasses of wine in a restaurant and carrying and heavily drinking in a bar.
Guns and Alcohol don’t mix saying that are Cops allowed to drink after work knowing they carry a backup gun just curious?
The incrementalist strategy has worked for the grabbers, but it’s now working for the good guys. Over time, VCDL has worked that strategy masterfully.
Getting rid of the restaurant ban was and has been the overriding objective. Now that the restaurant ban has been eliminated, it’s time to get rid of the restrictions that had to be agreed to in order to achieve the larger objective. While I think this all or none strategy is a gamble, it’s a prudent one.
I doubt that Courts of Jokers will let any bill get through next year. But that doesn’t really matter. The bold tortoise usually wins the race. VCDL has been pushing the rstaurant carry issue for as long as I can remember. And they’ll push the alcohol consistency issue this year, and the year after that, and the year after that. And eventually they’ll most likely prevail.
If you want to see a conservative lobbying organization that really works, take a look at VCDL and the organizations it has inspired such as opencarry.org and AzCDL.
You put yourself in that "other class" by choice, Mr. Van Cleave. If you don't want to be disarmed, don't enter the bar. Drink at home, and you can have it both ways. It's your choice.
Pretty simple, huh?
What you're proposing, instead, is to force the owner of the bar to allow your gun inside his business, against his will.
So, the business owner can either let you have your way or close his business. You can either let the business owner have his way or simply not enter the building.
Which solution is fair?
I side with the private property owner. The Constitution is a limitation on the power of the government, not a stick for beating private property owners into submission.
I’m against all gun laws aimed at the honest citizen. I hope if the law changes CCW holders will continue their common sense.