SC: Open Carry is Legal Act of 2016 (Failed)

[Associate Justice PiT]

I'd prefer to keep it as a regional law, but I'd be open to a "Private businesses and institutions may refuse service and/or entry to anyone who is carrying a gun granted they post signs outside indicating this." amendment

     This makes sense to me. Leave the right to decide on allowing weapons with the establishment owners.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I'd prefer to keep it as a regional law, but I'd be open to a "Private businesses and institutions may refuse service and/or entry to anyone who is carrying a gun granted they post signs outside indicating this." amendment

     This makes sense to me. Leave the right to decide on allowing weapons with the establishment owners.

I personally believe this is an implicit, inalienable property right, but I would support codifying this in the law just for clarification. A sign should not even be necessary to enforce this right.

I also believe that the government's existing authority to prohibit firearms from government property such as schools, courthouses, and airports is well within the government's rights and responsibilities.

     I also do not believe that it needs to be said, but I think we should say so anyway. As you said, for clarification's sake.