The People’s Republic of Chicago has a new proposal that “would require any establishment that serves alcohol to post signs prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms on the property. Businesses that don’t comply could lose their liquor licenses.”
“Simply put, booze and bullets don’t mix,” Burke said in a news release. “They clearly present a very dangerous combination. That is why Chicago needs to enact this local requirement in order to protect the public.”
…”Bar and restaurant owners would be exempted from the ban on concealed firearms at their establishments, as would current and retired police officers.”
In Chattanooga, there is no such requirement. Of course, if I go to a business that serves alcohol while carrying my gun, the law doesn’t allow me to drink alcohol.
But let’s give Burke’s argument a chance, he says that “booze and bullets don’t mix” yet he allows bar and restaurant owners to be exempted from the ban they would have to impose on their customers? How come? I watch Bar Rescue, irresponsible bar owners have been known to drink on the job.
And what about knives? How come you don’t see them posting Knife-Free Zones? And what about men who are built like bouncers? How come they’re allowed to drink? If we followed liberal logic to the end, the only people allowed into a bar would be midgets in wheelchairs.
Let’s get real, society worked perfectly fine before gun-bans and drinking ages, if you study history you’ll see that there was a time in countries like England where even children used to drink beer because it was safer than water.
Both prohibition and gun control are failed experiments, because both of them assume that bad people stop being bad when you tell them it’s against the law to be bad. But don’t expect a Chicago Alderman to understand that, no matter how much gun crime they experience, no matter the bloodshed, these people will continue doing the same gun control thing while expecting a different result.