I'm taking this title directly from the Arizona Republic article on the issue of allowing people to carry guns into businesses that serve liquor.
I am not at all surprised that Gov. Napolitano has vetoed this bill. Like every other gun-grabber, she claims to support Second Amendment rights, but--other than these empty words--has very little to show for this support. I'm not so sure she'll even pay much of a political price for this veto, in that those who understand the Second Amendment are probably not that likely to vote for her under any circumstances. She's a crafty politician--sort of a merging of the political attributes of Bill Clinton (although not nearly as engaging), with the personal and professional pedigree of Janet Reno. Without agreeing with her an very much, I do admire the way she found enough Democratic votes to win her election in a fairly Republican state.
I do hope--and will write my state legislators with this hope--that this issue re-emerges next year. That I cannot take my carry-gun into a restaurant where my wife might enjoy a glass of wine is not right.
As is typical of the left, they confuse the issues. Towards the end of the article, a representative of the Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police, Eric Edwards, said, "Guns don't mix with booze any better than driving has." The issue has never been about mixing guns and booze. Question for Mr. Edwards: If guns and booze shouldn't mix in the same way as booze and driving shouldn't mix, how does anybody get their beer home from the liquor store? No one has ever claimed that one ought to drink and carry, anymore than anyone says that drinking and driving is OK. But it ought to be OK to carry in the presence of someone drinking, just as it is OK to drive in the presence of alcohol.
As I said, I will support this issue again when it is resurrected.