Mic.com is a news* media site that targets millenials and is intended to compete with Gawker and BuzzFeed. Like Gawker and BuzzFeed it leans hard left, has a generous seasoning of Social Justice, and its articles are generally poorly thought out.
*I used the term “news” very generously in this sentence. This is the same site that claimed that calling chocolate sprinkles “Chocolate Jimmies” is racist, despite no evidence of racist origins of the name Jimmies. because some people believe the urban legend that it has a racist origin. So yeah… news.
I caught a repost of a Mic article over at Everytown’s Facebook Page, “If You Can’t Drink and Drive, You Probably Shouldn’t Drink and Carry a Gun, Either.” The article tries to sound like it is preaching common sense, you shouldn’t drink and use a gun. That is a very good and reasonable stance to take. Don’t drink and drive, don’t drink and boat, don’t drink and shoot.
However the article goes on to talk about the number of states that allow concealed in places that serve alcohol, bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.
Miguel and I have touched on this before. I don’t believe that if a person is going to drink, they should be carrying. It is just irresponsible. However, I am a big believer in the “designated driver exemption” in which I would like to see states that prohibit carrying in bars make an exemption for a person who is not drinking. Make it enforceable with a breathalyzer. I’ll accept that. Blow anything other than a 0.0 and your CCW permit gets suspended. Do it again and you lose it permanently.
I have felt this way for years, since some friends and I got hassled by some people in a bar in South Dakota during the Rally. Some bikers didn’t like that some college kids were hanging out at the bar they decided they wanted to hang out in (we were locals, they were in for the Rally). They picked a fight, we got the manager to toss them out. They waited in the parking lot for us to leave and a fight broke out. Because of SD law, I couldn’t carry in the bar even thought I was the DD.
The article doesn’t address the idea of people with CCWs not drinking. I lived in Indiana, which has a no guns in bars law. There you can go into the TGI Friday’s with your gun to eat, but you can’t sit at the bar. So there are all sorts of gray areas like this were CCW permit holders can be responsible and still be in a place where alcohol is served.
But the article, instead, goes into several horror stories of drunk people shooting others. Although, none of the examples they used seems to be CCW holders. I agree, don’t drink and use guns. But if you are not drinking, why should you be obligated to give up your right to defend yourself.
I got to the end of the article and saw a link for another Mic article that seemed so dumb and anti-gun that it made the one I just read almost seem sensible: 9 Foods That Are Harder to Buy Than a Gun.
This was so poorly thought out, so beyond ridiculous, it seems like an Onion response to President Obama’s “easier to buy a gun than fresh vegetable” statement. Except that this is supposed to be a real new site.
I couldn’t let some of these idiocies go:
First of all, would never wait in line for two and a half hours for a donut. But I have waited that long for Cabela’s to process a Form 4473 during a Black Friday sale. So this is total bullshit.
Because that’s a totally fair, not in any way apples to oranges, comparison… How about Pappy Van Winkle vs. a Remington Model 700 200th Anniversary edition which only 2016 will be made. Now tell me which one is harder to get.
A better guns vs. booze comparison, but not by much. Yes, you have to be 21 to purchase booze from a place that has a liquor licence. You also have to be 21 to buy a handgun from an FFL. Also, no, a child can’t OWN a gun. They can use one under the supervision of a parent. But why let little details like that get in the way.
The laws regarding the sale of Chilean Sea Bass (or Antarctic Toothfish) apply to commercial fishing boats. Commercial fishing is highly regulated. So are commercial gun sales. Not “anyone” can sell guns online as a business. You have to have an FFL to do that, which requires a lot of compliance with the ATF.
There are several other comparisons which are just as bad. Not one has an honest explanation of the law. They are lies and distortions meant to scare millennial hipsters.