SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNOR GETS IT RIGHT
S.C. Gov. Nikki Haley took to Facebook this week to share her thoughts on various gun-related issues in the wake of the recent school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.
What did she have to say? Take a look …
My stance on guns: As a (Concealed Weapons Permit) holder, I am pro 2nd amendment and pro 10th amendment and will defend both. I would support open carry and reciprocity with any other state. The horrible shootings we have seen over the past few years have been related to individuals with mental health so my administration went right to the source. My first year in office we dramatically increased funding to mental health by $16 mill the first year and $11 mill this past budget. I am committed to helping those with mental health issues get the help they need while defending our 2nd amendment.
We obviously don’t share Haley’s faith in the efficacy of additional government funding for a mental health bureaucracy, but everything else she said is pretty much spot on – and that’s a pleasant surprise.
Haley has been a profound disappointment on numerous bread-and-butter pro-freedom, pro-free market issues – including this abomination – but when it comes to the debate over “gun control” it appears she has her priorities in line.
Props to Haley for her support of this fundamental liberty at a time when it is under a full-scale attack.
RELATED: Lee Bright’s “Firearms Freedom Act”
***
19 comments
“The horrible shootings we have seen over the past few years have been related to individuals with mental health so my administration went right to the source.”
With mental health? The whole thing is a mess. She pays someone write this shit?
Huh?
She’s an idiot.
Hell yes she is!
“As a (Concealed Weapons Permit) holder, I am pro 2nd amendment and pro 10th amendment and will defend both.”
You could make a case that being pro gun permits of any kind isn’t pro 2nd amendment….unless you read Guero’s interpetation of the 2nd which allows for “regulation” of the militia, which I happen to agree with.
There is also a legitimate argument that the 2nd amendment is poorly worded and distinguishes the “peoples” right to bear arms seperately from the militia’s(suggesting no regulation).
Either way, it’s a mess. Maximum freedom means allowing everyone to carry what they want where they want(short of other people’s private property), but if we’ve learned anything the last 237 years-it’s that the Constitution is no document of a substantially free people let alone the fact it has been ursurped long ago.
If the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bare arms, why does Nikki always wear long sleeves?
I have my CWP and I’m a strong supporter of the 2nd Ammendment and all pro-gun rights. S.115 is a bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee RIGHT NOW that makes CWP’s optional and removes restrictions against open carry. It is a “Constitutional Carry” or “Open Carry” bill. Read it here: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess120_2013-2014/bills/115.htm.
If Gov. Haley is serious about open carry, I would urge her to sign it. One of the reasons I voted for Nikki Haley was her “reported” pro-gun views. We have seen very little in the way of advancing gun rights in SC since her election.
We need Republicans to FIGHT Leftwing Raqdicalism MORE than EVER right now.
Haley can greatly aid her re-election by Spitting in the face of Obama and the left…
We are watching you. Should any of the Self-called Republicans pull a “Sanford” and go wobbly…There WILL BE consequenses…
Or her willingness to brandish firearms to protect the 10th amendment – maybe what we really need is Sherman to come back to Columbia.
Who is “we” tiny T??????? You and your mamma!!!!!!
“my administration went right to the source”
So, I am to believe when the Gypsy Queen Governor and her staff sat down to prioritize budget allocations one of the first things they considered were the dates:
April 20, 1999
March 25, 2006
October 2, 2006
April 16, 2007
November 5, 2009
After a review of the events on these dates everyone agreed that DMH needed $millions$ more.
Bullshit.
There ain’t a cockroach in the Governor’s Office nor a single employee at DMH who can tell you what occurred on any of the above dates.
Most of you guys attack this problem like an emotional mother. You react to things. You want to ban things. “for the children.” You want to restrict access to an object. The thing is evil. The object is dangerous. You make an object the enemy. men on the other hand seem to percieve this as a people problem, not a thing problem. We deal with people for their actions and sometimes their intentions. Nikki Haley takes my model and completely turns it on it’s head, as she thinks like a man. That’s what we like about her. And it’s what Will Folks hates about her – if Will were a woman he’d sleep his way to the top too, but he can’t do that now as his power has flown away like the wind, (power is fleeting isn’t it?), no one would have him. Meanwhile, Gonerness does what any man would do, appoints fine ladies to top positions. Damn it’s kind of funny if it werent so sad. Be damned if I ever vote for a lady governor again.
There is no law in SC prohibiting a private citizen (including the owner of a gun shop so long as he does it at a gun show) from selling a gun to a mentally ill person.
There is no law in SC that says a mentally ill person cannot own or possess a gun. There is no law in SC that says a person who lives with a mentally ill person cannot own or possess guns. There is no law in SC that say a person who lives with a mentally ill person must secure the guns he has in his possession.
The law says if a person has been adjudicated incompetent he cannot own a gun. The vast majority of people with mental illness do not meet the definition of “incompetent.” In fact our laws do not even define incompetent.
SC law says prisoners and those under the jurisdiction of the department of mental health cannot have access to a fire arm. We are talking about criminals in prison and people who have been institutionalized. Of course they cannot have access to firearms.
Beyond that it is not illegal for a private citizen to sell or give a gun to a mentally ill person or for that person to own a gun. The guy who just blew away all those children in Connecticut could probably legally own a gun in SC.
I love her solution – to spend an additional $27 million in SC tax payer money.
I’d be willing to bet that she does not have a concealed weapons permit. Kind of like that pageant disqualification fabrication and identity theft story.
I think she might, they aren’t that hard to come by. I suppose she hasn’t been caught breaking the law (yet) and obviously no mental health professional has yet to diagnose her.
She could very well have one, but I honestly think the only reason she does is so her campaign can brag about it to get the gun nut vote. It is the same with everything about her. She uses this stuff to cover up the stink of her failures and corruption.
Having a CWP is not something you ever lie about and get away with!
I respectfully disagree “We obviously don’t share Haley’s faith in the efficacy of additional government funding for a mental health bureaucracy”
That additional funding can actually reduce costs. As a fiscal conservative I have closely followed incarceration rates, costs of incarceration, and causes. Mental Health plays a key role. In 2010 CASA at Columbia did a study that if only 10% of those behind bars were rehabilitated we would break even in one year and every year thereafter reap the rewards of productive members of society vs. a system we pay for. Also consider the economical burden mental health (particularly as it relates to drug addiction) places on our healthcare system.
SC rehabilitation centers have 10% or less success rate, most people who are addicted to drugs, which is categorized as a disease by healthcare professionals, must leave the state to receive proper care or end becoming a part of the very system we pay for.
In this case I believe the end does justify the means and will result in lowering the state costs in two key areas: both incarceration and healthcare. Additionally it can save lives. We can either build more prisons, accept the rise in healthcare costs, and even murder; or we can address mental health issues. IMO – the latter is more fiscally conservative and proactive vs. reactionary.
How close has she come to shooting Will Folks for revealing her little problem with back hair?