This is precisely what happens when a bunch of retarded legislators get together with time on their hands and political points up for grabs.

Senate committee OKs guns in restaurants, but not bars

With the state’s restaurants no longer opposed, a Senate panel on Wednesday agreed to let Arizonans carry their pistols into places where they eat lunch, even if liquor is sold there.

Sounds great, right? Not so fast …

The 42 vote by the Senate Committee on Commerce and Economic Development came after it was crafted so that weapons would be allowed only in restaurants where the owner or manager first posts a sign specifically permitting patrons to be armed. And the scope of the allowable weapons was narrowed to sidearms, eliminating the possibility that diners could bring in their rifles and shotguns. That was enough to convince the Arizona Restaurant and Hospitality Association to drop what has, until now, been perennial opposition to the idea.

I see. Sure, we’ll allow carrying of firearms into restaurants, but first the restaurant owner has to post a sign saying, “Gun-carriers welcome here!” Which, of course, nobody is going to do, so you’ve effectively banned it.

Some smart individual is going to realize that there’s nothing to shit your pants over, and they’ll post up a big “We respect the 2nd Amendment” sign and - hopefully - they’ll get enough business to retire on after a few years.

Dave Kopp, president of the Arizona Citizens Defense League, said the bill is now unacceptable. He said weapons should be presumed allowed in restaurants unless the owner posts the premises as a gun-free zone.

Amen, brother.

But the change that bothered Kopp was, in fact, what was needed to keep the measure alive: Sen. Ken Cheuvront, D-Phoenix, who owns a wine and cheese bar, said he believes few, if any, business owners will actually decide to post signs to allow weapons, if for no other reason than how it might affect their liability insurance.

So typical. So tiresome. Cheap legislative tricks to get what you want. “Now they must post a sign saying that they willfully don’t unexplicitly won’t not allow firearms on opposite day!”

Before approving the measure, the committee agreed to grant guncarrying privileges to anyone legally entitled to have a firearm. That means anyone without a criminal record, as long as the gun visible.

By contrast, the original version of the legislation limited the ability to bring guns into restaurants to those who have a state permit to carry a concealed weapon.

So CCW is out the window. Now we’ve got “you must put a sign explicitly allowing carrying of weapons in your facility” and “only for open carry” and “not if there’s alcoholic beverages served”. Who else is unhappy?

Don Isaacson, lobbyist for the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association, said that change makes the bill unacceptable to his organization’s members who include owners of bars and restaurants with liquor licenses.

He said getting a concealedcarry permit requires attending attended a stateapproved training program covering weapons use and safety as well as the laws about when people can use guns to defend themselves. Permit holders also are fingerprinted and undergo background checks.

“A CCW permit holder knows the law, is backgrounded, and there’s a level of protection,” Isaacson said.

Unless theyr’e a thug with a pistol in their pocket, in which case they really don’t give a shit about background checks or cute little signs posted in the window. Make sure the signs just have pictures, because thugs can’t read.

But Sen. Barbara Leff, R-Paradise Valley, said she sees no reason to decide only certain people can bring guns into restaurants. She said Arizona law has long allowed anyone to carry weapons in the open “and there’s not bloodshed on the streets from law-abiding people.”

Of course not, law-abiding people follow the law. Criminals don’t. That’s why they’re criminals. How come it feels like we have to explain this to 3-year-olds? And they still don’t get it? Senator Leff gets a thumbs up for at least trying.

And Sen. Pamela Gorman, R-Anthem, said there are people who choose not to get concealedcarry permits because they don’t want to have to register with the government.

Some intelligence yet left in that desert.

The other fight on the Senate floor is likely to be over the issue of whether the right to carry firearms should be limited to sidearms. Gorman said hunters and others should not be forced to leave those weapons in their vehicles

Gorman said she isn’t trying to remove the restriction for personal reasons.

“I carry a semiautomatic .45,” she said. “It wouldn’t hurt me.”

But Leff said she does understand why larger weapons might be inappropriate. “Having an Uzi on the table might scare somebody,” she said.

Okay, I don’t think there’s a chance you’ll see someone at Applebees with an Uzi at their table. Though I’d sure as hell love to see the look on some server if you strolled in there with a .50 BMG.