Quote Originally Posted by Bang View Post
I keep thinking that "state of emergency" needs re-defining. Or at least better understanding of how ALL emergencies are better accommodated by the removal of presence of guns of whatever ridiculous sub-labeling.

Right now, a communicable disease is running its course, responded to by declaration of SofE. How the hell does absence or presence of firearms affect the disease model or the reaction to the disease by human behavior?
I disagree, because if the legislature goes down that road, I'm sure they will find a way to carve out situations where gun rights are impacted. The correct solution is to repeal 6107 in totality. If the governor wants to say we're in constant crisis after that, more power to him. It won't impact my rights. An since he's already said emergencies don't affect gun owners, I'd expect him to support the move to turn that lie into the truth.