Columbia - No "state of emergency"

This is an excellent time for students, parents, teachers, and Administration and the Trustees (and the two Trustees-elect) of Richland 2 School District to study the United States Constitution.

Constitutional rights in Columbia are being violated in the name of health. Is this okay? I say, "Not okay."

The public should be wise in its choices how to protect itself. Government should be wise in its efforts to persuade the public to be wise.

But I don't want Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, China and North Korean tactics employed in the United States.

Recently the mayor of Columbia and the city council voted to put a curfew in place. That triggered an older law that forbids the carrying of firearms during the curfew, even if one has a concealed carry permit. Thus, the City of Columbia attempts to pre-empt the U.S. Constitutional and the State of South Carolina, which grants the privilege of carrying a concealed firearm.

Columbia's state-of-emergency law appears to be unconstitutional.

Columbia's definition of "state of emergency" () reads, "A state of emergency shall be deemed to exist within the city whenever, during times of great public crisis, disaster, rioting, civil disturbance or catastrophe, or for any other reason, municipal public safety authorities are unable to maintain public order or afford adequate protection for lives, safety, health, welfare or property."

By definition, the COVID-19 pandemic, here in this area, does not fall into the category of "great public crisis, disaster, rioting, civil disturbance or catastrophe." 

An extremely worrisome provision of the law is the phrase "or for any other reason". This give carte blanche, "police state" privilege to the mayor and city council, and this is unconstitutional.

Where is the public outcry?