Agreed it could have. But that still violates the constitution. That is what 49er and I have been saying for the whole thread.
He has the right to a loaded firearm. period.
If that law/reg requires his gun to be unloaded. Then that reg steps on the consitution of the US and Alabama.
So by your thought process, there is no place that you could legally and constitutionally be forbidden to possess a loaded firearm?
And the whole disabled veteran bit is a weak argument; some of the most rule-bending, regulation-skirting, and sometimes law-breaking hunters on the place where I hunt consist of retired and retired disabled (according to the VA) veterans. When they get caught, the GW treats them like he would treat the rest of us non-disabled veterans and those that have never served a day in uniform - as somebody that willingly or unwillingly violated a law, regulation, or site rule.
"Any way you look at it, most of the problems facing baboons can be expressed in two words: other baboons" - D.L. Cheney and R.M. Seyfarth
