Well... no one is certainly forcing you to use const correctness. The thing is, even reasonably intelligent people will screw up: while you can make a char pointer reference a string literal it is not a wise idea in practice, since there are many ways to make the pointer invalid. While the code in my earlier post does not reflect this part of life (as I did it purposefully), it can happen.
I believe this was Corned Bee's intent. In fact, it's probably an argument for using const pointers to const char, but that's an assumption.