XD Fan
Member
Thanks, Texas.
"Only Feds Can Carry in Here..."
- Thread starter jahwarrior
- Start date
- Status
Hoffy
Member
Trying to follow this logic through...
...many places have a dress code that say I can't be served if I don't have a jacket/tie...
...some places don't accomodate parties of more than 4...
...does this infringe on my rights of self expression or assembly?
...many places have a dress code that say I can't be served if I don't have a jacket/tie...
...some places don't accomodate parties of more than 4...
...does this infringe on my rights of self expression or assembly?
scrat
Member
oh man i am so watching this thread please let us know what happens on monday
Drgong
Member
I might get flamed, but if a company properly posts that they do not want you to go armed, respect that or take your money elsewhere.
Public Property is another matter.
Public Property is another matter.
XD Fan
Member
Obviously this is a different scenario, but the question is whether or not carrying a firearm is a civil right. If it is, then it becomes the same thing. One's ability to stop carrying a firearm or stop being Asian is not a relevant issue. Is carrying that firearm a civil right or not?
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
So you're saying that some civil rights are deserving of protections and some are not?
That some civil rights can be infringed by other citizens on a whim?
There is no civil right as far as property rights go, no one has ever successfully argued that one.
So, personal property rights, something that is NOT a civil right, trumps something that IS a civil right?
How do you get to that line of thinking?
Now, if you don't believe the Second Amendment protects a civil right then of course this doesn't work.
But, do you REALLY want the Second Amendment to NOT be a civil right?
zxcvbob
Member
If you go to the profile options page http://www.thehighroad.org/profile.php?do=editoptions you can change the number of posts per page to 100. Then it will be just one page and a small part of another. HTH
wristtwister
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2008
- Messages
- 419
SC law says:
M) A permit issued pursuant to this section does not authorize a permit holder to carry a concealable weapon into a:
(1) police, sheriff, or highway patrol station or any other law enforcement office or facility;
(2) detention facility, prison, or jail or any other correctional facility or office;
(3) courthouse or courtroom;
(4) polling place on election days;
(5) office of or the business meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or special purpose district;
(6) school or college athletic event not related to firearms;
(7) daycare facility or pre school facility;
(8) place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law;
(9) church or other established religious sanctuary unless express permission is given by the appropriate church official or governing body; or
(10) hospital, medical clinic, doctor’s office, or any other facility where medical services or procedures are performed unless expressly authorized by the employer.
A person who wilfully violates a provision of this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not less than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, at the discretion of the court and have his permit revoked for five years.
Nothing contained herein may be construed to alter or affect the provisions of Sections 10 11 320, 16 23 420, 16 23 430, 16 23 465, 44 23 1080, 44 52 165, 50 9 830, and 51 3 145.
There's plenty of places in SC you can't carry, even with a permit, but unless there's a federal law hidden somewhere in the gazillion pages of federal laws, there's nothing in our state that would preclude you wearing a firearm into a bank. Before she died, my wife worked in a bank that was robbed, and one of the customers was laying on the floor armed with a pistol, and not one word was said about it... The robbers had shotguns, and apparently he didn't see any use in shooting it out with them.
WT
M) A permit issued pursuant to this section does not authorize a permit holder to carry a concealable weapon into a:
(1) police, sheriff, or highway patrol station or any other law enforcement office or facility;
(2) detention facility, prison, or jail or any other correctional facility or office;
(3) courthouse or courtroom;
(4) polling place on election days;
(5) office of or the business meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or special purpose district;
(6) school or college athletic event not related to firearms;
(7) daycare facility or pre school facility;
(8) place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law;
(9) church or other established religious sanctuary unless express permission is given by the appropriate church official or governing body; or
(10) hospital, medical clinic, doctor’s office, or any other facility where medical services or procedures are performed unless expressly authorized by the employer.
A person who wilfully violates a provision of this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not less than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, at the discretion of the court and have his permit revoked for five years.
Nothing contained herein may be construed to alter or affect the provisions of Sections 10 11 320, 16 23 420, 16 23 430, 16 23 465, 44 23 1080, 44 52 165, 50 9 830, and 51 3 145.
There's plenty of places in SC you can't carry, even with a permit, but unless there's a federal law hidden somewhere in the gazillion pages of federal laws, there's nothing in our state that would preclude you wearing a firearm into a bank. Before she died, my wife worked in a bank that was robbed, and one of the customers was laying on the floor armed with a pistol, and not one word was said about it... The robbers had shotguns, and apparently he didn't see any use in shooting it out with them.
WT
bogie
Member
Guys, in your pursuit of minutia, you are missing the big picture.
And if anyone is still reading this, here's how to derail a perfectly good thread: When someone is going along in a thread, and they're talking about doing something useful, like getting a few gun folks actually semi-organized to say something about infringement on our rights, you bring up some sort of hair splitting concept that involves another civil right or three, preferably with long typed citations. Because with 73,000 people on this system, someone will geek out on it.
Now, let me simplify a strategy for dealing with the concept at hand:
Company puts up sign.
Company gets told that sign is offensive.
Company gets told A LOT that sign is offensive.
Company takes sign down.
We've got 73,000 reasons here to enable that third step... if some of you can just quit picking things apart.
And if anyone is still reading this, here's how to derail a perfectly good thread: When someone is going along in a thread, and they're talking about doing something useful, like getting a few gun folks actually semi-organized to say something about infringement on our rights, you bring up some sort of hair splitting concept that involves another civil right or three, preferably with long typed citations. Because with 73,000 people on this system, someone will geek out on it.
Now, let me simplify a strategy for dealing with the concept at hand:
Company puts up sign.
Company gets told that sign is offensive.
Company gets told A LOT that sign is offensive.
Company takes sign down.
We've got 73,000 reasons here to enable that third step... if some of you can just quit picking things apart.
IA_farmboy
Member
I'd like to comment on the "just leave it in the car" comments. When in college I walked or biked nearly everywhere. The bus was nearly always packed and parking was painful, I'd invariably end up walking quite a distance anyway so I tended to avoid motor transport. So I can imagine myself going about my daily business sans a car. Suppose I am legally carrying my firearm and I desire to do business with a place that wishes I do not bring in my firearm.
That leaves me with a couple choices. I can walk home and deposit my firearm, and if I am lucky the place will still be open upon my return. My other choice is to go about my day unarmed. Wow, sure glad I went through all that effort to get my permit to carry. Well perhaps there is another choice, I suppose I could lock up my firearm to the bike rack outside before entering.
By allowing a business to prohibit people from carrying arms would destroy our right to arms.
That brings me to my second point on "rights of the business". A business is an artificial person, a person existing in law but not being a natural person. This whole "house is a castle" does not apply to a business. A business does not have a house. A business is allowed to act as a person in law but only with restrictions. This is to allow things like filing a lawsuit against a business. Only a person can be taken to court, a natural or artificial person. In the case of an artificial person a representative of that person is present in court.
Law makes a distinction between natural and artificial persons. An artificial person can be created for the convenience of a group of people but that comes at the price of some of the rights of a natural person. One limitation is that a business may not be so discriminatory on how it does business and with whom it does business.
A business is not "private property" like a house is "private property". Entering a house without explicit permission can result in trespass charges. Entering a business without explicit permission can result in trespass only if explicitly asked to leave. I think a direct parallel can be drawn with being armed. A homeowner may ask that you enter unarmed. A business owner may not ask you to enter only if unarmed.
Another analogy I can draw is this, people have "rights" and "privileges", a government does not have rights but is granted "powers" and "authority". A business, an artificial person, is somewhere in between. A business may have certain rights, privileges, immunities, powers, etc. but not those rising to the level of a natural person.
That leaves me with a couple choices. I can walk home and deposit my firearm, and if I am lucky the place will still be open upon my return. My other choice is to go about my day unarmed. Wow, sure glad I went through all that effort to get my permit to carry. Well perhaps there is another choice, I suppose I could lock up my firearm to the bike rack outside before entering.
By allowing a business to prohibit people from carrying arms would destroy our right to arms.
That brings me to my second point on "rights of the business". A business is an artificial person, a person existing in law but not being a natural person. This whole "house is a castle" does not apply to a business. A business does not have a house. A business is allowed to act as a person in law but only with restrictions. This is to allow things like filing a lawsuit against a business. Only a person can be taken to court, a natural or artificial person. In the case of an artificial person a representative of that person is present in court.
Law makes a distinction between natural and artificial persons. An artificial person can be created for the convenience of a group of people but that comes at the price of some of the rights of a natural person. One limitation is that a business may not be so discriminatory on how it does business and with whom it does business.
A business is not "private property" like a house is "private property". Entering a house without explicit permission can result in trespass charges. Entering a business without explicit permission can result in trespass only if explicitly asked to leave. I think a direct parallel can be drawn with being armed. A homeowner may ask that you enter unarmed. A business owner may not ask you to enter only if unarmed.
Another analogy I can draw is this, people have "rights" and "privileges", a government does not have rights but is granted "powers" and "authority". A business, an artificial person, is somewhere in between. A business may have certain rights, privileges, immunities, powers, etc. but not those rising to the level of a natural person.
Vibe
Member
IA_farmboy
And yet your "artificial person" can still purchase and own a 2008 model Full Auto FN P-90, or M-16 (in any configuration). Whereas a REAL person cannot.
And yet your "artificial person" can still purchase and own a 2008 model Full Auto FN P-90, or M-16 (in any configuration). Whereas a REAL person cannot.
Guns and more
member
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,929
No!!!
Vibe
Member
"No" That's not the question? or
"No" it's not a Civil Right?
Not that it matters, I think you are wrong in either case.
divemedic
Member
The Supreme Court says it is.
Grantman
Member
bsf said:
Thread started off good and turned into several pages of stuff you should make an effort to understand. Heck, I'm a Kiwi and I still found it interesting. If you don't exercise your civil gun rights healthily, instead letting ignorance run unchecked in society with "no guns" signs and the like, you'll find the climate increasingly intolerable.
I find the utter disregard of the rights of other people by business owners appalling. It's amazing how business owners who decry having their rights eroded by others are the very first ones to erode the rights of people who want to do business with them. You give some people a little power and they turn into an authoritarian. This is quite evident with the rise of the Internet and how so many forums (especially political forums) have such rigid rules. It just proves that there is an authoritarian heart beating in the breast of many so called advocates of freedom, especially advocates of free speech.
And read my sig, too.
That's a truly enormous leap of logic.
The supreme court says that the Second Amendment protects a preexisting right to own firearms for personal defense.
Being able to carry them is a logical conclusion, but NOT what SCOTUS said, regardless of how much we wish it were so.
Your rights are not eroded by being told you can't carry in a store. The Constitution enumerates numerous checks on the power of government and protects individuals from infringement by the government.
Were people to take this tack when trying to argue a 2A case, the antis would be doing much better off!
Indeed there is. People like law and order, and Internet libertarians are far more common than real life ones.
I'm not a huge fan of Heinlein, aside from a select few quotes. Simply because he said something does not make it so.
It seems as if some people here think it would be okay to carry a firearm on another person's property regardless of whether or not that person wanted them and their firearm there or not. If you don't like a business owner's rules or policies, then go somewhere else. Vote with your feet, but infringing on their rights is just as bad as yours being infringed upon (although they aren't being).
csmkersh
Member
CBS220 said:
Sadly, CBS220 is correct. What is also correct it that the Second does NOT grant a right to citiznes. In fact, none of the Bill of Rights do. The BoR was intended to set limits/bans on specific things the central/federal/feral government was allowed to do. The 10th also very specifically states that all powers/rights not given the feds by the Constitution are retained by the States and the People.
doc2rn
Member
IBTL, and for what it's worth I use a small bank to prevent this very problem.
Green Lantern
Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2006
- Messages
- 1,665
Jerry - you're probably right. They'll probably practice "diplomacy" as my boss once explained it to me:
"Tell them to go to hell in a way that makes them look forward to the trip!"
"Tell them to go to hell in a way that makes them look forward to the trip!"
Ohio
http://www.ohanet.org/advocacy/state/issues/resources/04-004.pdf
The new law
provides that private employers, which would include private
hospitals, are immune from liability in a civil action for any
injury, death, or loss to person or property allegedly caused
by or related to a licensee bringing a handgun onto the
private employer’s premises or property, including motor
vehicles owned by the private employer. However, this
defense is not available to a private employer if the employer
is found to have acted with a “malicious purpose.”
Please note that private employers are also immune from
liability in a civil action for any injury, death, or loss to
person or property that was allegedly caused by or related
to the employer’s decision to permit or prohibit the
carrying of handguns on its premises.
Kentucky:
http://www.kwwlaborlaw.com/PDFs/KWW News Vol. 5, No. 1-Winter 2004.pdf
Private employers are immune from liability in a civil action for any injury, death or loss to person or property allegedly caused by or related to a person bringing a handgun onto the premises or property of the employer, unless the private employer acted with malicious purpose.
I'm sure there are others
http://www.ohanet.org/advocacy/state/issues/resources/04-004.pdf
The new law
provides that private employers, which would include private
hospitals, are immune from liability in a civil action for any
injury, death, or loss to person or property allegedly caused
by or related to a licensee bringing a handgun onto the
private employer’s premises or property, including motor
vehicles owned by the private employer. However, this
defense is not available to a private employer if the employer
is found to have acted with a “malicious purpose.”
Please note that private employers are also immune from
liability in a civil action for any injury, death, or loss to
person or property that was allegedly caused by or related
to the employer’s decision to permit or prohibit the
carrying of handguns on its premises.
Kentucky:
http://www.kwwlaborlaw.com/PDFs/KWW News Vol. 5, No. 1-Winter 2004.pdf
Private employers are immune from liability in a civil action for any injury, death or loss to person or property allegedly caused by or related to a person bringing a handgun onto the premises or property of the employer, unless the private employer acted with malicious purpose.
I'm sure there are others
- Status