Anyone Else Find This Sign Offensive?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

joe4702

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
340
Location
San Diego, CA
This was in Arizona last weekend.
This is the second time I've seen this particular sign.

I don't like seeing "No Firearms" on businesses but I can understand why a hoplophobe business owner might post one.
But lumping legal gun carrying citizens in with illegal drug use is ridiculous.

I guess one could interpret the sign as meaning no illegal drugs or illegal guns.
Surely they don't mean to exclude someone carrying a bottle of aspirin for example.
Likewise, my gun is legally owned and carried and hence the sign doesn't apply. ;)

Edit: Not a nightclub.
It was a visitors center building on a Federal research facility, open to the public.
The land is leased from an Indian tribe.
It's possible the visitors center is operated by a private entity, but not sure.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1927.JPG
    IMG_1927.JPG
    15.3 KB · Views: 448
Last edited:
What type of business posted that sign? I can see a nightclub posting a sign like that . Yes, drugs are illegal but they are very common at clubs. The owner may be sending the signal that his club will not tolerate drug use. Likewise, many clubs don't want people carrying guns either.
 
The schools in my home town have signs very much like those shown.
 
Offensive? Maybe, but as we frequently say, you have no right to not be offended.

The establishment can be drug free and gun free, it will also be Me Free.
 
There's a similar sign in my kid's school. Inaccurate since permit holders can bring in concealed firearms. False equation bc drugs are harmful and shooting is good fun. Stupid at face value because no student thinks its within the rules (or lawful) to bring a gun to school, though some do anyway.

But perhaps an effective indoctrination, for some. On the other hand, my daughter is angered by the comparison (and teachers define guns as criminal in other ways) and often chooses projects that tie in lawful gun use ... So also an example of bad logic, for those with eyes to see.
 
Arizona residents, such as myself, don't like the signs either. If they are on public building, such as schools, we can't do much about it. If they are posted on a private business we can, by informing the owner we are taking our business elsewhere. In a number of cases I know of after the business received some unexpected reactions the signs disappeared. :evil:
 
Some of the so-called "night clubs" I have known couldn't take "no guns" or "no drugs" seriously. They would lose 99% of their customers, 98% of their kitchen and wait staff, and 100% of their entertainment.

Jim
 
i've not been offended by a sign since about 1960. There was a sign in the law of a mansion in Fayetville, NC: Dogs and soldiers keep off the grass.
 
"... Dogs and soldiers keep off the grass."

Now THAT seems offensive. Couldn't it just read, "keep of the grass" ?
 
joe4702 said:
This was in Arizona last weekend.
This is the second time I've seen this particular sign.

I don't like seeing "No Firearms" on businesses but I can understand why a hoplophobe business owner might post one.
But lumping legal gun carrying citizens in with illegal drug use is ridiculous.

I guess one could interpret the sign as meaning no illegal drugs or illegal guns.
Surely they don't mean to exclude someone carrying a bottle of aspirin for example.
Likewise, my gun is legally owned and carried and hence the sign doesn't apply. ;)
Click to expand...
Depends on where it was.

In this state, that sign, since it isn't "proper" as per the law. means exactly jack squat.
 
Stupid, yes. Offensive, not so much.

The sign makes a statement and implies a request, I disagree with both but I respect his rights even though he doesn't respect mine.

I guess when I meet people that have what I believe to be irrational or illogical beliefs then I figure they either need educating or they have thought it out and a come to a different conclusion than me (AKA the wrong conclusion).
Either way their option is theirs and therefore not mine, so I typically don't care. Therefore I don't care what they think, and if I don't care what you think I'm not going to be offended by you.
 
Maybe a bit offensive - crass in lumping a legal activity with an illegal one.

My immediate reaction was ... hey no drug use while using firearms. I can support that one!

Definitely lazy, not well considered ... and cheap. What, they couldn't afford two separate signs?
 
If the land is owned by an Indian tribe, all normal rules are out the window. Tribal law runs, and get thee hence.
Federal research facility also is a trump card, like a Post Office, fed land.
Mgkdrgn, in AZ there's are only clear cut "sign" rules for No Guns, in places that serve open alcohol. Otherwise, businesses can use whatever sign they want - it's called a "reasonable request". At least, the last time In read Title 13 that's the way it was read.
I would be very reasonable and go somewhere else.
 
Is there a Legal question here?

Don't know why we should care if anyone is personally offended by a sign.
 
Anything posted by Feds is bound to be irrational (and likely offensive).

If it were a privately owned business, I would probably try to talk with the owner....But I would not waste a lot of my breath.
 
From the OP

Likewise, my gun is legally owned and carried and hence the sign doesn't apply.
Click to expand...


Fed building on Indian land.... It applies if you carry your gun inside that building.

Why would think it doesn't?
 
I remember the NO AIRMEN signs in Wichita Falls in 1964 (Shepherd AFB). I didn't give them any of my business then, and I don't give businesses posting "NO GUNS" signs today any of my business. I do stop in and tell them that I'm going elsewhere and why. It may not make any difference to them, but it makes me feel a little bit better.

And yes I am offended at that sign. Two separate signs might not.
 
joe4702 said:
It was a visitors center building on a Federal research facility, open to the public.
Click to expand...

Key word: federal. I don't like it, but almost every federal building is off limits to guns. It's just how the laws are right now. And as usual, I'm lobbying to get them changed.

And I don't see them implying that guns = drugs. Both are off limits on federal property anyways.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

N
  • Locked
Carry in National Park?
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
swinokur
S
B
  • Locked
Traveling Through Arizona Tribal Lands on Vacation
Replies
15
Views
2K
J_McLeod
J
D
  • Locked
(MN) Signs of the times...
Replies
4
Views
487
SJG26
S
2
  • Locked
CO: New gun laws baffle businesses
Replies
13
Views
808
Billll
B
L
  • Locked
News story on Arizona's gun legislation
Replies
8
Views
698
Zoogster
Z
Back
Top