Great post ... stupid owner!
No, stupid author of the article.
Look what we have here.
One of those magical signs that stops anyone with a gun from entering.
The sign's great powers were set up to keep people from bringing guns into any place posting it - the anti-gunners' version of kryptonite.
From the article...
While police continue to sort out the shooting and look for a motive, what is clear from this shooting is the signs anti-gun lawmakers wanted and believe, like some business owners, prevent criminals from entering do not.
I don't know where pro-gun folks get the impression that the signs are supposed to stop the bad guys. It is a really stupid myth. No business owner believes a sign is going to stop criminals. If they did believe it, they would post DO NOT ROB signs, NO FIGHT signs, etc., huh?
More than anything else, the signs are to stop law abiding good guys from bringing their guns in where they might do something stupid that we see showing up on the news with disheartening frequency, like the preacher's daughter that was shot in the head by a church member and her boyfriend to whom the gun was being shown. They were apparently in what, a closet(?) when the gun discharged, went through the wall, and struck her in the head.
How about the guy in Utah at the burger place who shot the toilet? The guy in the Walmart in Arizona who had his own ND when he was fiddling with his gun out of the holster.
All of these incidents and many many more are by law abiding gun owners doing stupid stuff.
I like how the article posted in the OP talks about the failure of the sign. The sign failed and so it is obviously a stupid idea by the anti-gunners somehow, right? Looks to me like the failure isn't with the sign, but Jeff Thomas.
If we follow Jeff's logic, because bad guys took guns into the bar, the sign failed, right? This is where Jeff fails. The sign just isn't the rule of some anti-gunner bar owner. It happens to be the law. So that must mean that the law failed. Funy how Jeff puts the blame on the sign and not on the law. What is the point of laws if people are going to break them, right? After all, Jeff seems to think that there is no point to such a sign if people are going to violate it.
Notice that the author failed as well in that he put his entire emphasis on the sign not working when the bad guys in this incident broke several laws. That would seem to indicate a failure of the legal system, would it not?
Here in Oregon it's up to your conscience, no guns signs don't have force of law except in the few restricted places designated by state law.
At best, the sign is just a friendly reminder to law abiding folks who carry guns via a carry permit that they can't bring them into the bar. As we have seen repeated over and over, forgetful but well intentioned law-abiding folks manage to get busted with guns in places where it is illegal to have them. This happens with some regularity at airports and to a lesser extent, in places like courthouses.
what is clear from this shooting is the signs anti-gun lawmakers wanted and believe, like some business owners, prevent criminals from entering do not