• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

"Only Feds Can Carry in Here..."

Status
Not open for further replies.
Someone told me one time when you run over a cat in the street, and then run over it a few mort times there comes a point when the cat will only get so flat, no matter how many more time you run over it. You might think this has nothing to do with this Thread, but I contend it does, if you get my drift.
 
no your not, you removing a tool from thier tool chest. Lets replace gun with RPG, both work for SD, is it ok for me to restrict you from carrying a RPG?

Another question... if a CCW holder pulls a gun in a robbery when they SHOULD not have and a employee is killed as a result. Who should pay for that? Right now its the employer. Is that fair?

Example, you walk into into a robbery in progress, you draw and shoot a guy pointing a gun at the clerk. Thier partner in the back that you did not see, emptys the mag in your general direction. Hiting several people. One could argue that your actions cuased that to happen. Not every one that carrys gets training.

TAB where the hell did you get your RPG? I assume you have a Title III Distructive Device Tax Stamp on that bad boy. uh oh wait... Its not possible to own an RPG even if you pay for a $200 tax stamp!? *** TAB
1. You owe me a new keyboard
2. Lets not confuse, military explosive ordinance with a firearms. Not alike in anyway what so ever. And besides they such for self defence have you ever tried using one at the normal self defece range of 21 feet? Yea not the best idea.

Second example esay answer, The bad guy who was committing the robbery and actually shot people should be held responcible!!! How was that hard criminal committing crime goes to get stoped by civvy with gun, BG injures or kills bystanders, umm this is hard . . .

BLAME THE BYSTANDERS! Hell what are you doing standing during a robbery anyway you should be kissing floor. Yea that would be the best course of action and not actually blame the BG who shot the people. But if a civilian opened up during a robbery and hit and killed somone, then civilian is looking at some prosecution. Not for murder but maybe somehting like Involentary Manslaughter
 
"You have no constitutional right to keep & bear sex toys."

Yer dern tootin'! You think people are upset at open carry of a firearm, try walking into a bank carrying a two foot rubber schlong.
Oh, and concealed is ALWAYS better. Been working for me for 30 years, the last 20+ with the proper "papers". Joe
 
HAPPINESS IS A WARM GUN
I see you conveniently left free speech out of your argument.
Apply the question in post #98 to your position.

I simply didn't see #98.
Sure bank can eject someone who is spewing racial slurs, or threats. Just like they can ask someone to leave if they are brandishing a firearm.

On the other hand they can't refuse service to someone who is acting politely/calm just because they are a known [racist/communist/libretarian/vegetarian/anarchist/muslim/etc].

In one case the person is being ejected for their actions/words at the time. In the second the person is being ejected because of their beliefs.

You could argue that someone with a gun on their hip makes the teller "uncomfortable". What is one of the tellers is "uncomfortable" around a muslims who in their opinon looks like a terrorist [wearing traditional arabic clothing], or bikers who likes a BG wearing leather jacket, black t-shirt, etc.?

Should the business have the right to eject the person or ask them to come back wearing something less scary? Removing a person (or asking them to leave/refusing service) because of their actions being disruptive/offensive/dangerous is one thing. Removing them because of in irrational fear of a pistol securely holstered is another.

There is no evidence that law abiding gun owners with a gun in holster are more likely to cause a crime or present a danger.
When is last time you saw footage of robbery where gunman had weapon securely holstered and waiting patiently in line. Now if the OP had walked into store with pistol in hand walked up to the counter and put pistol on counter facing the teller with trigger on finger that would be different (and already illegal under a series of laws).
 
Guys, could we refocus on the core issue at hand? I just started another thread. Please get in touch with the folks, and let them know that you are not happy. Enough people call/write, and enough people close accounts, they'll get the message.

And if enough people do nothing, they'll think they're doing the "safe" thing.

Be nice. Be polite. Odds are they are not "antis." They're just risk-averse -and- uneducated. We can NICELY educate them.
 
Happiness,

Businesses are certainly free to refuse service to any person that they choose as long as the reason is not one of those specifically spelled out in antidiscrimination law. RKBA is not protected under these laws.

Bogie,

I support the bank's right to make their own rules. I am also willing to help a fellow gunner try to convince them that their policy is bad. Therefore, if you post contact info on your other thread, I would be happy to fire off a letter or email inviting them to reconsider.
 
Actually, the sign in a Pennsylvania bank window has no power of law. You can carry into the bank, up to the point where they ask you to leave. If you don't leave, immediately (I don't know if that means within 10 seconds, or immediately after you've closed all your accounts), you can be charged with trespassing. It's not like Texas, where the statute describes signage with the force of law. Pennsylvania law preempts even the rights of "private" businesses, in this regard.

Still, good on ya' for givin'em whatfor.
 
"SIR, YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT HAVE THAT IN HERE! YOU'LL HAVE TO LEAVE, NOW, BEFORE I CALL THE AUTHORITIES."

I would have encouraged her to call security so that I could have clarified the situation right then and there. I would take the advice of the security and not some bank clerk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top