posted "no guns"

[grizz5675]

then again i used to carry b-4 i got my carry permit......who has to know.

 

[TAB]

Its nice to see the complete lack of respect for the wishs of others.

 

[Treo]

Its nice to see the complete lack of respect for the wishs of others

You don't have to live with my decisions

 

[ants]

Posted by Treo:
You don't have to live with my decisions

But on my property, Treo, you have to live with mine.

 

[Treo]

(Ants) But on my property, Treo, you have to live with mine

Did I write this in Chinese?

(Treo) I absolutly respect the right of a home owner to dictate what is and isn't acceptable on their property.

When this issue first came up here I was strongly in the property owner's rights camp. I still am on the issue of private property owners but not public access businesses.

What changed my mind was the video of Suzanna Gratia Hupp testifying before congress ( or maybe the Texas legislature) about carry rights and how a bad law rendered her defenseless when a maniac with a gun ( ever notice the bad guys always seem to have guns regardless of the law? Haven't they ever heard of ptoperty owner's rights?) drove a truck through the wall of Luby's Cafeteria and started killing people . A little publicized fact, among the dead at Luby's were four people who had guns in their cars but not on their person because the had to live ( or in this case die) with some legislator's decision that they shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun for self defense.

If this illistration doesn't frame the issue for you nothing else I say will either

 

[M203Sniper]

Well you could stand outside the establishment claiming that the property owner is a Pedophile and a Murderer, as long as you are not on his/her property there's nothing they can do about it. Signs work both ways.

Of course it's a lot less hassle to just not go in to such a place, as many of us here choose to do.

You are correct in thinking that no person on this earth has the ability to take away your rights. There is no force of arms strong enough or law so well written as to stop you from worshiping, speaking out against wrongs, or gathering for good (1st) defending yourself (2a) or your home (3a/4a) or any other fundamental right addressed by our laws.

On this issue, however you and I do not have the full backing of the law. It is better for you to walk away from a sign than walk into a bad situation - with the property owner, a patron or the police - it will not end well for YOU, and that's all you need to be concerned with, until the law changes in your favor.

People will realize that the second amendment has nothing to do with hunting and it is not at odds with property rights. They are two distinct concepts and blurring the lines between a God Given Right and a thing you hold in your hand does nothing.

 

[ants]

No, Treo, you didn't write anything in Chinese. Nor did I.

I own a place of business. You follow my rules in my place of business.
I don't care what you think.
And believe me, I won't be polite if you don't follow my rules in my place of business.

Just for the record, I do not have a No Gun policy in my place of business. You are welcome to come armed.
But I won't be told by anyone that my few rules will be ignored.
I only have a few rules, but if you don't want to follow them you stay out.

 

[CoRoMo]

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Well you could stand outside the establishment claiming that the property owner is a Pedophile and a Murderer, as long as you are not on his/her property there's nothing they can do about it. Signs work both ways.

Obviously you're not familar with the term slander.

 

[jlh26oo]

At my own house I have a policy of No Pornography

This is O.T. and purely out of curiosity, but which if any of these would be allowed in your home? Is pretty much anything below playboy O.K.?

-Plumpers
-Barely Legal
-Penthouse
-Cinemax
-Playboy
-National Geographic
-F.H.M.
-S.I. Swimsuit Edition
-Makita Girl Calendar
-Sears Catalog

etc.

 

[Treo]

(Ants)
I don't care what you think.

Obviously you do, otherwise you wouldn't be going to this length to change what I think.

But I won't be told by anyone that my few rules will be ignored.
I only have a few rules, but if you don't want to follow them you stay out.

I have no problem with that until one of your rules infringes on my right to liberty ( real liberty not just my right to ignore your "No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service" sign) If I have to bow to allah to enter your shop I'm not coming in. Or my right to life ( self explanatory). My bank has a sign on the door requesting that patrons remove their hat and sunglasses before entry, it violates my right to self expression and I follow it to a "T" . The sign next to it that says " No concealed weapons past this point" not so much.

The law in Texas at the time of the Luby's massacre deprived the citizens of Texas of the right to defend their lives and because of that 19 people died. 32 people died a VTech and 9 died at NIU for the same reason.

If my right to life ( my most precious posession) is truly inailenable then no law, no corperate policy and not one of your rules can ailenate me from it, nor will I allow them to.

I'm not talking about ignoring some machs nix rule of your's I'll follow those to the letter I will not allow you to dictate when, how and if I can defend my self.

 

[px4storm]

Where I live, in Ohio, there just aren't many places that are posted. I guess I am lucky. The worst thing is trying to find a restaurant that does not have a liquor license but there are a few around.
Other than restaurants, if I can't carry, I don't patronize.

 

[jlh26oo]

Quote:
"But I won't be told by anyone that my few rules will be ignored.
I only have a few rules, but if you don't want to follow them you stay out."

I have no problem with that until one of your rules infringes on my right to liberty ( real liberty not just my right to ignore your "No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service" sign) If I have to bow to allah to enter your shop I'm not coming in. Or my right to life ( self explanatory). My bank has a sign on the door requesting that patrons remove their hat and sunglasses before entry, it violates my right to self expression and I follow it to a "T" . The sign next to it that says " No concealed weapons past this point" not so much.

The law in Texas at the time of the Luby's massacre deprived the citizens of Texas of the right to defend their lives and because of that 19 people died. 32 people died a VTech and 9 died at NIU for the same reason.

If my right to life ( my most precious posession) is truly inailenable then no law, no corperate policy and not one of your rules can ailenate me from it, nor will I allow them to.

Not allow them to by not entering his house, or just not following his rule while in his house?

If it's concealed and no one knows, walking into his house is just like at your bank (I.E. no harm no foul). O.T.O.H. what if, and this is a huge hypothetical, but what if his rule was no guns in his home, and he was a friend of a friend whose house you are entering for some reason- but he also has a metal detector at the door along with his "no guns" sign. Would you tell your friend you'll wait outside for him while he's in this gun-free house, or leave your C.C.W. in the car while you're in his house, or just set off the detector and ask what part of SHALL NOT does he not understand?

I take your approach with banks, stores, restaurants etc (I.E. private property but still public "place"), but if it came to someone who expressly forbid it in their home, I don't think my decision would hinge on whether their house rule is fair or not vs. my rights if I didn't have to be in their house.

 

[c_jackson]

I grew up in SD and I saw the "no guns" sign posted in a lot of businesses. To me, it applied to the hunters coming in from the field, including me. A lot of times, we carried sidearms for different reasons, we weren't gunslingers, but the business owners just didn't want us totin' hardware in their stores, banks and so forth. It made a bad image for the people who didn't carry guns, as well as making everybody uncomfortable in general. Usually, the sign was a polite reminder to us. We never took it as an offense, it wasn't that big of a deal. But, then again, in States like mine, guns were just part of life. It was like having a toolbox in your vehicle. In the more populated States, I see where it could have a different meaning. Guns=trouble anytime you have a lot of people in a smaller area.

Just my .02,

C Jackson

For any gun owner with honorable intentions, respecting the rights of others is paramount. If they don't want your gun on their property and you don't like it, you DO have the option, common sense dictating your own actions, just to turn around and leave.

 

[Treo]

(c. jackson) Not allow them to by not entering his house, or just not following his rule while in his house

This is the third time I've posted this statement, maybe if I bold it people will actually read it

(Treo) I absolutly respect the right of a home owner to dictate what is and isn't acceptable on their property

 

[jlh26oo]

(B.T.W. Treo I think that one's my quote, not from C.J.'s post)


In your post number 37 you are specifically talking shops, banks, etc only? Because "ants" is the pornography guy who posed his "no porn" sign analogy, and I thought you and ants were operatinig on that level.

Anyways, I'm not sure a business owner DOESN'T have the same on his privately owned property, it just conflicts with our right to defend ourself- O.T.O.H. that is an illusion I.M.O. because we don't HAVE to go on their property either (just like at a person's home, we don't have to go to that business).

 

[jacksonator]

As I see it, if you don't like the decision of the owner, don't go there. Period. That is what I would do. / But we start on a slippery slope when we start believing OUR rights supercede the rights of others on their own property.

Well said, JWarren.

 

[Treo]

In your post number 37 you are specifically talking shops, banks, etc only? Because "ants" is the pornography guy who posed his "no porn" sign analogy, and I thought you and ants were operatinig on that level.

In post 33 ants states that he owns a business


Thesis: Your rights as a property owner end where they infringe my right to life (and the defense there of) and liberty.

I've made this statement in all of my posts in this thread and I haven’t heard a single actual argument yet against it. To paraphrase Ted Nugent, I don't need a document to explain to me that I have the right to defend my life. That right exists independent of the 2nd amendment or any law of the land it is an inalienable right Inalienable means “ can not be transferred to another” (American Heritage Dictionary) that means that you can’t take it away.

Virginia Tech, Luby’s Cafeteria and Northern Illinois University have all provided convincing proof of what happens when a citizen surrenders his rights to the state or (in the case of Vtech) a private entity.

If I enter your place of business with my sidearm it will remain in its holster on my hip unless needed. My mere possession of a firearm does not infringe on your right to life or liberty, I t will not affect your ability to make money that day, and It will not drive your customers away (I never advocated the open display of a firearm in a Criminal Protection Zone).

The rule (and any such like it) is illogical because the criminals aren’t going to follow it anyway. What do you supposed would have happen if one of Cho Sung Hui’s teachers had jumped in front of him and said “ Now Cho, you know there’s a school rule against bringing guns to class.” Do you think he’d have said ‘OOPS s I forgot. “ And put the gun down?

I’m haven’t put anything in this post that wasn’t in the others and I’m tired of going around and around this mountain so I’m going to end this here. If you really want to defend your position tell me why your rights as a property owner override my right to defend my life.

Other than that I’m done

 

[jlh26oo]

#43
jacksonator
New Member



Join Date: 06-28-08
Posts: 1 Quote:
As I see it, if you don't like the decision of the owner, don't go there. Period. That is what I would do. / But we start on a slippery slope when we start believing OUR rights supercede the rights of others on their own property.

Well said, JWarren.

YES. The only way I could even imagine someone thinking otherwisei is if they refused to acknowledge that it's our choice whether to enter said property.

 

[Tamlin]

Treo,

I am just as much a pro-carry guy as you are, and I was trying to explain why the law of private property trumps the right to self-protection in my last post. I believe EVERYONE has the right to defend themselves, and I believe EVERYONE has the right to carry a gun to accomplish this purpose (well, everyone that is not a convicted VIOLENT felon, mentally insane, etc). But, as I said, only the government is constraint to not infringe our rights. There is no difference or distinction between a private business owned by Joe Smith and a large corporation, such as Luby's cafeteria. Yes, businesses are "open to the public" but they are still private property. If the owner of that private property doesn't want you doing something on his property, then you have two choices: (1) stop what it is that you are doing, or (2) leave his property. If Luby's posted "no guns" signs, whose choice was it for those people to patronize Luby's? No one made them go in. They could have just as easily gone to another restaurant that didn't have a sign posted. Private property rights trump because even though a business is open to the public, you are impliedly INVITED there. The owner can terminate that invite whenever he wants. Now, to be fair, would I go into Luby's carrying a concealed weapon anyway? Yes. Because as I explained, I am not committing any crime unless the owner finds out and asks me to leave and I refuse. Then I am trespassing. If I am eating dinner and some a@@hole comes in and starts shooting up the place, do you really think I will be charged with trespassing if I pull my gun and take him out? Do you think I would CARE if I were charged with trespassing in that situation? But if I walked in and the owner/manager noticed my gun and told me I couldn't bring it in, I would leave. IT'S HIS ESTABLISHMENT. I am choosing to patronize it. If he doesn't want me there, I will spend my money elsewhere. My life or liberty do not depend on going in his restaurant - I have NO RIGHT to go in his restaurant if he does not want me there. Now, if I am in a truly public place (walking down the sidewalk), that is a totally different story. I have every right to be there, and every right to carry my gun.

Bottom line: If you choose to step onto any private property, the owner of that property can tell you what to do. If you don't like what he tells you to do, you can leave.

 

[Mousegun]

I own a place of business. You follow my rules in my place of business.

I think of Ms. Hupp watching her parents die at the hands of a kook. I ask, if I followed a sign in a PUBLIC business and the same or similar thing happened to me, would I be able to live with myself because of a sign that violated my constitutional rights and I chose to follow it. Yes, I could patronize another business, and I would after letting the owner know why I left, but sometimes that is just not practical. Think of the many situations we have all been in with family, friends, and co-workers that would make for a difficult situation for us to respect a sign that says "no no" in a public place. On top of it all, would that public place be liable for my safety after the sign kept me from personal self protection?

You guys that live in states where the state realized it carried more weight than a sign and does not prosecute a person for ignoring the sign unless he is asked to leave, don't know how lucky you are. Here in Tn. it s a crime not to run away from that sign. Trespassing is not an option.

Last but far from least, I would feel safer if I owned a business and knew that half the people in that business, at any given time, were legal CCW carriers knowing full well that a sign does not stop a person that is not legal.

 

[Deltaboy1984]

Texas says if they displace the 30-06 sign in the state mandated size font and coloring at the door of their business then they can forbid you entrance or ask you to leave.

 

[Mohawk]

I can't tell you how many times I've read the sign "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". "No shoes, no shirt, no service." is another good one. "No guns allowed on premises." is also seen. In each case the owner of the property or business is stating the conditions for the general public to enter. No one has any rights that trump the owner's right to set his own conditions for dealing with the public. If you won't disarm yourself before entering then you have the choice not to enter. Nothing else is morally acceptable. From my perspective, I would structure my route and stops so that it doesn't infringe on the rights of others by carrying where it isn't accepted, rather than trying to change the world around me to suit my personal preferences. If I owned an establishment and had a "no guns allowed" policy(which I would never do) and someone came in and I saw their weapon printing through their shirt I would refuse service and ask them to leave immediately and never come back. I'd also be extremely angry that they dared to disrespect me and my rules on my property. That's my take on this subject.

 

[c_jackson]

Thanks jlh2600,

I'm glad you cleared that one up. Treo, I'm an FNG here and I didn't want to seem like I was stepping on toes. BTW, anyone who owns a gun is welcome in my house. Hell, I'd probably think there's something wrong with you if you left it in your car. Besides, my family's been around 'em for years, we're used to it. The crime element is a concern, yes, but all the gunslingers who show up on my doorstep are friends. This is a small town and everybody knows everybody else. I don't worry about it.

CJ

 

[Mousegun]

No one has any rights that trump the owner's right to set his own conditions for dealing with the public. If you won't disarm yourself before entering then you have the choice not to enter. Nothing else is morally acceptable.

I can honestly understand your position but it does seem that there are a number of states who's laws don't exactly see it that way by giving the gun owner a chance to exit before charging him or her with a trespassing or more severe count.

They don't make it an immediate criminal offense like Tennessee does.

Those states have granted the "legal" privilege to carry a gun and it appears that they feel that privilege over-rides a sign to a partial degree. If the gun carrier does not respect the owner's requests and leave, it is then and only then that problems could arise.

Yes, you could choose not to enter but at times that choice is extremely impractical and your sense of moral acceptability may have to be over-ridden.

For example, if you are with a group of people and you are the driver. You park the car at a considerable distance and the group decides to eat or go to a show that has a sign on the door. Your gun is fully concealed and no one knows you have it. What then do you do? Me, I would enter and stay with the group and not feel one bit of guilt about it.

OTOH, if in a condition of open carry, I would not enter because I would obviously antagonizing a situation.

A real problem develops in a state like Virginia where you must open carry in a place that serves alcohol to stay within the limits of the law. If that establishment is signed, then under the condition described above, your only choice, to stay within the law, is not to enter no matter how many people you have with you.

It really boils down to a matter of choices but the one thing that bothers me is that an establishment that posts a sign is probably not responsible for my safety if I left my gun in the car and something went down while I was in there.