Truth in advertising - a twisted thought

[ShooterMcGavin]

I was thinking about the battle on both sides; one to support personal rights and firearm ownership, and the other being the false claims made to take away personal firearms ownership and our freedoms. I've started noticing the few threads about anti-gun establishments becoming victims of robberies. This thought came about when realizing all the lies the anti-rights side will create and perpetuate, and then reading/hearing about Eric Holder's comment regarding "[We] really need to brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way."

This is a slightly twisted thought of mine, but it makes sense. For the record, I am not suggesting that we do this, but maybe there is another direction to take this idea...

Start an advertisement campaign to would-be robbers, criminals, thieves, violent offenders, etc.: "Looking for a place to commit criminal and violent acts? ACME Vendor Inc. has just become a gun-free zone where you will find no resistance!". List off the places in a public forum where firearm possession is restricted to law enforcement, who may be 10, 20, 30+ minutes away. It is almost a counter to the anti-rights folks releasing names and addresses of those who are licensed to carry concealed.

This is just a thought for discussion. Of course, I DO NOT want anyone to become the victim of a robbery or violent encounter!, even those who vote against my rights or use their 1st Amendment rights to suppress my rights. I just wonder if it might make some of the establishments reconsider their policies, or maybe steer their customer base into different businesses?

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Why not do it?

I know of at least one case where a homeowner posted a sign in his yard to would-be burglars, telling them there were no guns in the house next door.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

I guess it just seems "low", sort of pointing out to criminals where they can find easy prey - not that they can't figure that out themselves. I know that those fighting to take our freedoms away sink to lower levels, but still. Plus, I don't have the money for a campaign like that. I also could not afford the law suits that would arise if someone got hurt, robbed, or just felt that they didn't like the message. I really don't think the judge or jury would be on my side.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Just publish a list of businesses with a "no-guns-allowed" policy. Do it on a website. Heck, post the list on Youtube.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

Just publish a list of businesses with a "no-guns-allowed" policy. Do it on a website. Heck, post the list on Youtube.

I was thinking more along the lines of billboards, posters, TV, etc. That is where people who don't seek out information get their information, I think.

ETA: There are some lists like that online already. However, they are only seen by those people who don't need any convincing - on gun forums, prepper websites, even youtube. If you posted something like that type of list on democratic underground or the Brady Campaign website, etc., it would be taken down immediately and you'd be banned.

 

[blarby]

Better yet- since they've chosen to make an app for pointing out lawful gun owners, make an app for gun-free zones.

I have no problems with "turnabout is fair play".

Sometimes, ya gotta be careful what ya wish for, and gun-free zones awash in petty criminals seems to be a common result. Enjoy !

 

[Black Knight]

It is a very good idea. Instead of using the term "gun free zone" use the phrase "victim enriched zone where law abiding gun owners are prohibited". On the site you can say something like "These businesses welcome all forms of miscreants and bad guys and prohibit honest law abiding gun owners. Feel safe to apply your chosen trade".

 

[DT Guy]

Before Illinois got our CCW law, If I'd have had the money, I'd have put up

"Attention, Criminals: Welcome to Illinois, where Governor Pat Quinn and the Illinois Legislature Have Disarmed the Citizenry For Your Safety.
Please Don't Hurt Us!"

on some of the major interstates into the state from Indiana, Wisconsin and our other neighbors.

And then watch the %$#@storm when they're ripped down in the middle of the night by government employees.....


Larry

 

[slumlord44]

Places that ban guns usually have signs stating that. Criminals know already.

 

[USAF_Vet]

Not all criminals are as bright as you give them credit, slum lord.

Reminds me.of the Glock commercial where the stick up man tries to hold up a diner, full of cops. Some criminals are down right stupid. There's an entire series on TruTV dedicated to them.

 

[230RN]

A delicious thought, but overflowing with unintended consequences.

Example: "These businesses welcome all forms of miscreants and bad guys and prohibit honest law abiding gun owners."

I doubt that any merchant (or other) would stand for publishing that they welcome miscreants and bad guys without them seeking legal redress one way or another.

I know it was tongue-in-cheek, but it illustrates the kind of stuff that could get you in trouble. Especially considering that many anti-gunners are irrational and over-emotional about their stance and can get very self-righteous and aggressive about "their" rights.

Terry, 230RN

 

[aarondhgraham]

Could you live with the results?

Suppose you start a website that shows what retail establishments have banned their customers from carrying guns,,,
Then you read about someone in that retail establishment who got shot and killed in a robbery,,,
Then you read about how the robber got the idea from the website that you created.

Could you sleep at night?

This is not wise thinking my friends,,,
The consequences are too grim.

Aarond

.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Actually *I* sure as heck can live with the results of publishing a list of *BUSINESSES* that have "No Guns Allowed" signs in their windows. It is public information for gawd sake! What is the guberment going to do? Pass a law that says "Thou cannot publish accurate, valid, legal information about businesses."? If that happens, might as well re-write the Constitution.

Everyone has a right to defend their own lives or that of a loved one. *EVERYONE*, including rabid anti-gunners.

 

[627PCFan]

Lawsuit city....Someone place gets robbed and shot. It goes to court and the perp said I picked that place because I saw it on a billboard...........

 

[plmitch]

Suppose you start a website that shows what retail establishments have banned their customers from carrying guns,,,
Then you read about someone in that retail establishment who got shot and killed in a robbery,,,
Then you read about how the robber got the idea from the website that you created.

Could you sleep at night?

This is not wise thinking my friends,,,
The consequences are too grim.

Aarond

.

Finally a intelligent post....refreshing.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Could you live with the results?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Suppose you start a website that shows what retail establishments have banned their customers from carrying guns,,,
Then you read about someone in that retail establishment who got shot and killed in a robbery,,,
Then you read about how the robber got the idea from the website that you created.

Could you sleep at night?

The question is, could the CEOs of those establishments sleep at night -- it's THEIR fault, not someone who posted the information on a website.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

Suppose you start a website that shows what retail establishments have banned their customers from carrying guns,,,
Then you read about someone in that retail establishment who got shot and killed in a robbery,,,
Then you read about how the robber got the idea from the website that you created.

Could you sleep at night?

This is not wise thinking my friends,,,
The consequences are too grim.

Aarond

.

That was one of my main thoughts as well.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Suppose you start a website that shows what retail establishments have banned their customers from carrying guns,,,
Then you read about someone in that retail establishment who got shot and killed in a robbery,,,
Then you read about how the robber got the idea from the website that you created.

Could you sleep at night?

Nope. Sure couldn't. I can't sleep if i hurt someone's feelings. This idea, while legal perhaps, could endanger others. I don't care if my freedom of speach protects me. It's a bad idea. JMO

 

[Reloadron]

Suppose you start a website that shows what retail establishments have banned their customers from carrying guns,,,
Then you read about someone in that retail establishment who got shot and killed in a robbery,,,
Then you read about how the robber got the idea from the website that you created.

Could you sleep at night?

This is not wise thinking my friends,,,
The consequences are too grim.

Aarond

.

Every story has two sides. Living here in Cleveland, Ohio we have but one newspaper and that would be The Cleveland Plain Dealer and that newspaper is as anti-gun as anti-gun can be. Recently they began a new game of promoting their agenda. Apparently here in Ohio the issue of CCW permits is a matter of public record. Every month the paper devoted a column to listing the names of all CCW permits issued. While the paper stopped short of publishing the addresses anyone with Google would have no problem figuring that out and the paper made it a point to mention that. This journalism clearly targeted gun owners. The Cleveland Plain Dealer isn't the only major city newspaper that was doing this. I wonder how well the editors sleep at night?

Since I seldom read that rag I can't say if the policy still exist but it sort of lends itself to a double edge sword. Those who choose to promote their place of business as a gun free zone have every right to do so. Hanging a No Guns Allowed sign in your window pretty much spells out their position without the need for a published list on a website. However, what about the rights of a newly issued CCW permit holder? Do they have a right to privacy?

Ron

 

[Sunray]

"...Lawsuit city..." At the very least. Aiding and abetting a criminal act, accessory before the fact, criminal negligence, et al. And your 'Freedom of Speech' Right won't protect you.

 

[Ky Larry]

Evert time someone at one of the "No Gun Zone" places got robbed and/or shot, the antis would point to the crime as "proof" that we need gun confiscation. It's a nice fantasy but that's all,

 

[Vern Humphrey]

"...Lawsuit city..." At the very least. Aiding and abetting a criminal act, accessory before the fact, criminal negligence, et al. And your 'Freedom of Speech' Right won't protect you.

Just like all those newspapers were successfully sued for "outing" concealed carry permit holders and FFL holders, who were later burglarized.

What, you say that never happened?

You're right -- they couldn't be sued, anymore than anyone else publishing the truth can be sued.