Concealed carry in stores and shops with "No Weapons" signs

[Beau]

Howdy Pard!
Yeah, but I got in trouble because of precisely that sort of sign.
It said:
"No shirt, no shoes, no service."

It said nothing about pants!!!!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

That's the wrong type of gun to be open carrying.

 

[M-Taliesin]

That's the wrong type of gun to be open carrying.

Howdy Beau!
I can't seem to leave home without it!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

 

[JoeSparky]

Howdy Beau!
I can't seem to leave home without it!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

Did you WANT to be introduced to one Lorena Bobbit?

 

[Wolfstanus]

If you cc correctly they won't suspect a thing. But as son as they see it they can ask you to leave. Then you leave.

 

[mahkagari]

Howdy Pard!
Yeah, but I got in trouble because of precisely that sort of sign.
It said:
"No shirt, no shoes, no service."

It said nothing about pants!!!!

Blessings,
M-Taliesin

You should have worn your HAT! Why, oh, WHY must I always be the one to remind you of this?

 

[protias]

If you cc correctly they won't suspect a thing. But as son as they see it they can ask you to leave. Then you leave.

Why would you give business to someone who hates the Constitution?

 

[wrightme]

Why would you give business to someone who hates the Constitution?

Those who do not desire firearms in their businesses don't necessarily hate the Constitution. In fact, they are exercising their Rights by choosing. We may not like their choice, but their choice isn't necessarily one rooted in a hatred for the Constitution.

 

[protias]

Those who do not desire firearms in their businesses don't necessarily hate the Constitution. In fact, they are exercising their Rights by choosing. We may not like their choice, but their choice isn't necessarily one rooted in a hatred for the Constitution.

Please explain further. Would you think the same way if a business said no shirts with writing on them, or no people of a certain color/religion, or anything else?

 

[wrightme]

Please explain further. Would you think the same way if a business said no shirts with writing on them, or no people of a certain color/religion, or anything else?

How do you claim that those businesses DO hate the Constitution? In other words, what specifically is it about the choice of a business owner to ban firearms in his/her business location that makes you claim that this indicates hatred for the Constitution?

You claim they hate it, support your claim.

 

[protias]

How do you claim that those businesses DO hate the Constitution? In other words, what specifically is it about the choice of a business owner to ban firearms in his/her business location that makes you claim that this indicates hatred for the Constitution?

You claim they hate it, support your claim.

If one does not want something in their stores, that was given to us by God, reiterated in the Constitution, then I would have no respect for God or the Constitution. With this lack of respect is a self righteousness that says you are better than others because you can prohibit their rights. You laud that over them and then threaten them with getting arrested because you do not want anyone equal.

 

[JamesB]

If one does not want something in their stores, that was given to us by God...

Ok. I know about Charlton Heston and guns, but he was just Moses. I like the thought that God made my Glock though...

 

[wrightme]

If one does not want something in their stores, that was given to us by God, reiterated in the Constitution, then I would have no respect for God or the Constitution. With this lack of respect is a self righteousness that says you are better than others because you can prohibit their rights. You laud that over them and then threaten them with getting arrested because you do not want anyone equal.

So, to you, the collective Right is more important than the individual Right?


There are other reasons a business owner may have for denying firearms in their business, whether it fits your view of Rights or not. And, the Right isn't prohibited. The potential customer can choose to retain their Right by not choosing to be a customer in that business. Alternatively, the potential customer can choose to temporarily suspend their Right to become a customer.


The business owner has the right to choose what to allow in their business. Others have the right to choose to either be a customer or not. There is no onus upon each to either be or not be a customer of that business. It isn't against the Constitution, unless each person is under an onus to be a customer of that business.

 

[protias]

So, to you, the collective Right is more important than the individual Right?


There are other reasons a business owner may have for denying firearms in their business, whether it fits your view of Rights or not. And, the Right isn't prohibited. The potential customer can choose to retain their Right by not choosing to be a customer in that business. Alternatively, the potential customer can choose to temporarily suspend their Right to become a customer.


The business owner has the right to choose what to allow in their business. Others have the right to choose to either be a customer or not. There is no onus upon each to either be or not be a customer of that business. It isn't against the Constitution, unless each person is under an onus to be a customer of that business.

Woah there, let's not jump to conclusions. A business is open to the public. If someone wants to deny the rights in their home, that's a whole 'nother matter.

 

[wrightme]

Woah there, let's not jump to conclusions. A business is open to the public. If someone wants to deny the rights in their home, that's a whole 'nother matter.

I have not jumped to conclusions. I know we are speaking of a business that is open to the public. That does not mean a business owner is required to allow every member of the public onto their property.

What part of my post makes you feel I jumped to some conclusion? Further, why do you seem to feel that a business owner cannot limit rights in their business?


If you are speaking of 'for the collective right and not the individual right,' are you instead for individual rights, unless the individual is a business owner?

 

[Bellum_Intus]

A business is open to the public. If someone wants to deny the rights in their home, that's a whole 'nother matter.

A business is indeed open to the public, however, it's still private property..

I can ask ANYONE to leave my place of business FOR ANY REASON.. and if they don't .. PD will escort them out.

Your rights to carry do not trump an individuals rights.. period.. ever..

I do not enter businesses with signs, because I respect their right as a private company to make decisions while voting with my wallet..

--Rob

 

[bogidu]

A business is indeed open to the public, however, it's still private property..

I can ask ANYONE to leave my place of business FOR ANY REASON.. and if they don't .. PD will escort them out.

Your rights to carry do not trump an individuals rights.. period.. ever..

I do not enter businesses with signs, because I respect their right as a private company to make decisions while voting with my wallet..

--Rob

Grrrr, can't find the 'like' button!

 

[jdholmes]

Indeed...

You have the right to wear your pants however you like, but if you want to shop at my in-laws shop, "Jake's Trading Post" you will abide by the sign on the front door instructing you to "Pull Up Your Pants Before Entering".



I am not forced to give my business to a private enterprise open to the public. I am forced to use the DMV - a true public building, and as such they cannot deny me my constitutional freedom to carry.

 

[Logan 5]

Hmmm. I'm curious.

If I have a business, let's say it's a restaurant, and I have a sign saying "No Weapons Allowed", it's is argued that it's unConstitutional.
On the other hand, if I have a sign that says "No Child Molesters Allowed", what is that?

Considering what happened in Aurora and the theatre shooting, is a restaurant staffed better and more clearly than a theatre or not? I would think so.
Even then, should I make a rule just for you and your friends that disregards my preferences in hopes that maybe you are there constant enough to prevent such a shooting from happening in my restaurant?

jdholmes, explain to me why you feel that a business cannot decide who can or can not enter.

I'm not picking a fight, I just want to understand where you are coming from.

 

[jdholmes]

Way to revive a dead thread - that stance has been covered many times. Rot on troll.

 

[Logan 5]

reviing the thread? Well, since I am the OP, I figure I'll revive it if I want. I asked you a simple questing in a non-confrontational manner and you respond by insulting instad of directing me to the other threads.

I would be, of course, fully knowledgeable on those threads you speak of except I was without internet for 3+ months.

ETA: I just noticed that I am NOT the OP for this thread. My error.