Do you support a businesses right to ban guns(Poll added)

This is a discussion on Do you support a businesses right to ban guns(Poll added) within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by ccw9mm We can bear arms. But the right to do that coexists with the right of property owners to control access to ...

View Poll Results: Do you support a business's right to ban guns?

Voters
105. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES

    87 82.86%
  • NO

    18 17.14%
Page 12 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2891011121314151622 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 490
Like Tree293Likes

Thread: Do you support a businesses right to ban guns(Poll added)

  1. #166
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,824
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    We can bear arms. But the right to do that coexists with the right of property owners to control access to their property. One doesn't trump the other. Nor should it, IMO..
    Yet in effect, this is what posting is trying to do. I also don't see a way around this, regardless of what side of the argument your views fall on.
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Here is an example why the business owner should have the final say. I was a skydiving instructer in NH. We did not allow students to carry.
    You raised this same example a few weeks back. For some reason this seems to be a real hot topic recently. My response to this is the same as it was then: an activity such as skydiving, where there is an explicit safety consideration is very different than going out and about in the general public. Hopefully, however you inform your students of the prohibition makes this clear. If not, you will undoubtedly receive a different, more accepting response, than if you try to assert a totalitarian mandate irrespective of how much right you have for such a mandate.

    I answered the initial post quite a while back with the simple answer of no. Despite over 100 posts of protestations and assertions of property rights, my position has not changed. I will NOT put your property rights above my rights, period, especially when it comes to businesses open to the public which I do not view the same as your residence. All of the foot stomping and demanding has not and is not going to change my mind on this. If you are going to choose to ignore my rights, by posting, I am going to choose to ignore your rights too.

    Like another poster, I am also surprised at the number of folks who say that they support the business side. I really wonder if these individuals really feel this way or if they are just saying that because they view it as being the socially acceptable response, or even if they view themselves as being an honest and respectful person and are actually answering a different question. In other words, I wonder if this question is much like when people are asked if they attend church regularly. In the USA, when people are asked this question, about 60% of the respondents say yes they do attend church regularly whereas in Europe about 20% say that they attend regularly. When the actual attendance is measured, however, it is found that in both the USA and in Europe that about 20% of the population attends church regularly. One key theory for the discrepency is that people are answering a different question, that of are you the sort of person who believes you should attend church regularly, even though this isn't what they were being asked. I am willing to bet that the 'business rights' question is much the same.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #167
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,824
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    The thread that wouldn't die.
    Not only that, it keeps resurrecting itself about every other week. And yet nothing changes and nobody alters their stance.

  4. #168
    Ex Member Array dbglock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Durham, N.C.
    Posts
    278
    Quote Originally Posted by noway2 View Post
    Not only that, it keeps resurrecting itself about every other week. And yet nothing changes and nobody alters their stance.
    Or the signs on anybody's business, or any state's decision as to whether these signs carry any weight.

  5. #169
    Ex Member Array Pythius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Queens
    Posts
    462
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    gun owners who ban OTHER peoples' guns on their property, are hoplophobes?

    spare us the personal attacks.

    I have the RIGHT to ban other peoples' gun on MY property.

  6. #170
    Ex Member Array Pythius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Queens
    Posts
    462
    If we start enforcing the 2nd Amendment upon private property, then the 1st Amendment will be next. That means you MUST allow Skinheads and Satanists to hold a protest on your front lawn and in your kitchen.

    let's not go down this road, k?
    ccw9mm likes this.

  7. #171
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,824
    Then quit trying to force "property rights" down peoples throats. It is NOT a winner plan and it WILL backfire on you in ways that nobody can foresee. Quite honestly, Pythius, your property mantra is about the only thing I have seen you post since you've come here.

  8. #172
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by noway2 View Post
    Yet in effect, this is what posting is trying to do. I also don't see a way around this, regardless of what side of the argument your views fall on.

    You raised this same example a few weeks back. For some reason this seems to be a real hot topic recently. My response to this is the same as it was then: an activity such as skydiving, where there is an explicit safety consideration is very different than going out and about in the general public. Hopefully, however you inform your students of the prohibition makes this clear. If not, you will undoubtedly receive a different, more accepting response, than if you try to assert a totalitarian mandate irrespective of how much right you have for such a mandate.

    I answered the initial post quite a while back with the simple answer of no. Despite over 100 posts of protestations and assertions of property rights, my position has not changed. I will NOT put your property rights above my rights, period, especially when it comes to businesses open to the public which I do not view the same as your residence. All of the foot stomping and demanding has not and is not going to change my mind on this. If you are going to choose to ignore my rights, by posting, I am going to choose to ignore your rights too.

    Like another poster, I am also surprised at the number of folks who say that they support the business side. I really wonder if these individuals really feel this way or if they are just saying that because they view it as being the socially acceptable response, or even if they view themselves as being an honest and respectful person and are actually answering a different question. In other words, I wonder if this question is much like when people are asked if they attend church regularly. In the USA, when people are asked this question, about 60% of the respondents say yes they do attend church regularly whereas in Europe about 20% say that they attend regularly. When the actual attendance is measured, however, it is found that in both the USA and in Europe that about 20% of the population attends church regularly. One key theory for the discrepency is that people are answering a different question, that of are you the sort of person who believes you should attend church regularly, even though this isn't what they were being asked. I am willing to bet that the 'business rights' question is much the same.
    I think folks are pretty clear on this and there is no skewing of data or opinions to be socially accepted. Let us just take it at face value that folks beleive that business's have the right to determine in weapons are allowed and that so far a very few on this froum think that they can and should be able to carry a gun wherever and whenever they want.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  9. #173
    Member Array Carvin66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    170

    Do you support a businesses right to ban guns

    I support private property rights. Private citizens may require whatever they believe appropriate.
    Government entities have no such privilege however as they are owned by myself and other citizens.

  10. #174
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius View Post
    If we start enforcing the 2nd Amendment upon private property, then the 1st Amendment will be next. That means you MUST allow Skinheads and Satanists to hold a protest on your front lawn and in your kitchen.

    let's not go down this road, k?
    Yup. In time, such destruction of rights would lead to destruction indeed, sure as sunshine.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  11. #175
    VIP Member
    Array Jeanlouise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    2,101
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius View Post
    gun owners who ban OTHER peoples' guns on their property, are hoplophobes?
    NO! That is absolutely NOT what the article is about. Read it, it's an amazingly good piece about dealing with people who are anti-gun and why many of them think the way they do.
    ArmyMan likes this.
    It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.

    http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown...eaves%20office

  12. #176
    Ex Member Array Pythius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Queens
    Posts
    462
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeanlouise View Post
    NO! That is absolutely NOT what the article is about. Read it, it's an amazingly good piece about dealing with people who are anti-gun and why many of them think the way they do.
    I already know why many people are anti-gun. Its because they live in urban areas where gun-crimes are wide & painful to constantly hear about.

    In many places, guns are more about crime than recreation & self-defense. That's why most folks who are anti-gun in the USA, are this way.

    As for it being about being cowardly, insecure, and afraid of aggression and strength, that's just self-serving crap.

  13. #177
    VIP Member Array Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    2,782
    I don't think there is a global answer to this question.

    I would normally support someones right to restrict something from their place of business (i.e., no shirt, or no shoes, etc) but if it is something very personal to me and I am the only one with knowledge of it the only time they would have awareness would be if I exposed it.

    It would be like saying you cannot enter this business if you are wearing green underwear. Only if I exposed my green underwear would it even be known. That would only happen (exposing my green underwear) under dire circumstances.

    If there was a bad guy that failed to follow the rules and carried a gun onto the premises and did or attempted harm to me then I would hold the business responsible since they removed my ability for maintaining my own safety and security.
    oneshot likes this.
    Yoda, I am, yes.

  14. #178
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,064
    It doesn't matter if I support it or not. A business has the right to not allow firearms on their property.
    Exactly the same way if you owned a restaurant and didn't want bare feet or shirtless patrons sitting down to eat in your establishment.
    Or you owned a pharmacy and do not want customers bringing their dogs into your business.
    It no different.
    Even if the State law said that dogs COULD legally be allowed into pharmacies...that should not make any difference to you if you did not want people bringing dogs into YOUR pharmacy.

    If the gun policy of a particular business bothers you...the answer is to not patronize that business with your money.

    Some other smart business person "out there" WILL want your business and your dollars and will not have signs posted. Go there.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  15. #179
    Member Array 2700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    SoFlo
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter View Post
    It doesn't matter if I support it or not. A business has the right to not allow firearms on their property.
    Exactly the same way if you owned a restaurant and didn't want bare feet or shirtless patrons sitting down to eat in your establishment.
    Or you owned a pharmacy and do not want customers bringing their dogs into your business.
    It no different.
    Even if the State law said that dogs COULD legally be allowed into pharmacies...that should not make any difference to you if you did not want people bringing dogs into YOUR pharmacy.

    If the gun policy of a particular business bothers you...the answer is to not patronize that business with your money.

    Some other smart business person "out there" WILL want your business and your dollars and will not have signs posted. Go there.
    That about sums it up for me.
    NRA Certified Instructor - RSO - Life Member

    The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them.
    -Albert Einstein

  16. #180
    Member Array billstaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    203
    Here in Oregon private business owners have the right to deny entry or service to anyone as they see fit. That means that if they elect not to have guns on the premises, it is their right to do so. There is no state law about this. It is private property law.

    If someone is caught with a gun, they the store owner has the right to tell them to leave immediately. If the gun bearer doesn't leave when asked, then it becomes a police matter of criminal trespass. While that is a misdemeanor here, it will still cost you a citation and you will lose your CHL for sure.

    It is much easier to simply walk away and spend your money someplace else.

    It doesn't make any sense to get all huffy over some business owner's decision to ban guns. Spend your money in places that don't mind if you carry or not.
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

buisness banning guns in michigan
,
gun control
,
powered by mybb business license in washington
,
powered by mybb consumer protection cases
,

powered by mybb mail sign in

,
powered by mybb michigan consumer protection
,
powered by mybb move to colorado
,
powered by mybb ownership
,
powered by mybb public opinion
,
powered by mybb taurus firearms
,

powered by mybb top employers

,
when do you have a legal right to deny service in public accomdation facility
Click on a term to search for related topics.