Do you support a businesses right to ban guns(Poll added) - Page 13

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 Yoda :SNIP: If there was a bad guy that failed to follow the rules and carried a gun onto the premises and ...

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 13 of 33 FirstFirst ... 39101112131415161723 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 195 of 490
Like Tree293Likes

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

  1. #181
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Yoda View Post
    :SNIP:
    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.
    On the same note what about the people who choose not to protect themselves but instead demand that others do it for them. That same bad guy walks in and does them harm these people will also attempt to hold the business owner responsible for failing to take reasonable measures, gun buster signs, to insure the safety of its patrons.

    Sometimes we put business owners in a very difficult spot. When it comes right down to it I cannot fault a business who might look into the risk assessment. Then make his decision based on which option is more likely to open him up to lawsuits. Will more lawsuits arise from allowing patrons the ability to defend themselves or will more be filed because he did not put up signs which would at least give the appearance of making the effort to control violence.

    Michael
    Jeanlouise and GeorgiaDawg like this.


  2. #182
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    The thread that wouldn't die.
    Most online forums I visit have many threads in excess of 1,000 posts. This thread only has under 200 posts, it's a baby thread, very small, just getting started.

  3. #183
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Pythius 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.
    And I have the right to ignore your ban.

    See how far that get's us?

  4. #184
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    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?
    Protests are disruptive, a concealed gun is not.

  5. #185
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Yoda View Post
    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.
    And were you to wear green underwear past a "no-green-underwear" sign, and discovered, you can be asked to leave, but just walking past the sign shouldn't in and of itself result in a criminal charge.

  6. #186
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,439
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  7. #187
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    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.
    A dress code regards mere appearance. A concealed firearm does not interfere with appearance...it's concealed.

    Also, 'no-shoes/no-shirt' policies regard public health. A concealed gun does not pose a danger to public health. If they did, then concealed gun should be banned entirely.

  8. #188
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by TX expat View Post
    What exactly have you presented other than the opinion that a property owner shouldn't have the right to set limits or prohibitions on property they own?
    tacman and I have been discussing this topic allover the forum. I refer you to post #75 here: Accidentally carried into a NO CC building, but others' lives are threatened
    TX expat likes this.

  9. #189
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,787
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    tacman and I have been discussing this topic allover the forum. I refer you to post #75 here: Accidentally carried into a NO CC building, but others' lives are threatened
    gotcha

  10. #190
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    tacman and I have been discussing this topic allover the forum. I refer you to post #75 here: Accidentally carried into a NO CC building, but others' lives are threatened
    This is from the other post:
    I want to add 'lawfully carrying a firearm' as a protected class because I have a need to carry whereas the business does not have a need to deny.
    You come to my skydiving busines and I say no to you carrying. Not because of safety but becasue I do not want to take the time to make sure you are rigged properly with a weapon. It can be done, I as the owner do not want to do it. So it is not a safety issue, just what the owner wants for his convenience.
    Now, explain to me why you would the need to carry while jumping and on the drop zone?
    Sir, you do not have a need to carry everywhere you go. You have a desire to carry wherever you want to go. There is a big difference.
    As far as all of the qoutes you had in the referred post you only mention one that allowed or will allow employees to carry. And that was for STATE employees at work. EDIT: Just noticed it for state employees to be allowed to lock thier weapons in cehicles also, not to carry while working. It did not address privately owned business's.
    I do agree with laws tha should allow folks to lock their weapons in their cars even if on company property.
    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

  11. #191
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    This is from the other post:

    You come to my skydiving busines and I say no to you carrying. Not because of safety but becasue I do not want to take the time to make sure you are rigged properly with a weapon. It can be done, I as the owner do not want to do it. So it is not a safety issue, just what the owner wants for his convenience.
    Now, explain to me why you would the need to carry while jumping and on the drop zone?
    Sir, you do not have a need to carry everywhere you go. You have a desire to carry wherever you want to go. There is a big difference.
    As far as all of the qoutes you had in the referred post you only mention one that allowed or will allow employees to carry. And that was for STATE employees at work. It did not address privately owned business's.
    I do agree with laws tha should allow folks to lock their weapons in their cars even if on company property.
    Firearms aren't allowed on aircraft anyway as per FAA regulations, and if someone wanted to legally push the issue it's to easy for you to designate your whole business as a 'clean zone', so you don't need to worry about it.

  12. #192
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,787
    I don't believe that applies to private aircraft

  13. #193
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by TX expat View Post
    I don't believe that applies to private aircraft
    As I understand it....
    Carrying Firearms On Aircraft
    © 2004 Reigel & Associates, Ltd./Aero Legal Services. All rights reserved.

    U.S. Statute 49 USC §46505 makes it a crime subject to fine, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, if a person “when on, or attempting to get on, an aircraft in, or intended for operation in, air transportation or intrastate air transportation, has on or about the individual or the property of the individual a concealed dangerous weapon that is or would be accessible to the individual in flight.” Additionally, under 49 USC §46303[a]n individual who, when on, or attempting to board, an aircraft in, or intended for operation in, air transportation or intrastate air transportation, has on or about the individual or the property of the individual a concealed dangerous weapon that is or would be accessible to the individual in flight is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 for each violation”.

  14. #194
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    As I understand it....
    Are you a pilot? If not then get hold of one so you have an informed answer. I have given one before and am not going to rehash it. Anyway, it is away from the thread topic. Until you can figure it out by yourself let us just say that on private aircraft leaving from privately owned airstrips you can carry (which is how we operated). Please address what I asked in my post instead of trying to deflect the topic away to something else.
    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

  15. #195
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,787
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    As I understand it....
    Those are laws pertaining to Air Carriers, not private aircraft.

    49 USC § 40102 - Definitions | LII / Legal Information Institute

    As I understand it, a private aircraft that doesn't board passengers through a TSA sterile area, would be an entirely different matter than commercial aircraft. There's still a lot of gray areas, but I do believe that you could take a suntzu skydiving lesson with your concealed carry weapon intact, assuming he allows it, and not break any Federal laws.
    ArmyMan likes this.

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 internet services in my area
,

powered by mybb mail sign in

,
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.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors