Do you support a businesses right to ban guns(Poll added) - Page 15

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 mcp1810 I said nothing about signs. That's right, you said nothing about signs, that means your post was completely off-topic. Thank you ...

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 15 of 33 FirstFirst ... 511121314151617181925 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 225 of 490
Like Tree293Likes

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

  1. #211
    Ex Member Array ArmyMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SD
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    I said nothing about signs.
    That's right, you said nothing about signs, that means your post was completely off-topic.

    Thank you and have a good evening.


  2. #212
    VIP Member
    Array Jeanlouise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Almost Heaven
    Posts
    2,183
    guns are welcom.jpg

    click on pic to make it larger.

    Got this in an e-mail today and thought you might like it.
    1MoreGoodGuy 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

  3. #213
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,986
    As it seems Armyman is unable our unwilling to answer a simple direct question it would seem he can not rationally or logically defend his position.
    It really is simple. If you are in a place where you can be ordered to leave or face trespassing charges you do not have a right to be there. Your presence there is a privilege that has been extended to you. Hence everything relating to your presence there its based on privilege. As it is a privilege granted to you buy the owner, or manager of the business they can dictate the terms of that privilege, just as they can dictate what hours their establishment is open.
    tacman605 likes this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  4. #214
    StarPD45
    Guest StarPD45's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeanlouise View Post
    guns are welcom.jpg

    click on pic to make it larger.

    Got this in an e-mail today and thought you might like it.
    That same sign is on a business in Floyd VA. I just read about it in an email from VCDL.

  5. #215
    Member
    Array discoboxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    Yes, quite civil, for example:

    Nice double standard you have there, Disco.

    Nothing tacman has said has refuted anything I've presented, so where do you want this to go?

    One side will cite examples of property owners limiting actions of people on the property, the other side will cite examples of property owners authority to limit, itself limited.

    Where do you see this thread in 2 pages?
    ArmyMan,

    Actually it wasn't a double standard, it was past 2AM and the thread became exhausting.....I went to bed just after my post. I would have addressed the issue with others, but in my sleepy-time the thread grew a few more pages and it was self-corrected by the fine folks continuing in this forum. I am not after you personally, so please take it easy.
    “There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
    ― Albert Einstein

  6. #216
    Member Array eipo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by ArmyMan View Post
    Here we go again...

    Yes, mcp, in my state my presence in a store is still a lawful presence even if I ignore a gun-buster sign.
    Until you are asked to leave. Then you are trespassing. Here in MI, once you cross the trespassing line you are no longer engaged in a lawful activity and the charges start to mount.

    Your individual rights do not trump someone elses. When you step onto someone elses property you either abide by their rules or don't take that step.

  7. #217
    Member
    Array discoboxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    333
    So the primary argument has been property rights of business vs. gun rights.

    I am not a lawyer, but in certain situations, I do believe rights of one do trump others. Specifically in the situation of private property. I can tote my gun all I want on my own property and I can tell you not to. If I don't like your political or religious views, I can forbid you on my property with no reason stated other than I don't want you there.

    My belief is that your property is your domain and should be respected entirely as such. If I wish to do business on my private property, I still should have control over that domain as to what I allow and don't.

    I get the argument about private business being open to the public and the stated belief by some that because it's open to general public, it should be held to different standards. I wholeheartedly disagree. If I am a business who bans guns, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SHOP at my store. Like QK and others have tried to elaborate, some other very smart businessman will likely come along and capitalize on the fact that these "gun-busting" businesses are leaving out a whole other market.

    These views of mine supporting a private business the right to post and enforce such a post is something that literally drives me mad when I see it. However, property rights are foundational in a sense that your private property is the last place where you should be able to go to find peace.......the way you want it. The one place in the whole world and in this great nation where you can truly have it your way, not subject to others opinions or what they want you to have, just plain YOUR WAY. Forget for a moment that local governments enforce ordinances that overstep this, I believe that's how it was intended.

    Not limited to my home. There are hundreds of restaurants out there. The one I build to compete is because I want it my way and I think there is a market for it.
    Last edited by discoboxer; October 27th, 2012 at 03:33 AM.
    “There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
    ― Albert Einstein

  8. #218
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,090
    Quote Originally Posted by discoboxer View Post
    I do believe rights of one do trump others. Specifically in the situation of private property. I can tote my gun all I want on my own property and I can tell you not to. If I don't like your political or religious views, I can forbid you on my property with no reason stated other than I don't want you there.
    That's still not disarmament. The carrier still gets to carry (though, elsewhere if asked to leave); and the property owner still gets to dictate who's present on that property. Both "win," in that sense, and nobody is deprived of his/her rights.
    Ksgunner likes this.
    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, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #219
    Member Array eipo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    190
    To answer the question of the thread...

    I support anyone's personal property rights. That includes not allowing firearms on their property. If someone wants to invoke the "I have a right to defend myself" I will not argue that either. We all have that right.

  10. #220
    Member
    Array discoboxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    333
    Also,

    In most places where signs even have the force of law, I bet most officers will assist in asking you to leave opposed to issuing a citation.....just like a typical trespass. If you are confrontational about it when they arrive or to the owner asking you to leave, that's likely to encourage further action than just an escort off the premise. My humble opinion and I am not a LEO, so don't take my post as gospel.

    Because of my views (stated many times here), even when the signs do not have "force of law" in your state, I think it is wrong to disregard the post and go in armed. That is just my opinion, because I believe in respecting all rights. Plus, I think it is silly for me to give my money to a business that posts a sign saying I'm not welcome. There are many other businesses out there that don't mind my firearm.

    In some cases, I trade "gun-buster's" for internet commerce "price buster's"!
    “There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
    ― Albert Einstein

  11. #221
    Senior Member Array sensei2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    washington state
    Posts
    1,081
    1. i agree that they have the right to do so. i do not, "support" that decision.

    2. i really try to NOT give such businesses my patronage.

    3. "no guns" signs in Washington State do not have the force of law - you can be asked to leave, if you are discovered to be armed, but not arrested unless you refuse to leave.

    4. when i'm invited to a restaurant that has such a sign (it's one of my girlfriend's favorites), i now carry anyway. if discovered, i would leave quietly.

  12. #222
    Member
    Array discoboxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    That's still not disarmament. The carrier still gets to carry (though, elsewhere if asked to leave); and the property owner still gets to dictate who's present on that property. Both "win," in that sense, and nobody is deprived of his/her rights.
    Yes you are right because they don't have to come on my property or do business with me. They can go elsewhere.

    But in all truth, I make the argument that a business should not have to ask you to leave.....the posted sign says you should not be there in the first place with the firearm. Even in a state where they have no force of law, you are clearly being told by the owner or "person with authority", you with a firearm are not welcome. I struggle to understand how some find it acceptable to blow past a property owners rights to say "not on my property", and the CCer exempts themselves on whatever grounds that fit them like: "signs not big enough", "not proper wording", "I know it's on that door but not all doors", "or I will do what ever I want".....the point is, you saw it and you know what the owner is requiring to be on his property. Your choice to disregard is like that of anyone who disrespects a law by breaking it. While severity is not always the same, it's wrong and I'm not afraid to say it here on this forum.

    I'm pro constitution in it's entirety, not just pro 2nd. I love my guns and believe the majority of legal gun owners are great, law-abiding citizens and a needed part of this free nation. If we don't defend all the rights listed in the constitution than how can we hold them up individually.

    “There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
    ― Albert Einstein

  13. #223
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,090
    Quote Originally Posted by discoboxer View Post
    the point is, you saw it and you know what the owner is requiring to be on his property. Your choice to disregard is like that of anyone who disrespects a law by breaking it. While severity is not always the same, it's wrong ...
    The distinction is: one is law; the other is owner preference. The level or "severity" is that one is the will of the people of the state, whereas the other is merely the desire of one person (perhaps a committee). The moment a request to leave gets refused, however, then it becomes a matter of law (criminal trespassing).

    "Wrong"? Disagree. It's surely not in accordance with the property owner's wishes. But IMO until asked to leave it's equivalent to being told the owner's preference is for no persons wearing green, or carrying books, or whatever. Being asked (required, demanded, perhaps even demanded at the point of a gun [for zealots believing such disregard to be a shootable infraction]) to not wear green is hardly supportable, nor is being asked/demanded to not carry a book. IMO, nor is being asked to not be armed. Each is wholly different, IMO, from being asked to leave, which is absolutely within the owner's right to request.

    Thankfully, most states essentially agree with the basic distinction between law and preference, in this regard.
    oneshot likes this.
    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, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  14. #224
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,817
    In some instances, legal/illegal and right/wrong are at best subjective and at worst, mutually exclusive. We are two hundred and twenty-four posts into it this time around, and all of us are probably still going to do what we do.
    suntzu likes this.
    "If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world, but I am sure we would be getting reports from Hell before breakfast."
    William T. Sherman

  15. #225
    VIP Member
    Array 1MoreGoodGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    6,257
    If you choose to ignore this sign, you are trespassing.
    hours_of_operation_v01.jpg

    If you choose to ignore this sign, you are also trespassing.
    gun sign.gif
    Regards,
    1MoreGoodGuy
    NRA Life Member
    GOA Life Member


    Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!

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.