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; Yup, carrying a firearm does not make one a protected class. Protected classes are people, not things. No Gun signs mean just what they say ...
YES
NO
Array
Yup, carrying a firearm does not make one a protected class. Protected classes are people, not things. No Gun signs mean just what they say "NO GUNS". They do not say "NObody that owns guns" or Nobody that likes guns" are not allowed.
The whole comparisn about religion, race, gender, is IMO not even worth mentioning until guns become sentient beings since they are the ones being "discriminated". Not the person wearing it.
Array
I do not support a buisness non-right to ban firearms.
If you are a buisness open to the public, the you get the public. You dont get to exclude groups supported by Constitutional rights. If you want to keep people out, then dont be open to the public.
Question for those who support buisness banning firearms, it is their property right? Then landlords should be able to ban firearms from their property as well right?
Array
Array
He always sums up how I feel on this issue, so just plus one every time.Originally Posted by suntzu
I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
Clint Eastwood
I try not to support them, either, but yes, I believe they have the right to ban guns. What they generally do not have is the ability to actively enforce those bans on concealed weapons, unless they have metal detectors or pat-downs at the doors.
Kahn Souphanousinphone, Sr. "I could be manic, could be depressed. Real crapshoot."
Array
Property rights are one of the basis for our country's founding. One of the main grievances against Britain was the forced quartering of British troops in private homes. The Third Amendment of the Constitution addresses this. I may not like it when I see a gunbuster sign and I can choose not to patronize the establishment, but I accept the owners right to post it.
I'd rather be lucky than good any day
There's nothing that will change someone's moral outlook quicker than cash in large sums.
Majority rule only works if you're also considering individual rights. Because you can't have five wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper.
Array
"I may not agree with a single thing you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I don't know the author....
It's their store and I don't have to go in..
Hawkeye. You have to realize that even though they are "open to the public" it is private property and as such they have the right to say what comes into or on their property. You are invited to shop there.
Like Suntzu stated gun toters are not a protected class. The signs say no guns not certain people.
Again before it is mentioned again. No gun signs do not stop criminals from entering anymore than signs that say guns welcome prevent them. If they are going to come in to do harm then they are going to come in and do harm no sign in existence will stop them. Gun stores are robbed, police stations attacked and so on with the bad guy knowing that there are armed people inside and they, for whatever reason, don't really care.
In regards to your question regarding a landlord in this matter. I think they can. If the entity which owns the property states that no firearms are allowed to be carried or stored on their premises it is legal. Again they are not saying people who like guns, own guns and so on just that the gun is not allowed on the premises. Gated communities and homeowner's associations have several rules and regulations that while they seem strange to the rest of us are perfectly acceptable and legal to the folks who live there and are agreed to before the person even is considered to let live there. If someone know something different please chime in.
I think people in general may for a short time avoid businesses that ban guns as long as they are not put out of their way to much but if for whatever reason Wal Mart said today "NO GUNS IN OUR STORES" period, nationwide folks would raise a stink, boycott, send letters and so on but I assure you within 72 hours if that long they would be right back in the store shopping away unarmed or so deeply concealed, paranoid and fearful of using their firearm they would be of no use to anyone. It is simply the nature of the beast.
"A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. (WETSU)
Array
It is still their property, however, their powers are constrained by contract, i.e. your lease agreement. Now, if there were a clause in said agreement banning firearms, they would be within their rights. You, of course, would be within your rights to not sign that contract.
"Mind own business"
"Always cut cards"
Array
Although I live in a non-carry state, I would definitely support a businesses right to post no-carry. I would not do business with them, but I would support their right to ban firearms. A believe that society and the government should respect my right to carry, so I have to respect a businesses right to not want me to carry on their property. Of course this is all elementary to me because I live in Illinois!!!
Glock 22 Gen 4 w/CBST
Kimber Compact CDP II w/Silent Thunder
A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
Yes, I do.
And gun toters are a protected class--a self-protected class!
Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone - 1978. Oh, to be young again...
Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield
What he said. I guess it would be just like them saying you cannot smoke, have pets and so on. They are not banning or discriminating against smokers or pet owners just simply the cigarettes or pets being on the premises.It is still their property, however, their powers are constrained by contract, i.e. your lease agreement. Now, if there were a clause in said agreement banning firearms, they would be within their rights. You, of course, would be within your rights to not sign that contract.
"A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. (WETSU)
Array
If the law states that a sign carries legal power, then you aren't performing a lawful act carrying in a posted establishment.
Not true. It's still a private board and being a customer would give you no more rights than are in the board's terms of usage. I'm on another very popular board that costs $10 and they probate and ban those who break the rules constantly. They can kick anyone off that they want.
Array
Do I support anyone's right to disarm me, short of my being involved in a crime and captured/disarmed by LE? Absolutely not.
Do I support any private person on private property to disarm me? Absolutely not.
Do I support a private person's right on private property to retain his/her property rights regarding control of access to that property, including whether another has continuing authorization to be present on that property? IOW, do I believe the private person (including any person authorized to function on behalf of a private business) has every right to exercise those property rights? Yes, I do.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
Thoughts: Justifiable self defense.
Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
Array
Businesses are certainly welcome to ban guns from their operations. I have absolutely no problem with that. On the other hand, we as consumers, are equally free to refuse to patronize those businesses.
Posting Permissions
293Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
