Boycotting businesses that ban firearms

This is a discussion on Boycotting businesses that ban firearms within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I approached my employer policy very professionally and received positive results (posted in another thread). It does work much better than coming off way out ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 57

Thread: Boycotting businesses that ban firearms

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulf Coast of Florida
    Posts
    9,367
    I approached my employer policy very professionally and received positive results (posted in another thread). It does work much better than coming off way out there.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.


    Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Ex Member Array Don Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    sleeping with the fishes
    Posts
    888
    most businesses ban CCW or open carry due to liability reasons. sometimes they can't get insurance without doing so.

    if a customer were to be accidentally shot by a ccw, the shooter and the business can be sued.


    several local gunshops in my area have banned carry for this reason.

  4. #33
    Member Array Timberline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Glock View Post
    most businesses ban CCW or open carry due to liability reasons.
    that's short-sighted because in so doing they open themselves to liability suits from victims when someone is assaulted on their property while being denied the ability to defend themselves

  5. #34
    Ex Member Array Don Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    sleeping with the fishes
    Posts
    888
    Quote Originally Posted by Timberline View Post
    that's short-sighted because in so doing they open themselves to liability suits from victims when someone is assaulted on their property while being denied the ability to defend themselves
    case in point?



    businesses can be sued regardless of whether the victim is legally armed or not. everyone sues everyone else in this country.

  6. #35
    Member Array NIS350ZTT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    South GA
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Glock View Post
    case in point?



    businesses can be sued regardless of whether the victim is legally armed or not. everyone sues everyone else in this country.
    I agree that businesses and individuals are sued for pretty much anything these days. Then what would be point of banning legal carry?

  7. #36
    Ex Member Array Don Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    sleeping with the fishes
    Posts
    888
    Quote Originally Posted by NIS350ZTT View Post
    I agree that businesses and individuals are sued for pretty much anything these days. Then what would be point of banning legal carry?

    the reason i outlined in post #32


    (business tend to reduce their liability as much as possible)


    i'm of course not anti-CCW, but at the same time, i understand the reason why some ban the practice on their premises. this country is too litigious-that's why we are in serious need of tort reform. it's not a 2A assault.

  8. #37
    Member Array NIS350ZTT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    South GA
    Posts
    244
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Glock View Post
    the reason i outlined in post #32


    (business tend to reduce their liability as much as possible)


    i'm of course not anti-CCW, but at the same time, i understand the reason why some ban the practice on their premises. this country is too litigious-that's why we are in serious need of tort reform.
    That's my point though, how much does it actually decrease their liability when they can be sued either way?

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array Majorlk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Naugatuck, CT
    Posts
    2,406
    Quote Originally Posted by Timberline View Post
    that's short-sighted because in so doing they open themselves to liability suits from victims when someone is assaulted on their property while being denied the ability to defend themselves
    Anyone can be sued; can you cite any cases where the plaintiff in such suits won? I don't believe it has yet happened.

    It's my understanding that companies cannot be held liable for the actions of third parties on their property, other than their employees.
    An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. - Robert A. Heinlein

  10. #39
    Member Array PaxMentis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    S. Oregon (aka Paradise)
    Posts
    356
    Quote Originally Posted by Majorlk View Post
    Anyone can be sued; can you cite any cases where the plaintiff in such suits won? I don't believe it has yet happened.

    It's my understanding that companies cannot be held liable for the actions of third parties on their property, other than their employees.
    I think the key word in your first paragraph is "yet". A few years back, the idea of a tobacco company being held responsible for someone choosing to smoke and coming to harm as a result was laughable to most people...until the first jury went along.

    As far as the second paragraph, I don't believe that is true if the jury finds that the company, either through action or inaction, created an environment that contributed to the injury.

    However...IANAL

    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

    -- L. Neil Smith

  11. #40
    Member Array nash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Columbus Ohio
    Posts
    107
    Did anyone notice all the well known celebrities?

  12. #41
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,044
    Well written letter. I did go to the list of anti gun places and people and now I guess I will not shop or do business where there is a union, AFL/CIO anti gun, will not watch baseball, I dont anyway but the KC Royals are anti gun, Not go to movies or listen to certain music because the actor or singer is anti gun and the theater if owned by a certain company is anti gun.
    I will no longer go to certain hospitals or be treated or have my family treated because many of the top medical orginazations are anti gun.
    I will no longer have anything to do with certain people until I determine what groups they belong to. The planned trip to Disney world with the kids is off since the CEO of Disney is on the list.
    I truly understand the sending of letters to a business saying you will take your money elsewhere but does it really make any difference? With all the places, businesses, and people listed we support anti gun movements everyday of our lives. No trying to start a war here but they, the anti gunners, do hold a lot of strong cards from the deck and we cannot avoid doing business with them or supporting them with our money in one way shape or form.
    Just my opinion.
    Last edited by HotGuns; July 21st, 2010 at 08:29 PM. Reason: amended
    "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. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  13. #42
    Member Array since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    16
    Good letter. When I write I usually add that the Wal-mart where I usually shop for groceries, sundries, clothing, and various household items was recently held up at gunpoint, and any denial of my 2A right to keep and bear arms puts me unnecessarily into harms way should I opt to shop at their store.
    Why is it "shall not be infringed" is among the most misunderstood clauses of our Constitution?

    I'm a Virginia Tech Alum, and that tragedy was avoidable! Even after losing more than twenty bright young minds, they still don't get it. I hope others do, and soon.

  14. #43
    Senior Member Array Zsnake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    623
    DOCTRUPTWN......et al,

    I stole your card and reprinted a few copies. I gave one to the manager of the "Tuesday Morning" store in Warrenton, Va. as it was posted at the door. I even had the clerk have him come to the door so that I didn't transgress into his space. That was a few weeks ago.

    Yesterday, I was passing by and the posting was missing. I went inside and found something I liked. The manager was at the counter ringing up sales. I thanked him for removing the sign and assured that I would be back as a customer again. He said it was a "Corporate Decision" and did not seem much pleased with it. He complained to me that one person came for a job interview carrying a pistol, and didn't get the job.

    Oh, well....can't please everybody.
    Last edited by Zsnake; July 1st, 2010 at 08:33 AM. Reason: Spelling

  15. #44
    VIP Member Array tkruf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Really SW, Virginia
    Posts
    4,710
    What erks me the most is sporting goods stores, or LGS's that have no firearms, no loaded firearms, or no CC signs on their door.

    They want to sell them, but don't want you to carry them in their store. HA!
    NRA Member
    Glock 26 XD9sc
    Ruger SR9c Ruger LCP

  16. #45
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Majorlk View Post
    Anyone can be sued; can you cite any cases where the plaintiff in such suits won? I don't believe it has yet happened.

    It's my understanding that companies cannot be held liable for the actions of third parties on their property, other than their employees.
    A business can come out ahead in a lawsuit and still lose large sums of money in the form of lawyers fees. They could also stand to lose future profits due to bad publicity.

    Michael

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Yeah... I'm boycotting Frommer.
    By JerryRushing in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: January 27th, 2011, 01:29 PM
  2. When you see the sign "no firearms" on businesses....
    By cammo in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 163
    Last Post: February 28th, 2010, 08:10 PM
  3. Employee CCW policies of firearms related businesses?
    By TheGreatGonzo in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: February 10th, 2010, 03:33 PM
  4. Businesses that have no firearms signs posted
    By azchevy in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: May 16th, 2007, 09:34 PM
  5. Do You Go Out Of Your Way To Use Businesses That Allow CCW?
    By Tactician in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: January 30th, 2005, 08:51 PM

Search tags for this page

business that ban guns
,
businesses banning firearms
,
businesses banning guns
,
businesses that ban firearms
,

businesses that ban guns

,
businesses that prohibit guns
,
companies that ban firearms
,
companies that ban guns
,
list of businesses banning firearms
,
list of businesses that ban firearms
,

list of businesses that ban guns

,
list of companies that ban guns
Click on a term to search for related topics.