Property v. human rights redux

Property v. human rights redux

This is a discussion on Property v. human rights redux within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; A business may not enact a prohibition against any person based on that person being part of a group that has legal civil rights status. ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23

Thread: Property v. human rights redux

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,150

    Property v. human rights redux

    A business may not enact a prohibition against any person based on that person being part of a group that has legal civil rights status. For example, race, religion, national origin or sex.

    For example, a business cannot post signs that say:

    "NO BLACKS"
    "NO MUSLIMS"
    "NO IRAQIS"
    "NO FEMALES"

    So here's my question. Doesn't being a citizen qualify as a group? Isn't "keep and bear arms/self defense" a civil right? Can we find a legislator who is willing to codify our "baseline" civil rights, enumerated in the Bill of Rights, into a Federal anti-discrimination bill?
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,054
    The owner of private property, regardless if it is a business or not, has the right to allow or disallow a citizen from carrying a firearm onto their property.

    The Second Amendment doesn't give you the right to violate their property rights.

    If I don't want anyone coming in my house armed, that is my right. The Second Amendment doesn't give you any protection regarding private parties, it is only a prohibition against government. A private party cannot violate your Second Amendment right.

    If you don't like a particular private party's or business's lawful prohibition of firearms on their private property, go or shop somewhere else. They have just as much right to prohibit firearms on their property as you do to spend your money at another establishment.
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  3. #3
    1943 - 2009
    Array Captain Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    10,372
    Quote Originally Posted by freakshow10mm View Post
    The owner of private property, regardless if it is a business or not, has the right to allow or disallow a citizen from carrying a firearm onto their property.

    The Second Amendment doesn't give you the right to violate their property rights.

    If I don't want anyone coming in my house armed, that is my right. The Second Amendment doesn't give you any protection regarding private parties, it is only a prohibition against government. A private party cannot violate your Second Amendment right.

    If you don't like a particular private party's or business's lawful prohibition of firearms on their private property, go or shop somewhere else. They have just as much right to prohibit firearms on their property as you do to spend your money at another establishment.
    I agree 100%. You can lodge a protest against a company's policies, or boycott them, if that makes you feel better, but the bottom line is prohibiting firearms on private property is NOT discrimination or a civil rights violation.


    When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
    And the women come out to cut up what remains,
    Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
    And go to your God like a soldier.

    Rudyard Kipling


    Terry

  4. #4
    Member Array walther1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    329
    AMEN!
    -------------
    Walther1

    Life, liberty, and the pursuit of the ultimate CC gun!

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array Euclidean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,213
    The best solution to this dilemma is what some states have done: if a posted no carry business asks you to leave the premises while carrying and you refuse to do so, then it's a crime.

  6. #6
    Member Array Bryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    334
    Yea its not a problem until All the businesses start to regard your civil rights as dangerous. Then its too late. Also your vehicle should be "your" private property but some offending business don't respect that do they? Not much reciprocation from the benevolent Business gods is there. They are starting to be able to fire you for anything you do (they don't like) outside of the normal property and workday.
    -Diplomacy: The art of saying nice dogie until you can find a rock.
    -The truth is a three edged sword.
    -Your brain is your primary weapon everything else is just a tool.
    -When the only tool you have is a hammer then everything starts to look like a nail.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Array Zundfolge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    516
    The owner of private property, regardless if it is a business or not, has the right to allow or disallow a citizen from carrying a firearm onto their property.
    I would also contend that private property owners should have the right to disallow Blacks, Iraqis, Females or Muslims on their property too.

    The problem isn't that anti-discrimination laws should also protect us who CCW, the problem is that no matter how well intentioned, anti-discrimination laws are anti-freedom.

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,335
    The Second Amendment doesn't give you the right to violate their property rights.
    Equal rights. Which is "more" equal? Neither, of course. None trumps the other. They coexist. As it should be. The USA was founded, primarily, on the right of the people to govern themselves. Property rights, self defense rights, arms ownership rights, the right to speak/write/assemble freely ... all are crucial to who the people of the USA are. Someone wants to claim rights on my property, in my home, on my time or on my nickel? That person needs to rethink his premises. That's as it should be.
    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. #9
    Member Array Double Naught Spy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by paramedic70002 View Post
    A business may not enact a prohibition against any person based on that person being part of a group that has legal civil rights status. For example, race, religion, national origin or sex.

    For example, a business cannot post signs that say:

    "NO BLACKS"
    "NO MUSLIMS"
    "NO IRAQIS"
    "NO FEMALES"

    So here's my question. Doesn't being a citizen qualify as a group? Isn't "keep and bear arms/self defense" a civil right? Can we find a legislator who is willing to codify our "baseline" civil rights, enumerated in the Bill of Rights, into a Federal anti-discrimination bill?
    You will have to clarify for me what defines a group as having a "legal civil rights status."

    As for being a "citizen" qualifying as a group, the answer is NO, it does not qualify as a group under the law. Why? Because our laws pertain equally to citizens and non-citizens alike when it comes to things like civil rights. A foreigner has as much protection under the law as a citizen.

    While the 1st Amendment is well known, as a business owner, I don't have to allow you the right to exercise your 1st Amendment rights on my property.

    So, a business may have to let a Muslim enter the business for business purposes, but it does not have to allow the Muslim to practice religious services in the business.

    Similarly, businnesses are not discriminating against people with CCW/CHLs. They are discrimminating against the object itself, the firearm. You are still welcome in the business, but your firearm is not. They don't have to allow the firearm in their business and by proxy, don't have to allow you in their business if you are carrying a firearm, but that isn't discrimination against you.

  10. #10
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,150
    Wow, there are a lot of strong opinions here, and surprisingly, most people on a pro-CCW forum are against the imposition of CCW on private property.

    I believe very strongly in private property.

    I believe that my right to self defense (life) trumps any other rights.

    I believe that a corporation, when formed so that it can be a "person", should have greater responsibility to other "persons" rights that a non-corporation.

    I believe that a private property that is open to the public should have more restriction on their property rights than one not open to the public.

    But I can see that I am in the minority here, and I respect that. While there have been times throughout our nation's history when the minority was judged RIGHT by the SCOTUS, perhaps this is not one of those issues, or the time is not right.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  11. #11
    Senior Member Array Wayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    822
    This may sound bad, wrong, or just assinine but here are my thoughts:

    I figure that my body, and anything upon my body, to be private property.

    So, therefore, even though I am on private property, the firearm and anything else upon my body is on private property.

    So therefore, I don't consider my having a firearm on their private property as disobeying thier signs due to the fact that my private property (firearm) is upon my private property (my body) which just happens to be on their private property.

    I know that many here will think that I'm disrespecting the other persons private property but I am not, for the firearm is technically on my private property so therefore it is removed twice from their private property.

    Hey, it's just my way of thinking. Some may disagree with me, but that is just the way I think about the subject.

    Plus, it's concealed, what others don't know won't hurt them or cause them to freak out.

    Wayne

  12. #12
    Member Array robinsonre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    173
    I'm a big fan of the Nevada law....

    There's no such thing as a private business "banning" concealed firearms. If they catch you they can ask you to leave, and you must or else be charged with trespassing, but you can't face any criminal charges for it.
    "Life exists at a level of complexity almost beyond our ability to comprehend. It's a well known fact that if you try to take apart a cat to see how it works one of the first things you have on your hands is a non-working cat" - Douglas Adams

    "All things are governed by law" - Hippocrates

  13. #13
    Member Array Double Naught Spy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    453
    So therefore, I don't consider my having a firearm on their private property as disobeying thier signs due to the fact that my private property (firearm) is upon my private property (my body) which just happens to be on their private property.

    I know that many here will think that I'm disrespecting the other persons private property but I am not, for the firearm is technically on my private property so therefore it is removed twice from their private property.
    No, we don't think you would be disrespecting our property. We think you would be violating another person's rights and technically, you would be breaking the law, technically, regardless of what you consider to be private property.

    By your logic, you should be able to carry on planes, but that isn't the case.

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array SammyIamToday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,087
    Quote Originally Posted by Zundfolge View Post
    I would also contend that private property owners should have the right to disallow Blacks, Iraqis, Females or Muslims on their property too.

    The problem isn't that anti-discrimination laws should also protect us who CCW, the problem is that no matter how well intentioned, anti-discrimination laws are anti-freedom.
    Well said.
    ...He suggested that "every American citizen" should own a rifle and train with it on firing ranges "at every courthouse." -Chesty Puller

  15. #15
    Senior Member Array GoodSamaritan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Central Kentucky
    Posts
    790
    By your logic, you should be able to carry on planes, but that isn't the case.
    Absolutely we SHOULD be able to carry anywhere the general public, or paying customers are welcome. Unfortunately that is not the case.

Page 1 of 2 12 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. Gun Control: The Ultimate Human Rights Violation
    By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 3rd, 2010, 07:23 PM
  2. Property rights bill in Texas (gun in car)
    By bigiceman in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: February 28th, 2009, 07:08 PM
  3. Mad Human Rights Laws (UK)
    By Tint Bob in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: November 12th, 2008, 03:57 PM
  4. Utah-gun oweners vs property rights bill
    By TyC in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 7th, 2008, 10:38 AM
  5. Bear Cub Redux
    By P95Carry in forum Related Gear & Equipment
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 15th, 2007, 09:19 PM