"No Guns"- sign an insult...What if it said "No Jews"?

[rodc13]

Agreed. The comparison with racial discrimination is beyond the pale and does nothing to foster understanding of genuine Second Amendment issues.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[kazzaerexys]

Let me say up front that I think the article's headline is a bit of a stretch.

To play devil's advocate, though, you don't have to look back too long to find a time when anti-Semitism, for example, was so passively widespread, was so much a part of standard liberal intellectualism, that one could even argue that there were people of no particular malice who would exercise discrimination against Jews. It wasn't any sort of burning hatred, just so much that "everybody knew" that Jews couldn't be trusted, or would bilk your money, or scare your good Christian babies, or whatever... (For those that believe this sort of faddish anti-Semitism still goes on...well, you won't find my arguing the other side.)

The point is that the prevalence of "No Jews" signs could be seen for a lot of the 19th and 20th centuries as a passive and pervasiveness ignorance. The fact that such a level of ignorance was (and still is) profoundly insulting to those on the receiving end of it is very important, but it still represents something different from, say, cross-burnings and lynchings in the spectrum of bigotry.

Taken in that light, the analogy isn't indefensible; the notion is that all those anti-gun businesses are following the passive prejudice induced by the fact that "everybody just knows" how dangerous guns are and therefore shouldn't be brought around right-thinking people.

It is a form of prejudice induced by pervasive lazy thinking and ignorance (sometimes willful ignorance) surrounding legally owned firearms. And, as with past incarnations of such ignorance, patient education is probably the best long-term answer.

[ccw9mm]

No Guns signs are usually due to ignorance,the other signs are a result of bigotry and hatred.

Hatred of those who are unlike ourselves is an ugly sink, whether it's due to having a "tan," a different religion, daring to bring weaponry into the presence of others, or whatever. It's prejudgment of people for no legitimate or supportable cause, whatever else folks might call it.

In the case of defensive weaponry and training, it has ZERO to do with being a criminal. To those daring to stand up to ill-considered stigma and hate, it's doubly offensive because it relates to one's ability to keep alive in the face of crime. It's far more than merely shoes, shirt, etc. It is, and should be, considered one of the "holies," and it is (IMO) a protected right exactly for this reason: because of the sanctity of life.

Silly as the point may seem, kudos to those unwilling to take the anti-gunning rammed down the throat any longer. Whatever form calling a spade a spade might take.

VCDL is doing all the right things. They're intelligent, articulate, willing to debate a point, willing to take on stupidity and hatred via all legal means at their disposal. They're helping to peel back the veil that cloaks the anti-gunners behind their hypocrisy, to show their ideas for what they are: empty, pointless pleading based on fear and conjecture, with only tenuous connection to reality. I hope they keep it up. I wish their ideas would spread like a brush fire. It needs to, badly so.

[Random]

...price and convenience trumps principles

Wow, that's an extremely unfortunate quote.

Especially for a group that is trying to gain or regain public office!

Call me crazy, but I'd kind of like my elected officials to believe that PRINCIPLE trumps price and convenience. Go VCDL!

It's a wonderful example of just what's wrong with politics today - on BOTH sides of the aisle.

[uziman2k]

Why would you want to be somewhere where you're not wanted? Why would you? I lost a job once because of my ethnicity. In '69 I had problems with a drill sgt because of my religion. My dad in his younger years had a problems with an employer because of his religion. Like all of us out here in "Forum Land" we've had to take a bite of the sandwhich" of life. Hope the bite isn't too big!
As for the "NO GUNS" sign - go elsewhere. There are plenty of merchants who you can deal with who'll be glad to have you as a customer. And you'll be glad to spend your money when there is not even a mention of guns. But...that's just me...

[TN_Mike]

"No Guns"- sign an insult...What if it said "No Jews"?

EXACTLY. I agree with this 100% and I for one do not see it as a stretch at all.

[Thanis]

This may poke the OC / CC wasp nest, but the only thought I have against no gun signs is that if you legal CC, then it may be a form of discrimination, as it infringes on the right to privacy.

No shirt, no shoes, no service would apply, maybe with some argument, to something like OC. The difference is that a store and a private business can decide what is indecint exposure, what can be worn. For example, require a coat and tie.

If no one can observe a CC, and it is legal, when what is it that you are doing wrong that would not allow you in vs the person next to you.