As a gun carrier - Page 3

As a gun carrier

This is a discussion on As a gun carrier within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I certainly don't go out of my way to patronize places that post such signs. I also don't have an internal moral conundrum if through ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 51
Like Tree142Likes

Thread: As a gun carrier

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array craze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    2,135
    I certainly don't go out of my way to patronize places that post such signs. I also don't have an internal moral conundrum if through the course of my day I find myself at a place of business that has something I need at the time and is posted. I simply walk right past the sign armed against their wishes, do what I need to do and move on. I honestly don't do this based on a principle of my rights vs their rights, I just do it because its easy convenient and legal where I live.

    I won't carry a gun into the home of someone who specifically says they don't want me to, but I also don't ask for permission.
    WebleyHunter and GraySkies like this.
    "Some people go to bed with Lucifer..........then cry, cry, cry when they don't greet the day with God."

  2. #32
    Distinguished Member Array Scouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Orlando Florida
    Posts
    1,294
    Walmart sells a bread we can not get anywhere else that I know of Daves Bread, the yellow label, thick cut (For toast) If I walked up to the door met that sign. I am going for my bread.

    The Store is not the problem reference risk, in all probability. It is the car park, the entering, and leaving your vehicle. Carrying or pushing your purchases to and from to your transport. That is your major risk area.

    Henceforth, after that one excursion for Daves Bread, my next move, call the Company, address my problem, with them, solve it.

    Downright threatening my self, wife, granddaughter. Dr. Phillips Art Center, downtown Orlando, no guns, no knives.
    Metal detectors. One lone Police Officer. I have trained Police Officers for 25 years, mostly with handguns.
    The guns I have gone back and forth with, the 43X versus Glock 19 4th Gen (gone back to the 19 today!)

    I can outshoot 99% of my students, as an ex Bouncer from Liverpool UK, except for the age difference, would do OK in a physical altercation one on one. I would be an asset in a terrorist attack (Far fetched as that may be) but again, that is not my major concern, but rather the walk from the car park, and my Jeep, to and fro is!

    Watching all these stupid wins in lawsuits (IE The hot Coffee on her crutch win!) how would we fair suing the Center?

  3. #33
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,220
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    Let me get this straight, carrying a gun is a natural right? I don't think so. If it were a natural right guns would have been invented during adam and eves era. You have a natural right to defend your life, you don't have a natural right to defend yourself with a firearm.
    Your argument is similar to what the anti-gunners say about 2A: "We don't have the right to modern weapons under 2A because modern weapons hadn't been invented when 2A was ratified." We don't live in the time of Adam and Eve, we live now. And if we have the right to self defense, now, that right is denied if we don't have the tools to defend ourselves today.

    BTW, while the BOR only serves to protect rights against the government, the rights it enumerates are said to be inalienable rights that we always have with or without the document, including the RTKABA. For Adam and Eve, the weapon of the day might have been a club. When the BOR was signed, it was a musket. Now it is a modern gun. I maintain the RTKABA, is a logical extension of the natural right to self defense, which means modern guns in this day and age.
    OD*, Bikenut, G-man* and 2 others like this.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #34
    Ex Member Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,639
    Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
    Your argument is similar to what the anti-gunners say about 2A: "We don't have the right to modern weapons under 2A because modern weapons hadn't been invented when 2A was ratified." We don't live in the time of Adam and Eve, we live now. And if we have the right to self defense, now, that right is denied if we don't have the tools to defend ourselves today.

    Let me get this straight, there's only one tool to defend yourself? I don't think so. No one is being denied to natural right of self defense simply because they can't carry a gun. One's "natural" right to self defense is mans hands and feet, sticks/stones etc. You know, stuff that early man used to defend himself with long before the bronze age.

    BTW, while the BOR only serves to protect rights against the government, the rights it enumerates are said to be inalienable rights that we always have with or without the document, including the RTKABA. For Adam and Eve, the weapon of the day might have been a club. When the BOR was signed, it was a musket. Now it is a modern gun. I maintain the RTKABA, is a logical extension of the natural right to self defense, which means modern guns in this day and age.
    Okay, so now the gun is an extension of mans natural right, not the actual natural right itself?

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array WebleyHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    2,578
    My summarized position is pretty simple- if your business is open to the general public, it's open to concealed carry permit holders. I really don't give flying toot about your "private property rights" when your business model encourages customers to waltz right on in- citizen, hood rat, or spree shooter alike. Install effective security screening (no kill zones) with access control (everybody screened every time) and MAYBE my opinion changes. Concealed carry has no negative impact on the bottom line or business operations, so legal standing for demonstrable harm is generally non-existent. Whether I agree or not, I can understand a restriction on open carry as this can have a demonstrable impact on other patrons (Cleetus with a bubbaized SKS and Jerome with a over-Barbied M4gery usually aren't good for promoting business at the Fashion Bar).

    My family wanted to see the new "Addams Family" movie this past Saturday night. We dropped nearly $100 in tickets, concession food and arcade tokens. Please explain how Century Theaters was fundamentally and irrevocably violated because I ignored their hidden "code of conduct" sign and had my .32 PPK in my pocket? I never saw an armed security agent (LEO or not) the whole time we were there, just a "shoot me first" guy riding around in a "SECURITY" Prius with orange flashing lights.
    Last edited by WebleyHunter; October 17th, 2019 at 01:15 AM.
    Arkancide- Three self-inflicted gunshots to the head with hands tied behind the back.

    Active Shooter Response- Assess the situation, Position yourself to gain tactical advantage, Engage perpetrator violently (APE).

  7. #36
    Senior Member Array ButtShot14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    581
    So, does a storeowner have the right to ban certain races or religious followers as well as those who would carry a firearm into his/her store? These are constitutionally protected rights are they not? You may not refuse service or entry into any public place based on two of these reasons. Why is the third (gun ban) allowed? Is it lawful? Do state and local laws trump federal laws? Apparently they must. Just one point of view. The author of this does not necessarily support the views expressed therein.

  8. #37
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    3,244
    The safety of me and mine trumps everything. Don't like it? I don't give a damn.
    " It's easier to avoid conflict than it is to survive it, but if you have to play ..... play to WIN!!!"
    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array dangerranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Exact center of CA
    Posts
    5,420
    There are very few places near me that ban firearms. The state is trying to fix that, By making more places where I can't carry, but retailers have not jumped on that band wagon. I don't even see signs on theaters. So right now I can't carry in schools, post offices, government buildings, Courts, jails, police stations, etc... That leaves a lot of places that I can go. If I did see a lot of signs, They don't carry the weight of the law here. But I don't see many, and since I retired, I don't spend much time in government buildings! DR

  10. #39
    Senior Member Array Holmes375's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
    You asked for my position on this and I am obliging you by giving it. I have no doubt by the way your questions were worded you probably won't agree and others may not also. Frankly I donít give a hoot of what anyoneís opinion of this is. I have no illusions of convincing anyone and no one should have any illusions of convincing me. I am not going to argue or answer questions on any of these points. First, let me say that I will avoid posted businesses if I can, on principle. But sometimes that is not possible. To your question, I can see several possible, independent arguments here:

    Argument 1: In my state, carrying past a ďno gunsĒ sign is not a crime. A crime only happens if the proprietor asks me to leave because I am carrying a gun and I refuse. Then it is only a trespass misdemeanor. The proprietor is not going to know I am carrying, so he is not going to ask me to leave because of it. If he did, I would leave. If I am in compliance with the law, I donít believe I am violating anyoneís rights.

    Argument 2: The RTKABA is a natural right. COTUS says the government canít infringe on that (even though they do). I donít think anyone has the right to infringe on the natural right. Do you lose your right to defend yourself in a store? Well, if you let a store deny you the RTKABA, you may have given up that right.

    It is not correct to say that a property owner has a "right to deny access to those carrying a firearm." I think saying so is buying to the anti-gun narrative. What a property owner has the right to do is invite me onto his property or dis-invite my off his property. If he invites me on his property, I have a right to privacy that says what I have hidden on my person is none of his damn business. Maybe he is an abolitionist and teetotaler and I have a flask of whiskey in my pocket. None of his business. Maybe he is a vegan and I have a package of beef jerky in my pocket. None of his business. Maybe he is anti-gun and I have a gun in my pocket. Same answer.

    Argument 3: If we are talking a store, it is a public venue. The owner cannot refuse my presence based on race, creed, color or sexual orientation. I donít believe he should be able refuse based on me exercising my natural RTKABA in a way that does not disturb his business.

    Argument 4: Gun free zones are criminal empowerment zones. Survival is my #1 priority. It is not just survival in his store, it is also survival to and from the parking lot. If I have to go on his property, he does not have the right to make me a sitting duck.

    Argument 5: Hoplophobes donít respect my rights. I will be damned if I will respect theirs.
    You make some interesting points that give me cause for consideration.

    Thank you.

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,220
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    Okay, so now the gun is an extension of mans natural right, not the actual natural right itself?
    You can't have one without the other. How can a jurisdiction say you have the right to self defense if it denies you the right to have weapons reasonably necessary for self-defense? I also believe, and the founders of this country believed, people have a natural right to be able to fight tyranny. How can one fight tyranny without a reasonable level of weaponry?
    AzQkr likes this.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array Scouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Orlando Florida
    Posts
    1,294
    Elija Cummings died at the age of 68. He was totally anti-gun, anti-President Trump. That age of 68 is very young to expire in this land of milk, and honey.
    I drove across a corner of his State last month, with trepidation last month, only on his doorstep for half an hour. Florida plates are a good enough reason for a fishing expedition?

  13. #42
    VIP Member Array CDW4ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Guncentric
    Posts
    4,044
    I've seen this over & over: "concealed is concealed" > principle
    Many gun owners are willing to support posted businesses even when other options are available.
    There could be a posted restaurant "2A Sucks Pizza" and right across the street non-posted "Pistol Packing Pizza" - "concealed is concealed" would support the posted place.
    Lack of principle.
    Bikenut likes this.
    I'm not inclined to disarm for a concert, game, (entertainment) and I ain't going on a plane or cruise.
    "Wouldn't want to or Nobody volunteer to" get shot by _____ is not indicative of quickly incapacitating.

  14. #43
    Ex Member Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,639
    Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
    You can't have one without the other. How can a jurisdiction say you have the right to self defense if it denies you the right to have weapons reasonably necessary for self-defense? I also believe, and the founders of this country believed, people have a natural right to be able to fight tyranny. How can one fight tyranny without a reasonable level of weaponry?
    A well elucidated response, thank you
    Mike1956 likes this.

  15. #44
    VIP Member Array WebleyHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    2,578
    Quote Originally Posted by CDW4ME View Post
    I've seen this over & over: "concealed is concealed" > principle
    Many gun owners are willing to support posted businesses even when other options are available.
    There could be a posted restaurant "2A Sucks Pizza" and right across the street non-posted "Pistol Packing Pizza" - "concealed is concealed" would support the posted place.
    Lack of principle.
    It's not that simple. Show me a chain theater (like Regal or Century) or mall property (like Simon) that doesn't have a "no weapons" clause. Saying you never patronize such establishments works for some, but is not realistic for those people with normal children and family in urban areas.

    My principle is strong and definitely not lacking.
    AzQkr likes this.
    Arkancide- Three self-inflicted gunshots to the head with hands tied behind the back.

    Active Shooter Response- Assess the situation, Position yourself to gain tactical advantage, Engage perpetrator violently (APE).

  16. #45
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion county, Ohio
    Posts
    32,670
    Name:  Opinions.jpg
Views: 16
Size:  20.3 KB

    Directed at no one in particular, but a decent fit for the discussion in general.
    AzQkr likes this.
    "Stop being dangerous, and you become edible." William Aprill

    "Slaves, enjoy your freedom." Chuck Klosterman

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •