RIP OC - Man Banned from Walmart in Lexington, KY - Page 11

RIP OC - Man Banned from Walmart in Lexington, KY

This is a discussion on RIP OC - Man Banned from Walmart in Lexington, KY within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Aceoky That is your opinion, so I suspect you actually believe that to bear (carry) was NOT meant to be in ALL ...

Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 229
Like Tree487Likes

Thread: RIP OC - Man Banned from Walmart in Lexington, KY

  1. #151
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    3,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    That is your opinion, so I suspect you actually believe that to bear (carry) was NOT meant to be in ALL public spaces, open to the public places, or to put it another way, YOU would be willing to let all anti 2nd folks make carry impossible by them being able to use FOL to keep every legal person from carrying?

    IF you must disarm "constantly" you're not really allowed to bear arms - that pretty simple and straight forward.

    You're simply wrong that is "exactly how that works" , the 2nd is NOT a "privilege" depending on even a majority's wishes, (which is why were are not and never were a democracy) not to mention the fact the 2nd didn't even grant the right but simply enumerated it in Fed law. When the law (e.g. GOV) steps in (FOL signs) that is a direct violation of the 2nd - period

    Policy of a store or stores should never be law- we do have legal ways of law making, stores don't follow those. They're in business to make $$ Not LAW.....as it should be.

    Which is why more & more states signs won't carry FOL; and why they don't now in several states.

    ETA:

    DO you think criminals obey "no gun signs"? Signs are worthless and foolish, as are those who "believe in their magic power" just another thing that tries to punish the law abiding that were not a danger to begin with. Since most mass murders happen in no gun zones, it's comical anyone would even try to defend "the right to post signs" much less the .Gov being a part of that with FOL Signs.......
    Nice strawman—actually strawmen, plural. No need for me to address them.

    A business has every right to say what items they will or will not allow on their property, and that’s all a gun is—an inanimate object that has no rights.

    Dot, period, end of story.
    AzQkr and G-man* like this.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  2. #152
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,909
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    Show me where 2a enumerates any wording discussing carrying in public. It says the right to keep and bear arms, it does NOT enumerate open carry nor carrying in public, that's a presumption based on your own opinion of the reading of 2a. Nor does it enumerate private businesses and their owners are subject to 2A within their businesses.
    Where do you think the 2nd mandates to bear (to carry) if NOT in public? Open to the PUBLIC businesses are well, open to the public nothing confusing there is there? Since criminals don't obey laws (much less signs) I'm not clear on why some think signs should be heeded, much less carry fol (and that is where the BOR gets violated) Stores cannot make laws, they make their own policy, LEO should not have to honor those signs, and doing so ONLY punishes law abiding citizens , many who don't see the signs . You don't see the shooters charged with violating signs .... Gang members getting charged? No even the red flag lists cannot contain the thugs.

    Upside down world and those who should know better are right here supporting it?

    YOU brought up Heller, I assumed you're read the carry in public part, my mistake I guess....
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  3. #153
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Cuda66 View Post
    Nice strawman—actually strawmen, plural. No need for me to address them.

    A business has every right to say what items they will or will not allow on their property, and that’s all a gun is—an inanimate object that has no rights.

    Dot, period, end of story.
    The "object" has BOR protection same as the person who has the "object" Shall not be infringed......they can say what they don't want brought in YES sure they can, show m e where I EVER said otherwise.........you can't

    My point is about signs having FOL making store policy "law" violating the 2nd - pretty clear and it's still there to re-read .
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #154
    Ex Member Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    Where do you think the 2nd mandates to bear (to carry) if NOT in public? Open to the PUBLIC businesses are well, open to the public nothing confusing there is there? Since criminals don't obey laws (much less signs) I'm not clear on why some think signs should be heeded, much less carry fol (and that is where the BOR gets violated) Stores cannot make laws, they make their own policy, LEO should not have to honor those signs, and doing so ONLY punishes law abiding citizens , many who don't see the signs . You don't see the shooters charged with violating signs .... Gang members getting charged? No even the red flag lists cannot contain the thugs.

    Upside down world and those who should know better are right here supporting it?

    YOU brought up Heller, I assumed you're read the carry in public part, my mistake I guess....
    So you can't show anyone where in the 2a it addresses private businesses, got it. All the rest is simply your opinion, yes, I brought up Heller, before that ruling in 08. Some 200+ years it was NOT part of 2A.
    Cuda66 likes this.

  6. #155
    Senior Member
    Array Wavygravy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    1,161
    Sooo, @Aceoky -- I take it you'll come here to NC and defend me in court when I take my gun into a place with a legal No Guns sign (which carries the force of law in NC), get charged, fined, and immediately lose my CC permit?
    Charlie Co. 101st Assault Helicopter Battalion (Wings of the Eagle), 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile)
    Phu Bai, Vietnam 1971-72

  7. #156
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    3,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    The "object" has BOR protection same as the person who has the "object" Shall not be infringed......they can say what they don't want brought in YES sure they can, show m e where I EVER said otherwise.........you can't

    My point is about signs having FOL making store policy "law" violating the 2nd - pretty clear and it's still there to re-read .
    Tell me—does a business have the right to tell someone they may not hold religious services on their property? How about hand out religious or political pamphlets?

    Or is that violating their 1A rights?
    AzQkr and G-man* like this.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  8. #157
    Ex Member Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    The "object" has BOR protection same as the person who has the "object" Shall not be infringed......they can say what they don't want brought in YES sure they can, show m e where I EVER said otherwise.........you can't

    My point is about signs having FOL making store policy "law" violating the 2nd - pretty clear and it's still there to re-read .
    So explain to me in lay terms how a gun can be infringed as an inanimate object? And with that bolded, we've entered the twilight zone. I knew we'd get there eventually. Only a matter of time before some 2a zealot extended infringement to the inanimate object.
    Cuda66 likes this.

  9. #158
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,909
    Heller & McDonald struck down long standing "laws" (that were in fact never laws) because they clearly violated the 2nd, SCOTUS didn't really need to rule for most everyone who knew the COTUS & BOR could easily know that, they did NEED to rule because folks ignored common sense and long standing laws and passed BS off al "law" knowing it clearly violated the 2nd.

    These are not just MY RIGHTS, they belong to each of you folks too! IF you want to pretend they're something they're not and willingly give them up not only for yourselves but your kids, grandchildren and on down the line that is your choice to make freely.

    YES you 100% have the RIGHT to carry arms out in PUBLIC, it's sad SCOTUS had to actually write that down in recent rulings........it was SO clearly stated a very , very long time ago in the BOR!
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  10. #159
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,909
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    So explain to me in lay terms how a gun can be infringed as an inanimate object? And with that bolded, we've entered the twilight zone. I knew we'd get there eventually. Only a matter of time before some 2a zealot extended infringement to the inanimate object.
    Read the 2nd.......

    "Arms" are protected

    Those who KEEP & BEAR(carry arms) are protected to the point of Shall NOT be Infringed

    Now read (very slowly) take notes even

    Heller & McDonald

    Now simply TRY to convince yourself it's "only my opinion" ; it was clear for more than a century and it's still quite clear.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  11. #160
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    3,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    Heller & McDonald struck down long standing "laws" (that were in fact never laws) because they clearly violated the 2nd, SCOTUS didn't really need to rule for most everyone who knew the COTUS & BOR could easily know that, they did NEED to rule because folks ignored common sense and long standing laws and passed BS off al "law" knowing it clearly violated the 2nd.

    These are not just MY RIGHTS, they belong to each of you folks too! IF you want to pretend they're something they're not and willingly give them up not only for yourselves but your kids, grandchildren and on down the line that is your choice to make freely.

    YES you 100% have the RIGHT to carry arms out in PUBLIC, it's sad SCOTUS had to actually write that down in recent rulings........it was SO clearly stated a very , very long time ago in the BOR!

    Scalia also wrote in the Heller decision that 2A rights were not absolute, and some restrictions were Constitutional.

    And kindly answer the questions I posed above...
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  12. #161
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Cuda66 View Post
    Tell me–does a business have the right to tell someone they may not hold religious services on their property? How about hand out religious or political pamphlets?

    Or is that violating their 1A rights?
    Talk about "strawman" , holding services & handing out pamphlets are actions, and often talking to folks not interested; akin to handing out guns maybe?

    The first only denies Congress the right to establish a religion, doesn't protect pamphlets (not that I can find) it does protect free speech however.

    A better example would be can someone in a store say "God bless you " when someone sneezes , or "God go with you" , or "God bless" when checking out etc. carrying arms is not "in your face" (though some try to say it is, it's not) LEO do it all the time and who pays attention? Oh yeah , lately thugs have been trying to make that an issue , even killing them on the job.

    Academic exercise anyway, since I've never seen a "no religious pamphlets " sign, much less someone getting arrested over the sign like you can in some states for crossing a no guns sign (that is the BOR issue & violation btw signs having the FOL involving agents of the state- LEO) even IF you really didn't see the sign.

    Regardless, carrying of arms in public is protected outright
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  13. #162
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    3,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    Talk about "strawman" , holding services & handing out pamphlets are actions, and often talking to folks not interested; akin to handing out guns maybe?

    The first only denies Congress the right to establish a religion, doesn't protect pamphlets (not that I can find) it does protect free speech however.

    A better example would be can someone in a store say "God bless you " when someone sneezes , or "God go with you" , or "God bless" when checking out etc. carrying arms is not "in your face" (though some try to say it is, it's not) LEO do it all the time and who pays attention? Oh yeah , lately thugs have been trying to make that an issue , even killing them on the job.

    Regardless, carrying of arms in public is protected outright
    Carrying a firearm is not an action?

    And no, it is not protected outright. Try to carry your gun through TSA security and find out how wrong you are.
    AzQkr likes this.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  14. #163
    Ex Member Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    Talk about "strawman" , holding services & handing out pamphlets are actions, and often talking to folks not interested; akin to handing out guns maybe?

    The first only denies Congress the right to establish a religion, doesn't protect pamphlets (not that I can find) it does protect free speech however.

    A better example would be can someone in a store say "God bless you " when someone sneezes , or "God go with you" , or "God bless" when checking out etc. carrying arms is not "in your face" (though some try to say it is, it's not) LEO do it all the time and who pays attention? Oh yeah , lately thugs have been trying to make that an issue , even killing them on the job.

    Academic exercise anyway, since I've never seen a "no religious pamphlets " sign, much less someone getting arrested over the sign like you can in some states for crossing a no guns sign (that is the BOR issue & violation btw signs having the FOL involving agents of the state- LEO) even IF you really didn't see the sign.

    Regardless, carrying of arms in public is protected outright
    You have failed, to this point, to demonstrate where 2a states carrying openly in public is protected. It may well be a presumption, but nowhere was it written. If you think the founders were that smart, they'd have articulated that so there would be no need to presume.

    The Doc is constantly being adjudicated in the courts, as such, it's obviously open to interpretation.

  15. #164
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,909
    I don't have any use for TSA so how about NO.

    Also I never said you could carry a gun onto a plane (you can carry into the front of the airport ) and have it onboard IF you follow the rules.....

    Try to follow this:

    THE FOL signs are what violates the BOR - NOT a store's policy on carry, not a stores sign on food or drinks , nothing else - NO gun signs that carry FOL - involving agents of the state to enforce store policy on a protected RIGHT

    Just like you can't put up a NO _________ <-- put in your pick of religions, races, genders etc. allowed signs you shouldn't be putting up a no gun sign with FOL
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Gibson v. Commonwealth, 237 Ky. 33, 34 S.W.2d 936 (1936), the High Court stated:  “[I]t is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs.   He does not have to.”

  16. #165
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    3,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Aceoky View Post
    Talk about "strawman" , holding services & handing out pamphlets are actions, and often talking to folks not interested; akin to handing out guns maybe?

    The first only denies Congress the right to establish a religion, doesn't protect pamphlets (not that I can find) it does protect free speech however.

    A better example would be can someone in a store say "God bless you " when someone sneezes , or "God go with you" , or "God bless" when checking out etc. carrying arms is not "in your face" (though some try to say it is, it's not) LEO do it all the time and who pays attention? Oh yeah , lately thugs have been trying to make that an issue , even killing them on the job.

    Academic exercise anyway, since I've never seen a "no religious pamphlets " sign, much less someone getting arrested over the sign like you can in some states for crossing a no guns sign (that is the BOR issue & violation btw signs having the FOL involving agents of the state- LEO) even IF you really didn't see the sign.

    Regardless, carrying of arms in public is protected outright
    Additionally, you may want to re-acquaint yourself with the 1A:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof—that is, holding religious services...doesn’t say you can only hold them in your home, or a church, does it? Sounds like that business can’t tell them to leave, for you to be logically consistent with your 2A beliefs...

    Handing out pamphlets? I’d see that as free speech...or peaceably assemble. Take your pick.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 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
  •