Defensive Carry banner
1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
As I was grocery shopping today I had a thought. For those of us in states where "no gun" signs hold no legal weight, is it discriminatory if the store asks you to leave? Even in states where those signs are "legal" I can see a basis for a discriminatory lawsuit. If they were to ask you to leave because of age, sex, race or religion you would have a big lawsuit. So why is it any different if you are asked to leave if you are legally carrying a firearm?

I am no lawyer but I see a strong basis for a lawsuit. Maybe an actual civil lawyer could chime in. What do you think? Am I way off? Or am I thinking too rationally for politicians?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
Here in Kentucky "Guns Prohibited" have no force of law behind them. If I really wanted to carry in this business I would just ignore the sign. However, I simply refuse to patronize such businesses and give them my money.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,817 Posts
We have several lawyers here that spend millions on advertising. They assure us they will never charge us a dime until the case is settled. I suspect you have zero chance of getting these ambulance chasers to take your case.

If you want to take it on be prepared to pay an hourly rate around $200 - $400 per hour.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,182 Posts
As I was grocery shopping today I had a thought. For those of us in states where "no gun" signs hold no legal weight, is it discriminatory if the store asks you to leave? Even in states where those signs are "legal" I can see a basis for a discriminatory lawsuit. If they were to ask you to leave because of age, sex, race or religion you would have a big lawsuit. So why is it any different if you are asked to leave if you are legally carrying a firearm?

I am no lawyer but I see a strong basis for a lawsuit. Maybe an actual civil lawyer could chime in. What do you think? Am I way off? Or am I thinking too rationally for politicians?
just tell them you are gay ... and it's only because you are a "gay" gun owner that you are being asked to leave , and they'll leave you alone.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,033 Posts
Haven't seen this discussion in awhile:wink: I beleive that with SCOTUS and "strict scrutiny"..........oh never mind LOL:danceban: Some here will get the reference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Even if gun-owners were a protected class, they could still prohibit you from bringing a gun into their place of business, they just couldn't ban you.
That would be like prohibiting you from driving in a shopping center parking lot because you own a 4WD. What is the difference? They are discriminating against you because you have a gun. Based on the definition of discrimination they are discriminating. I know I am taking the definition very literal and I know the law would probably would probably never see it that way. I was just wondering if others see it as I do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
706 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Here in Kentucky "Guns Prohibited" have no force of law behind them. If I really wanted to carry in this business I would just ignore the sign. However, I simply refuse to patronize such businesses and give them my money.
Since in WA such signs aren't legal I don't even look for them. I know the places I can't carry based on state and federal law. That is all that matters to me.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,033 Posts
That would be like prohibiting you from driving in a shopping center parking lot because you own a 4WD. What is the difference? They are discriminating against you because you have a gun. Based on the definition of discrimination they are discriminating. I know I am taking the definition very literal and I know the law would probably would probably never see it that way. I was just wondering if others see it as I do.
Probably? This is a decided issue with law. And it is nothing like your analogies. Respectfully, get over it. It is a free country and there are competing rights, those of individuals who want the right to bear arms and the rights of property owners to ban what they want allowable by law. Your rights to not trump mine and vice versa. You have a choice to go somewhere and shop. If folks are so darned afraid of going somewhere without their gun they can shop on Amazon.com.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
The property owner does not want your gun on his/her property and since you brought the gun into the store you are asked to leave the premises with your gun. You can then return to the premises without your gun if you so choose. It's not about you, it is about the gun.

The exact same thing goes for bicycles.

The property owner does not want your bicycle on his/her property and since you brought the bicycle into the store you are asked to leave the premises with your bicycle. You can then return to the premises without your bicycle if you so choose. It's not about you, it is about the bicycle.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,531 Posts
As I was grocery shopping today I had a thought. For those of us in states where "no gun" signs hold no legal weight, is it discriminatory if the store asks you to leave? Even in states where those signs are "legal" I can see a basis for a discriminatory lawsuit. If they were to ask you to leave because of age, sex, race or religion you would have a big lawsuit. So why is it any different if you are asked to leave if you are legally carrying a firearm?

I am no lawyer but I see a strong basis for a lawsuit. Maybe an actual civil lawyer could chime in. What do you think? Am I way off? Or am I thinking too rationally for politicians?
You are way off. And if you find a lawyer that will take your case on a civil rights violation, you either have a lousy attorney that was the anchor in his law school class or one so brilliant that all other attorneys of all bars in the US are blinded by the White Hot Sun of Genius that now represents you. You choose the more likely scenario.

Probably this most crude but graphic example is illustrative: If you are a gun owner, you can take off your gun. If you are a black person, you cannot take off your skin. If you are a woman...oh, heck, that's enough.

This is not really an accurate analogy but hopefully you get the idea. It has to do with "protected classes." Race, Gender, Age, etc. It also has to do with what a party, as a property owner, can do with respect to exclusion. As a property owner you do have rights to exclude others, within boundaries. Totin' a gun is well within those boundaries.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
That would be like prohibiting you from driving in a shopping center parking lot because you own a 4WD. What is the difference? They are discriminating against you because you have a gun. Based on the definition of discrimination they are discriminating. I know I am taking the definition very literal and I know the law would probably would probably never see it that way. I was just wondering if others see it as I do.
Yes, some people "see it" like you do. The laws however, do not "see it" like you do.

What you have to understand is that property owners also have rights and your rights do not trump their rights and their rights do not trump your rights. Both party's rights must coexist. You are able to enter the store and he is able to revoke your privilege to remain on the premises if you choose to only be on his property while you are armed. You have a choice...enter the store unarmed or remain armed and shop somewhere else. You can go where you want, you just have to abide by the property owner's rules while you are on his property and he will abide by your rules when/if he chooses to go onto your property. He is not stopping you from coming onto his property...he is stopping you from bring your firearm onto his property.

There is a difference between public property and private property where business is conducted with the public.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top