citizenvain
Marksman
This is going to sound totally counter to my usual posts, but....the private business is not negating rights, Constitutionally protected or otherwise (is there even an "otherwise"?) As was recently pointed out to me, no one is handcuffing you and dragging you into the store. Scutter and Spasmo drove 260 miles round trip to go there-by choice! and therein lies the problem: After all that driving, they were treated badly because of someone's ignorance. You have a right to protect the life God gave you. You have, IMHO and apparently, those of our Founders, a responsibility to protect yourself and those dear to you. If to do that you must shop elsewhere, then so be it. It sounds like this was a case of flunkie-fication, however, and not store policy. I may be willing to reverse my statement upthread in re: shopping there.
Agreed, they could choose elsewhere to shop, but I still think my point is valid. If they drove 260 miles and were turned a way because they were a gay couple or wearing islamic t-shirts and were turned away, their "rights" would have been violated, or so all the special interest groups would cry and the ACLU would being having a press conference today suing that specific store and maybe corporate. And it would be the same situation, they drove there by choice, and no one forced them to, but yet their rights will always be protected over gun owners.
I think we are on the same page though as far as looking at the situation, just that I get tired of how it is ok to discriminate against certain types of people while others are considered "protected", and in this case, I am thinking someone who chooses to exercise their right to carry. You won't see the ACLU getting involved with this, but I guarantee you if it was the example I painted above , yep, it would be all over the news.