brucecrain
Marksman
Feel free to sue them, see how that goes. What's a "public venue"? if I open a restaurant, why do I not have the right to allow who I want there?[/
Edit*
Last edited:
Feel free to sue them, see how that goes. What's a "public venue"? if I open a restaurant, why do I not have the right to allow who I want there?[/
Edit*
And now you know one of many reasons I dont open carry!Do any of them ever ask if you are the police when they see the OC gun?
I was thinking of Cynthia and Robert Gifford, but okay.Let's ask Ollie McClung.
I was thinking of Cynthia and Robert Gifford, but okay.
Crawford's?
AMEN BROTHER!I don't really care for people, therefore, I'll conceal, and avoid the idiots.
Shop Wright!
Now I 'member! I grew up right around the corner from there. Well, lived there from like age 4-10. My great grandma lived in Cloverdale Heights for several years. We were by Shopwright all the time.
I DO now remember all the pictures of people they had up. Lots of them for back-check passers, too. Their little endorser stamp they had had a mini-camera in the handle of it. They'd endorse the check with a "whump" of the stamp and you got your picture taken at the same time.
Good ol' days.
So you're for freedom just not when it pertains to something you don't agree with? Seems to be a popular trend these days.
Everyone likes to claim the private property rights card.... Newsflash, once you're open to the public you should not be able to hide behind that and use it as a method of discrimination. It's no different than the 'No Colors Allowed' or 'Whites Only' signs of the 50s and 60s. Those are illegal now. Prohibiting those carrying lawful firearms is the same exact thing but somehow folks want to pretend that it's not.
Me too, but when has that ever happened?I like it when the gvt. stays out of things and policies we don't like are changed by the market if they are important enough to enough people. Removing one person's freedom to advance another's isn't much of a consistent approach.
No... I don't believe a third-party should have ANY say in my personal safety.
As a business we don't have the right to refuse service to someone because I don't like them, their religion, their beliefs, etc. It's discrimination and everyone gets their knickers in a twist. However, if a public establishment throws me out simply for exercising my lawful right of carrying a firearm... same difference.
Everyone likes to claim the private property rights card.... Newsflash, once you're open to the public you should not be able to hide behind that and use it as a method of discrimination. It's no different than the 'No Colors Allowed' or 'Whites Only' signs of the 50s and 60s. Those are illegal now. Prohibiting those carrying lawful firearms is the same exact thing but somehow folks want to pretend that it's not.
They actually are not the same thing. One is who you are. The other is a behavior. Not arguing about property rights vs. right to carry. Just pointing out the difference.
I like it when the gvt. stays out of things and policies we don't like are changed by the market if they are important enough to enough people. Removing one person's freedom to advance another's isn't much of a consistent approach.
No... I don't believe a third-party should have ANY say in my personal safety.
As a business we don't have the right to refuse service to someone because I don't like them, their religion, their beliefs, etc. It's discrimination and everyone gets their knickers in a twist. However, if a public establishment throws me out simply for exercising my lawful right of carrying a firearm... same difference.
I'm not talking about the guy pulling his piece out of the holster every five minutes or waving it around. I'm talking about the responsible person with it parked in its holster until - God forbid - it's needed.
If someone is exercising their rights in a responsible and non-disruptive fashion they should be free to do so and no one should be able to prevent that.
Everyone likes to claim the private property rights card.... Newsflash, once you're open to the public you should not be able to hide behind that and use it as a method of discrimination. It's no different than the 'No Colors Allowed' or 'Whites Only' signs of the 50s and 60s. Those are illegal now. Prohibiting those carrying lawful firearms is the same exact thing but somehow folks want to pretend that it's not.
Lots of chest thumping without much critical thinking here.
What do you mean? Petitioning the government to restrict other people's freedom always leads to more freedom for all. Right?
Lots of chest thumping without much critical thinking here.