A call to hands (and mouths): Remember your oath

[Braggs]

Our rights do not trump theirs.

"shall not be infringed" - Your moral superiority, while respectable, didn't stop the business owners from trumping our rights.

 

[yukonjack]

"shall not be infringed" - Your moral superiority, while respectable, didn't stop the business owners from trumping our rights.

They didn't trump your rights. You still can own and bear firearms. They've simply said they don't want you to bring them onto their private property. The ability to own private property in this country is also a RIGHT that we should honor and respect.

 

[sh00ter]

They didn't trump your rights. You still can own and bear firearms. They've simply said they don't want you to bring them onto their private property. The ability to own private property in this country is also a RIGHT that we should honor and respect.

A business is a PUBLIC place...your house is not...there is a difference.

Exhibit A:

[Broken External Image]

 

[Lurker66]

I respectfully disagree..."no guns" discriminates against those who choose to exercise their right to bear arms...I am on the fence here man...I mean part of me says if someone doesn't like it, they can go on down the road because it is not systematic discrimination...when the gov't impedes blacks or gays or gun owners, then that is systematic...but a private business owner, also has rights....But I think ULTIMATELY, it comes down to a cost of doing business...If you are gonna do business with the public, you have to be more tolerant of the public than is they were coming into your home. But then, if that is true, then can I refuse to bake a cake for a customer who is a demanding a-hole? Or do I somehow violate his rights? What about refusing to serve anyone who voted for 0bama because you do not want to support anyone who helped to destroy the nation? I mean this debate can get real granular..

But looking ONLY at the CCW policy, I think perhaps a barber shop might be fine with a sign, but a wal-mart is not...maybe only mom & pop businesses can decide but large national businesses must accept local laws in order to do business in that state???? Can we find any common ground there Lurker66?

Yes, theres lotsa common ground. We're on the same side and differ in our opinion of who's rights are being violated or when to violate them. We cant say its Ok for "mom n pop" barber shops to violate laws or discriminate while saying Super Cuts must be held to a different standard.

 

[Lurker66]

If they put up a sign that said "no gun owners", would that be a violation of civil rights?

I think they should be culpable for any damage, injury or death that prevents me from protecting my civil rights while on their property. So in that sense, yes, no guns is in the area of civil rights is a violation.

 

[Lurker66]

Yes, there are laws on the books (maybe somewhere) that says they have a right to refuse business and possibly to remove you from their property (trespassing?). For now, I agree you should respect them and their unpatriotic policies, otherwise, why should they respect you and your message?

Simply "not spending your money there" is a very passive protest. How can they know they lost business unless you tell them they did? How can they know their gun policy is what caused them to lose business unless you tell them it is?

The liberals (like the Tulsa World) don't wait for economics to work things out... they actively market their gun control message to businesses providing them the "legal" message and perhaps even the window decals. We need to be just as active as the enemy because if you're not playing offense, then you're only losing ground.

Braggs

Its not my job or duty to tell any business how to run its policies. Although you say its passive, i say let them fail. Theres not one single business that cannot be replaced. In fact i hope every store, business or company with gun buster signs fail, close shop or just goes away.

I choose to spend my time and money being a customer of pro gun businesses. Theres actually lots of them and ya dont have to tell them how to run their business.

 

[riper1]

so Lurker66 you would rather sit on the sideline and take the path of least resistance, thats how we got a 2nd term for our not new president,

 

[sh00ter]

Well tot he OP, I think he has the right idea...he is not wanting the government to force the private business owner to allow guns...he is wanting the majority (gun owners) to voice their concerns about the no gun policy in hopes to influence some change...I think that is totally reasonable.

Reminds me in college when the Pizza place got too many beer busts and stopped selling beer to college kids with no ID...word got around and he almost went out of business from the boycott and he decided to start selling beer to college kids with no ID again because he got the message LOL...of course, only a few voiced their concern but many boycotted him. Alone we are weak but together we are strong...

I just wonder if the guy at Ingrid's kitchen (or the nice lady who I have met who owns it) realize that a criminal is not going to obey their "no gun" sign LOL.

 

[Lurker66]

so Lurker66 you would rather sit on the sideline and take the path of least resistance, thats how we got a 2nd term for our not new president,

The OPs idea isnt a bad idea. He continues to be a customer and voice his opinion, which keeps that business open. Its one thing to try to educate a uneducated owner on the pro's of being allowed to carry. Its quite another to keep them in business after youve educated them.

I put alot of my money in local business, hardly any goes to a chain store unless it seafood and theres no gun buster signs at Red Lobster or Joes.

I also voted for Obama because im not a single issue voter. And Romney sucked.

 

[JB Books]

"shall not be infringed" - Your moral superiority, while respectable, didn't stop the business owners from trumping our rights.

What the Hell does this even mean?