My thoughts exactly, I ignore all signs I see, except at the places I can't legally carry, post office, schools, federal buildings
One of my bosses just asked me to procure 200 "No Guns Allowed" signs for our stores.
- Thread starter Silveravnt
- Start Date
My thoughts exactly, I ignore all signs I see, except at the places I can't legally carry, post office, schools, federal buildings
I have no problem with ignoring the signs too. But if there is an alternative business to give your money to why wouldn't you? Those who have gun-buster signs are anti-Constitution which makes them enemy. I personally want to see them fail and let those who support the 2A thrive. The employees at the former can then go to work at the latter.
A lot of times our votes at the polls have little impact on how things turn out. But we can still speak by where we spend our money.
A lot of times our votes at the polls have little impact on how things turn out. But we can still speak by where we spend our money.
Well said. Agreed.
I have to disagree with this one. Just because they want to control what happens on their property, doesn't mean they don't believe in our constitution. If anything, they're simply exercising their God given right to own property and then make the decisions as to what takes place on that property. I have much more of a problem with government (public) owned establishments banning guns than a private business/property owner deciding what they want. How dare someone come into my home and call me unconstitutional simply for making a request that they not bring something into my home.
BTW... I'm a business owner that welcomes firearms. Just think the business owner has the right to choose.
I'm glad you're a business owner, and glad that you welcome legal firearms into your place of business. A person's place of residence is a much different thing, IMHO.
Both are properties which I own. Which property I sleep in and which one I work in is a non-issue. If I don't want you there or want you to bring something into my dwelling (both are my dwelling according to castle doctorine) or onto my property, it is and should be my decision. Now, whether you visit my house or do business with me because you disagree with the rules of my property is your decision and right. I have to be willing to live with loss of business that may come from my rules. But, I can make those rules none the less.
And the way it should be. There should not be laws which require property owners to cater to special interests.
I absolutely agree that it is 100% your decision and your right. And yes, according to the castle doctrine you are allowed to defend yourself in either as they both are your dwelling. But a place of business (ie: retail shop) I certainly would not consider equivalent to a home (ie: place of residence). A retail shop I am welcoming the public. My residence, I most certainly am not.
If I owned a Chilis... I wouldn't consider that my "home".
The reason you were quoted in the first place was because of: "How dare someone come into my home and call me unconstitutional simply for making a request that they not bring something into my home." -- nobody said you were being anti-2A or unconstitutional because you made a request that they not bring something into your home... and even if they did, brush it off and move on.
Hypocrit! You denying my right to control my private property is covered in more amendments than your right to carry a gun.
Sometimes it amazes me that people can claim to be such constitutionalists yet only want to use the ones that fit them. No better than any stinking liberal that does it. UNAMERICAN! BOOOOOO!
In my opinion, it seems that the "Right" does it more than the "Left".
No, I do not have sufficient data to back that up, nor do I have the time to gather sufficient data.
Similar threads
