The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 20, 2016, 03:17 PM   #1
chief357onYouTube
Junior Member
 
Join Date: August 19, 2016
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 12
Gun Free Zones - What's the point?

Here's a opinion video on Gun Free Zones. I created this video with the intent of passing along my thoughts on gun free zones..... I don't really understand what their purpose is. I'm not talking about schools, bars, government buildings, etc. My video and question pertains to businesses who choose to make their establishment or property a gun free zone. Sometimes that business is a mom&pop type place, only 1 location exists. But sometimes, that business is a nationwide chain that makes it a blanket policy across all stores....Target for example.



Let's say that a particular business decided that they don't want anyone carrying a gun inside their store. That is their right, it's their store and I understand that part. If I don't like it, I don't have to shop there..... My question is, what type of problem or behavior are they trying to prevent or discourage?



Thanks for watching!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzAqbnfljrI

Last edited by chief357onYouTube; August 20, 2016 at 04:13 PM.
chief357onYouTube is offline  
Old August 20, 2016, 04:40 PM   #2
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 11,996
That is one LOOONNNGGG video to make a point being made on this forum numerous times in the past.

What problem (asked in the video) are these companies trying to solve by putting these policies in place? Simple. They are trying to keep your fine, law abiding idiot gun holders from having NDs in their stores and harming their customers. They already know that they can't control lawbreakers, but they can control law abiders. They can't stop bad guys from shooting people and they know they can't count on good guys to step in and protect them without potentially harming other good people, but they can stop law abiding folks from carrying guns and having NDs in their stores...and these happen with some frequencies, complete with injuries and often deaths.

Before ask whether or not this policy makes sense, it all depends on your perspective. Their stores and their rules, plain and simple. You don't have to agree with them and you don't have to shop in them. You think your logic is better. They think their logic is better.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 20, 2016, 04:53 PM   #3
sig-gunner
Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2016
Location: Top/Mid portion of the U.S.A.
Posts: 42
Gun free zones were originally about having extra penalties for being caught in them with a gun. Supposedly this would deter gun use around schools etc.

Now they seem to be about the community (or a group of politicians in the community) stating that they are against guns in general. <-------- my opinion, not supported by facts, just conjecture

I think they're as silly as the no guns allowed signs we see on some retail stores etc. Only law abiding people will obey those signs.
__________________
We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. – Ronald Reagan
sig-gunner is offline  
Old August 20, 2016, 08:59 PM   #4
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 11,996
Well that is the idea. Gun free zones are not about trying to stop criminals. Only anti-gun free zone people seem to think they are to stop criminals.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 20, 2016, 11:40 PM   #5
Armed_Chicagoan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2013
Location: Albany Park, Chicago
Posts: 712
"My question is, what type of problem or behavior are they trying to prevent or discourage?"

They're trying to protect themselves from lawsuits. Whether or not it actually makes anyone safer or even unsafe is none of their concern.
Armed_Chicagoan is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 04:05 AM   #6
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,892
Liability. If someone does something stupid/illegal with a gun in their store, and someone tries to sue the store, they can say "We told them not to bring one in here. It's not our fault!"
raimius is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 08:49 AM   #7
Louca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 229
I am kinda wanting to agree with Armed_Chicagoan and raimius in that it might be liability related. Always follow the money first.

But my related question is: is it really illegal to carry in a store that just puts up a "no guns" sign? From what I read in my state laws, for "Prohibited Premises" it does not say anything about stores that put up signs. I mean the store could put up a "No fat people allowed" sign to avoid the liability of someone having a significant medical event (like heart attack or stroke) in their store, and then suing the store (which they would do). Is that legal? I doubt it.

And then sometimes I think the store just wants to be politically correct by making the statement, actually thinking they will somehow make people (incorrectly) think they are safer in their store.
Louca is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 09:08 AM   #8
sig-gunner
Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2016
Location: Top/Mid portion of the U.S.A.
Posts: 42
Quote:
is it really illegal to carry in a store that just puts up a "no guns" sign?
In my state the concealed carry issuing entity, the state patrol, has among the criteria and rules for obtaining a permit (state patrol licensed training, fingerprint FBI background check, etc etc etc) the provision that the permit holder must obey any "no guns" signs anywhere, whether at a home, retail store, church etc.

In addition there is a list of "no gun zones" such as government buildings, schools, sports events, etc.
__________________
We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. – Ronald Reagan
sig-gunner is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 09:16 AM   #9
Indawind
Member
 
Join Date: May 14, 2016
Location: Flyover Country
Posts: 55
Quote:
But my related question is: is it really illegal to carry in a store that just puts up a "no guns" sign?
And here in lies a question some must ask themselves. Not is it illegal, but HOW illegal is it.

Here the force of law behind the signage is minor so an example of the question to ask boils down to this event.

A guy buys some stuff at a local Mall. The entire property is a "gun free zone" according to the owners, and is posted as such. The guy has a gun pulled on him by some youths that want his stuff. The guy pulls HIS gun and kills the kid. The only charges placed were on one of the kid's buddies.

So the "Bad guy" had no issue with carrying in a gun free zone, and the shooter made the decision that his life was worth the risk of being asked to leave a gun free zone. The shooters decision seems to be a prudent one, he walked away rather than being carried.

I suppose the decision comes down to understanding that Big Boy Rules apply when it comes to guns. It's a personal decision.
Indawind is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 10:21 AM   #10
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 11,996
Quote:
But my related question is: is it really illegal to carry in a store that just puts up a "no guns" sign? From what I read in my state laws, for "Prohibited Premises" it does not say anything about stores that put up signs. I mean the store could put up a "No fat people allowed" sign to avoid the liability of someone having a significant medical event (like heart attack or stroke) in their store, and then suing the store (which they would do). Is that legal? I doubt it.
The no fat people sign would be a form of discrimination against people, which is generally illegal. No guns is discrimination against an object, not a person, and is generally legal to do. So the comparison isn't parallel or comparable.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 10:42 AM   #11
sig-gunner
Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2016
Location: Top/Mid portion of the U.S.A.
Posts: 42
I feel like I should be able to carry (concealed) whenever and where ever I want to. But I generally comply with the rules the state patrol here has in place for the permit. That means noting where the signs are and not going back with my business; I'll take my money elsewhere.

Also, if it's a court building or school sports event etc I'm going to, I leave the gun at home.

I just don't want to lose that permit privilege. I carried before the days of cc permits, where it was legal to do so.

The whole thing of feeling defenceless because I'm in a place where it's not legal to carry a gun is the big irony about all this. I want to keep my permit, but I don't think I should have to have a #$%^*&! permit in the first place.
__________________
We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. – Ronald Reagan
sig-gunner is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 12:40 PM   #12
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,075
Gun free zones work.
Has caused many of you to leave your guns at home.
GFZ has caused me to leave mine at home before.
That's one gun that didn't shoot anyone, and if we save just one... It's all worth it.
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 01:31 PM   #13
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 11,996
Quote:
The whole thing of feeling defenceless because I'm in a place where it's not legal to carry a gun is the big irony about all this.
If you feel defenseless because you don't have a gun, then you probably need to really reevaluate your self defense preparedness. A gun is an improper tool for the vast majority of self defense situations.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 01:50 PM   #14
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,892
I would recommend reading through handgunlaw.us and your state's page on carry regulations if you are unfamiliar with the specifics in your state. Some states have legal penalties for disregarding private "no guns" signs, while others will simply treat it as trespassing if you do not leave after your firearm is noticed.
raimius is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 06:38 PM   #15
sig-gunner
Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2016
Location: Top/Mid portion of the U.S.A.
Posts: 42
Quote:
If you feel defenseless because you don't have a gun, then you probably need to really reevaluate your self defense preparedness. A gun is an improper tool for the vast majority of self defense situations.
Nothing to re-evaluate, except maybe my posted wording here and there. Could/should have been something like, "...I could feel potentially defenseless in a deadly situation which would otherwise necessitate the need for a gun not allowed in various locations.."

But I think you knew that because it is implied, but you just felt like jumping in with a condescending response, big guy. Because you're so rough and tough and all that.
__________________
We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions. – Ronald Reagan
sig-gunner is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 07:32 PM   #16
Louca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 229
Quote:
The no fat people sign would be a form of discrimination against people, which is generally illegal. No guns is discrimination against an object, not a person, and is generally legal to do. So the comparison isn't parallel or comparable.
Yes, Double Naught Spy, you are correct and thanks for pointing that out. I readily now admit that was an incorrect example. I would argue however that the "no guns" sign is not just discrimination against an object, but also discrimination against a citizen's rights, rights that are Constitutionally ordained and State licensed (in the case of a carry license).

I suppose if a state says that putting up a sign constitutes a binding legal statute, then an arrest could be made. Otherwise, I would think about all they could do is ask the person to leave. And that might be a little difficult to do if a handgun is truly concealed and not visible.
Louca is offline  
Old August 21, 2016, 10:22 PM   #17
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,231
Quote:
I would argue however that the "no guns" sign is not just discrimination against an object, but also discrimination against a citizen's rights, rights that are Constitutionally ordained and State licensed (in the case of a carry license).
And you would essentially be correct.

HOWEVER...

You are dealing here with PRIVATE property rights, and while open to the public and having to allow certain protected classes, legally armed citizens are not one of those protected (by law) classes.

Our constitutionally ordained rights do NOT apply on other people's property, absent their permission, nor do their rights apply on ours.

Your state license allows for legal carry in PUBLIC (on public property) with certain noted exceptions. While you or I might hold the opinion that a "no guns" policy is not proper behavior, it is entirely legal.

The guy running a snack bar downtown isn't going to lose much if he puts up a "No Shirt, no shoes, no service" sign. The guy running the snack bar at the beach would lose most of his business if he did.

It's their place, their rules, don't like them? Don't go there.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 07:31 AM   #18
JimPage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2010
Location: Rome, NY
Posts: 941
44...: That's true in the most part, but not in totality. Most glaring example is that you can't enslave anyone even on your own property. The person maintains his rights there, too.
__________________
Jim Page

Cogito, ergo armatum sum
JimPage is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 07:31 AM   #19
Louca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 229
Very good point 44. I had not previously considered the private property aspect of all this. I suppose the legal vs. illegal subject in all this comes down to a trespassing issue.

I suppose that is a huge advantage of knowing martial arts in that you cannot be thrown out of a place just for knowing something. Just don't let them see your black belt! :-)
Louca is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 07:53 AM   #20
steve4102
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,903
Louca, ya might want to read this from HandgunLaw on your State of MI concerning NoGuns signs.

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/michigan.pdf

And again here.

http://miopencarry.org/faq#7
steve4102 is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 08:08 AM   #21
Louca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2013
Location: Michigan
Posts: 229
Wow, although not a legal document, that is a very good read. Thanks Steve.
Louca is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 08:38 AM   #22
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 11,996
Quote:
Yes, Double Naught Spy, you are correct and thanks for pointing that out. I readily now admit that was an incorrect example. I would argue however that the "no guns" sign is not just discrimination against an object, but also discrimination against a citizen's rights, rights that are Constitutionally ordained and State licensed (in the case of a carry license).
You know, it isn't even discrimination against a citizen's rights in a legal sense when the "rights" are subject to the permission of the land owner (as clarified by various state and federal laws and rulings). That means your rights are limited (as held up by the Supreme Court) and that your rights do not supersede the rights of another. So unless otherwise stipulated by law, your "right" only means that it is okay with the government so long as it is okay with the proprietor of the premises. Many folks seem to forget this.

So a landowner disallowing gun carry may be discrimination, but it is without a rights violation (assuming all applicable laws are followed).
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 10:55 AM   #23
thallub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 2,802
My doctor is a concealed carrier, shooter and hunter. He did not have a no gun sign. Then some idiot was fondling his Glock in an examining room and had a negligent discharge. The bullet went through several walls, narrowly missing a nurse.

My doctor now has a no gun sign.
thallub is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 11:03 AM   #24
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,231
Quote:
Most glaring example is that you can't enslave anyone even on your own property. The person maintains his rights there, too.
Because enslaving someone is a crime. We kind of fought a war with that as a major issue back in the 1860s. You can't enslave someone on your own property because you can't enslave anyone, anywhere, and the property owner's legal right to determine what goes on, on their property does not supersede that.

Quote:
Just don't let them see your black belt! :-)
I let 'em see my black belt, AND my black suspenders! (and my black cane..)

Quote:
.. your rights do not supersede the rights of another.
One of the operative phrases describing this idea is "your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.."

The law provides the framework we use to determine who's rights, about what, take precedence, and when.

Generally speaking, property owners rights, on their property, are given more weight than the rights of an individual on someone else's property.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old August 22, 2016, 04:28 PM   #25
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,075
I'll always respect private property rights, just as I wish mine to be observed. Even outside of the law as a courtesy.

Say, for example, a feller has a no guns allowed sign in an establishment, the local laws do not give the sign any legal weight, I will still respect the owner's wishes. Most likely I'll comply by not entering the premises. If it's something I have to do, I'll disarm.
rickyrick is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.08858 seconds with 8 queries