|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 4, 2009, 10:15 AM | #76 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
|
The business has every justification for asking you to leave if you don't abide by their policies (whatever they may be).
We have every justification for letting said business know how we feel. If you want to protest then by all means take your business elsewhere but don't forget the other part which is a stream of letters to corporate headquarters with receipts showing them the business they are losing with their policy along with a nicely worded letter covering the "no guns no cash" talking points. That is what tends to get some attention. |
May 4, 2009, 10:46 AM | #77 |
Staff In Memoriam
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
|
If you can't figure out how to fry frozen chicken nuggets, cheese sticks and seasoned curly fries from sam's wholesale club and pour a beer into a glass... by all means go to TGI Fridays:barf: But rules is rules... And heck if yer gonna eat "kiddie food" what makes you think yer mature enuff for a pistol...
Easy folks I am just ribbin' and flaming me won't work as I am wearing brand new nomex superman under roos... Brent |
May 4, 2009, 12:31 PM | #78 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
May 4, 2009, 01:30 PM | #79 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
What you do and what you are? Interesting divide - your 'race' (which is an ill-defined concept) might be what you 'are'. Your religion is what you do and that is protected. Your religion is supposedly part of the package of measures you choose to employee to protect you from an unpleasant after-life experience. It is protected. I would protect the right of the citizen not move into that afterlife earlier than expected due to action of a criminal action.
I would agree that private property owners and employers cannot control the exercise of civil rights unless it overtly and clearly disrupts the property or actual operations of the enterprise. Not PR issues.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
May 4, 2009, 02:34 PM | #80 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
May 4, 2009, 02:49 PM | #81 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
But not to wax theologically, you can convert to or adopt various religions. Faced with job discrimination or the Inquisition - you could change this for pragmatic reasons. I know folks who have done such (not the Inquistion though).
It is hard to argue that you could change the biology tagged as race or change the basic right of self defense. Now whether I think there are basic fundamental rights like self-defense and where they came from is another argument set.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
May 4, 2009, 03:54 PM | #82 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Glenn,
You are correct about religion I think. You can change that like socks and no one is the wiser. Maybe the answer is religion is what you proclaim to be. I think this is a very difficult question. I have debated this issue concerning employer's work rules against CCW on TFL a few times. So the moral question might be does your right to self defense (which predates the COTUS) trump the rights of employers and private property? The issue that to me in the defining one is that of true choice. It would seem that if you have a true choice (and that is NOT always a given) then should you simply take your business/employment elsewhere where you can carry and respect the work rule/private property of another? I have posited the case of the battered woman who is being stalked by ex-hubbie/boyfriend who is not safe anywhere without a firearm. Does her right to self defense get trumped by work rules or private property? Should she just quit her job and not leave the house shopping thru the internet or risk injury/death at the hands of her ex? If the business/employers does not allow firearms should it then take stronger steps to insure your safety with metal detactors and armed guards? Some businesses do that.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
May 4, 2009, 04:15 PM | #83 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
We have cell phone alert system as our first means of defense.
I suppose I will call the Rabbi so he can smooth my journey to the Afterlife.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
May 4, 2009, 05:13 PM | #84 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Carrying is not a status, carrying is always something you do. Just as ones religion may give protected status, some of the religious practices that are done are allowed to be prohibited. |
|
May 4, 2009, 05:55 PM | #85 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 11, 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 109
|
Quote:
Quote:
I have a right to keep and bear arms. You have a right of ownership of your property. If I want to go onto/into your property, don't I have an obligation, prior to entering, to accept your permission as you grant it? Don't we acknowledge the fact that the 2nd amendment is there to enable the keeping of our other inalienable rights? I have a right to carry a weapon. I do not have a right to come onto your property. I need your permission for that. You get to set the terms of that permission. There is no "rights" conflict in this. If I want to carry my weapon more than meet your terms of permission, I may make my choice to not accept your terms. In doing so I am refusing your permission. There is no "rights" conflict in this. I do not have the right to being a special class, because I am not a special class. You owe me nothing because I carry a filearm, because I are not required to carry a firearm. Carrying a firearm and accepting your terms of entry onto/into your propery are my choices, which I have the right to make. There is no "rights" conflict in this. Getting permission onto/into your property under my own terms is not my right. There is no "rights" conflict in this. But I know, it's still not fair. End of Rant. |
||
May 4, 2009, 06:14 PM | #86 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,060
|
Quote:
Simple enough. Don't go there. If you see value in changing their minds about this, contact the right people, in the right ways. Boy, this one's drifted...
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
May 4, 2009, 08:16 PM | #87 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 24, 2009
Location: RGV, Tx
Posts: 787
|
I refuse to eat there just because the food is nasty and nothing and i mean nothing is fresh it all comes from bags or boxes (used to work in the kitchen) and the one I worked in no one cared how filthy the kitchen got.
__________________
And death climbs the steps one by one, To give you the rose that's been burnt by her son, Point me to the sky above I can't get there on my own, Walk me through the graveyard Dig up her bones |
May 5, 2009, 08:56 AM | #88 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Quote:
Needless to say - I will stand on proposing laws that prevent private businesses, public and private schools and governmental buildings that are open to the public from banning carry unless they can come up with the compelling technical reason. Rights are a social construct and not a physical law of the universe or some abstract principle as in mathematics. I want the social construct of carry to be deemed as worthy as our other restrictions on property rights that forbid segregation and the like. Let the legislative process enact this and it will be so.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
May 5, 2009, 10:23 AM | #89 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,775
|
Here is a link of the conference committee in TN debating the provision to allow carry in restaurants (TN does not distinguish between bars and restaurants) and a lot of our arguments here are laid out in the video. The motion passed to allow carry. For those who might be interested:
http://tnga.granicus.com/MediaPlayer...0&clip_id=1390
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted." Anonymous Soldier. |
May 5, 2009, 12:12 PM | #90 | ||||
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
From the philosophical viewpoint, what difference is there between mandating that all businesses must allow people to carry guns and mandating that all businesses must prohibit people from carrying guns? |
||||
May 5, 2009, 01:39 PM | #91 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Quote:
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
May 5, 2009, 02:12 PM | #92 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: In the oak studded hills near Napa
Posts: 2,203
|
Quote:
I can't believe that this thread has gone this far! The property rights vs carry rights issue usually blows up pretty quick. On the down side, I don't think we're any closer to resolving the issue here. On the upside, I think most everyone now knows what to expect out of TGIF's kitchen, as well as their lawyer's offices.
__________________
grym |
|
May 5, 2009, 02:42 PM | #93 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
If you want to see how old I look:
http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/Massa...olite-society/ I once was young - sigh! Not to thread hijack. Hey - wore that vest to Red Lobster last night. Not posted and I carried without threat to any.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
May 5, 2009, 03:19 PM | #94 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: In the oak studded hills near Napa
Posts: 2,203
|
Quote:
So, it seems Red Lobster may be more gun friendly than TGIF, but the big question is (in my butter-basted little brain anyway) is the food any better?
__________________
grym |
|
May 5, 2009, 03:36 PM | #95 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
|
Quote:
|
|
May 5, 2009, 03:57 PM | #96 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 3, 2009
Posts: 3
|
carreing in ga
not sure but i think in ga you can carry consield if the place makes less than 33% of its sales on the bar where I WOULD THINK would be any tgif.
|
May 5, 2009, 04:02 PM | #97 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 11, 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 109
|
palmnos,
Are you a member of the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL), http://www.vcdl.org/ ? They are very active in getting VA gun laws changed for the good. If you want things to change maybe you should get involved. |
May 5, 2009, 04:09 PM | #98 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: In the oak studded hills near Napa
Posts: 2,203
|
Kinda ironic that the only places of business I recall seeing "no carry" postings are gun stores.... here in gun-friendly, sunny California.
__________________
grym |
May 5, 2009, 04:29 PM | #99 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 11, 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 109
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
or "a CCW permit SHALL be granted [by the government] unless...", versus "a CCW permit MAY be granted [by the government] under certain circumstances". It really makes a difference who may and who shall. If our only goal is to get a certain agenda mandated and in place, we are no better than the rights takers we say we are fighting. Only thieves deny and violate an owner's property rights. |
|||
May 5, 2009, 04:40 PM | #100 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
We shall go off into the void if we try to argue that property rights are inviolate. We've been there before.
The government mandates that you have a toilet in your restaurant. Thus, are they thieves to do such for the good of public health? When you open for business, you are not in your castle. Also, you expect tax payers to foot the bill for emergency services to come to your place of business. You can't claim splendid isolation and inviolate property rights when you interact with the populace and expect civic services. But, if we do this again - we've reached the end - same old, same old. Anything else new to say?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
|