Ignoring Gun Buster signage. - Page 14
Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 233

Thread: Ignoring Gun Buster signage.

  1. #131
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    I already have.
    No, ya havent.
    Show everyone where in the Ohio Revised Code it defines armed robbery as a PROPERTY crime.
    how about YOU do it since its YOUR claim.
    THEN show us how it makes ME a liar.


  3. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    Speaking of "BS lies", tell everyone again how armed robbery is a PROPERTY crime in Ohio.
    Again, dolt, YOU show where it says as much THEN show us where *I* lied about any such thing.

  4. #133
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    in Texas the signs are very specific, I do try and honor any sign and I notify the store I will no longer be shopping with them. No guns period would seem to also exclude LEO'S.

  5. #134
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    There it is! The exact argument that ALL anti-gun people use! Guns are different becaus they have the capability to kill.
    Actually, nimrod, had you NOT taken my words out of the context they were presented in I was simply showing the EXTREME ignorance of the comparison.


    Seriously, just come clean.... we know you support the Brady Campaign, or the Violence Policy Center, maybe even the Children's Defense Fund. Any minute now, I am sure you are going to say something about "but what about the children."
    And we all know that without BS slander/libel and dishonesty your type wouldnt have any argument in a debate at all.

    Oh, wait, you already did. Somewhere back there in your drivel you posted that we were bad examples for our children.
    Frankly you are since you teach them to NOT respect the RIGHTs of others even if they dont agree with them, and only under COMPULSION do they have to recognize someone elses rights.

    YOUR type is the single most dangerous threat to our Constitution anywhere.
    Reason being is that this CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC PROTECTS the RIGHTS of the minority, which is WHY we have a constitution and rights recognized therein...but YOUR type just makes up any damned rules you want to and ignores the rights of OTHERS based on YOUR whims.
    YOU and YOUR ilk will be the downfall of this Republic if it fails !

  6. #135
    Quote Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post
    How does this mean I'll be "pushing the envelope" so the antis have more, what, fuel? Should those bills become law, I'll be following them just as I follow them as written right now. That won't suddenly mean I'll be ignoring the law and carrying my sidearm into the school. And I can't be charged with a felony for carrying to a range, as I'm licensed.
    Youve already proven yourself as untrustworthy where the rights of OTHERS is concerned.
    ONLY if you are COMPELLED by LAW do you clearly accept someone elses rights AS rights.

    That is VERY frightening.
    NOt just because you carry a gun, but because you clearly have NO respect for private citizens RIGHTS on their property and only if FORCED to you do what is right to do.
    That isnt a law abiding citizen.
    That a child who only obeys when threats of punishment are made.
    You still seem to be attempting to push some moral issue when I'm speaking about the legal issue. You don't get it, do you? I follow the law.
    I carry where and when I'm legally allowed. If I go to a school, I don't carry period, unless I'm driving and dropping someone off, never leaving my car, per the law.
    See the bolded text above.

  7. Wow, 13 pages of this drivel.

    If a business has a sign, I take my business elsewhere. if they don't want to support the Constitution, I don't want to support them.

    Ruger, If someone takes a gun into a business that has a sign, what right has the gun carrier taken from the business owner and how has the business owner been harmed? On the flip side, what right has the business owner taken from his customers by posting the sign(assuming it is legally enforceable) and what harm has the business owner done to the gun owner?

    In other words, what is the potential downside to the business owner if the gun owner carries into his business(and does nothing else related to having the gun). OTOH, what is the potential downside to the gun owner who is forced to disarm?

    IMHO, all rules should be examined and followed based on their purpose. A lot of rules and laws are created to control the lowest common denominators in our population. A lot of others are created to enrich the financial status of our government entities or business interests that are owned by politicians or their friends and families.

    Following the rules just to tell yourself that you are morally superior to other who don't follow the rules is to me, the mark of a sheeple. Would you have followed the rules in Nazi Germany? Would participating in the mass murder of several million people just for their ethnicity or religious views made you a moral superman? The founders of our country broke a lot of rules. They committed treason against their country of citizenship. Were they morally reprehensible?

    There is a group of rule makers in history that were called "whitewashed tombs" and "a nest of vipers". Were they morally correct or was the person who called them these things correct?

    If a rule is a stupid rule, what does that say about the people who follow it?

  8. #137
    Quote Originally Posted by trailboss View Post
    I carry cards with me so when I come across a business with a no-gun sign I give one to the owner/manager.
    Thanks awesome. Thanks for the link!

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    Reason being is that this CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC PROTECTS the RIGHTS of the minority, which is WHY we have a constitution and rights recognized therein
    Seems to me that people who carry guns in their daily lives for self protection ARE the MINORITY at this point in time in our nation.

    It is best to be thought of as a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  10. #139
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    Ultimately it's an ethics issue and carrying past a gunbuster sign doesn't even register on my scale. My ethics are just fine w/ carrying a gun in a store where the owner prefers I don't.
    Then what I said to Navy applies to you as well.

    "YOUR type is the single most dangerous threat to our Constitution anywhere.
    Reason being is that this CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC PROTECTS the RIGHTS of the minority, which is WHY we have a constitution and rights recognized therein...but YOUR type just makes up any damned rules you want to and ignores the rights of OTHERS based on YOUR whims.
    YOU and YOUR ilk will be the downfall of this Republic if it fails !"

    I carried a gun illegally ( Not against the rules but in violation of state law) for years.
    yeah. This is precisely what the antis need to know.
    Gun owners are law breakers.
    Instead of getting laws changed, we just ignore the law entirely where we see fit.

    My life philosophy is different than most of the posters here I am not a sheep dog I am a reformed (barely) criminal. I carry a gun because I know thereís a world full of people just like me out there. They will take what they want and they donít fight fair. They also give lass than a damn about your gunbuster sign.
    The problem now, however, is that if you are a licensed CCWer in your state then you no longer have to be a lawbreaker or trample someone elses rights to carry a gun for self defense.
    AT this point if you do its just you being a stubborn child who needs to grow up so youre not giving our enemies more ammunition against our cause.

  11. #140
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Quote Originally Posted by Lakeland Man View Post
    Aexanda45, you are mistaken about the distinction between business property and private property. Business property is property that has been zoned to allow a commercial business to operate on it. However, it is still private property. I know this from my experiences when I was the director of security at a northern Virginia mall. The property owner can still make restrictions upon their property as long as they don't discriminate against a PROTECTED class of people. (i.e. black, gay, female, aged, etc...)
    No, YOU are the one that is mistaken here, not me. A BUSINESS may be privately owned, but it is NOT Private property, it is BUSINESS property, hence the name BUSINESS. If it were the same thing as Private property, it would be CALLED PRIVATE, not BUSINESS. What is so hard for those like you to make that VERY SIMPLE distinction?

    Let me give a very simple sample.....
    (not debating zoning laws here, so dont use that as a comeback, this is only an example)

    If I buy or rent/lease/whatever a building downtown in Smithville, USA....and decide to operate a Retail BUSINESS out of that said building.... I would need to follow certain BUSINESS laws would I not? Licensing, permits, occupancy codes, health codes, etc..... RIGHT? As a RETAIL BUSINESS, by virtue of being such, I have INVITED the PUBLIC into it, have I not?

    (remember, most manufacturing type businesses do NOT invite the PUBLIC into their property and can deny entrance to anyone they see fit, the same thing goes for PRIVATE CLUBS)

    If, on the other hand, I decide to have my home in this building.... Because I havent NOT INVITED THE PUBLIC into my house/home...... I can deny entry to anyone for whatever reason I want.

Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts