Ignoring Gun Buster signage. - Page 16
Page 16 of 24 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 233

Thread: Ignoring Gun Buster signage.

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Posts
    1,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    Youre neither, Im afraid.
    Youre just some guy on the web who has no respect for the rights of folks he doesnt agree with.
    Youre a guy who has to be TOLD what to do, coerced by law in order to do the right thing.

    Youre a very scary person as far as a peaceble, law abiding society is concerned.
    I have absolutely NO doubt that you support the right of restaurateurs to run Whites only lunch counters.

  2.   
  3. #152
    heh.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    I have absolutely NO doubt that you support the right of restaurateurs to run Whites only lunch counters.
    Touche...

    A business owner, running a business for the public, has to surrender some of his rights. He can do all his discriminating at home...

    mistergus75

  5. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by Deanimator View Post
    I have absolutely NO doubt that you support the right of restaurateurs to run Whites only lunch counters.
    Which once more just proves that you only have exaggeration and deception to try to make a point and defend your complete disregard for the rights of others.

    If either of us has proven he'll trample the rights of anyone he doesnt like or agree with, chump, its you and a couple others here.

  6. Quote Originally Posted by mistergus75 View Post
    He cannot discriminnate based on race...religion...whatever. His rights reign in his private home, of course, but not his business. If he wants to be open to the public. He must respect the public rights we all have.

    mistergus75
    And, the Second Amendment is right in the middle of those same rights of equality of religion, race and gender. The right to keep and bear arms simply has not been defined by the US Supreme Court as being equal to the rights to racial, gender and religious equality. And if this nation was composed entirely of people like Ruger357SP101, we would not have the Heller decision or the McDonald decision. Likely, if everyone in this nation were in agreement with Ruger357SP101, we probably wouldn't even have the Terry v. Ohio decision.

    And heck, we aren't even talking about violating laws or taking anything away from anybody or damaging them in any way. All we are talking about is ignoring a sign in a way that nobody will know we are ignoring in order to provide economic benefit to the business owner and ourselves.
    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.

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    Which once more just proves that you only have exaggeration and deception to try to make a point and defend your complete disregard for the rights of others.
    I don't see any exaggeration and deception. Perhaps you just need to think your positions through a little more.

    What about it? Why would it be ok to discriminate against gun owners but not blacks? His business, right? His "private property", right?

    mistergus75

  8. #157
    Quote Originally Posted by mistergus75 View Post
    Reading these posts, my thoughts had been running in favor of the business owner. His business, his property...in fact, I had been thinking those who would carry when he didn't want them to were just being smug jerks.

    But then I thought of something...

    I have no patience for business owners who are supposed to be open to the public allowing smoking to take place in their business (restaurants, especially), making their business effectively off-limits to people like me who suffer from asthma, and cannot handle the smoke.

    I don't give a rip that "it's their business, they paid for it, etc.)... Obvious example. I enjoy eating at On The Border. There's only one here in Amarillo, and I don't want to have to give that up so some smoker can sit there and smoke, making it impossible for me to eat there. I want to eat at that restaurant, and I want to be able to breath while doing so. Smokers have no right to take that restaurant away from me. So, I heartily support anti-smoking laws to keep that restaurant open to me, even if the owner of that restaurant doesn't want to do it. And though I love Rush limbaugh, I disagree with him on this one. Smokers can schedule their smoking around eating out, I cannot schedule my breathing in order to accomodate their "right to smoke".

    Now a private club...restaurant...different story.

    Now...transfer that principle to the carrying-concealed issue. A business owner, even if he's paying for it, has to surrender some of his rights if he wants to accomodate the public. He cannot discriminnate based on race...religion...whatever. His rights reign in his private home, of course, but not his business. If he wants to be open to the public. He must respect the public rights we all have.

    Bottom line...I've reversed my thinking on this. A business owner should not be able to deny our Constitutional Rights, even in his business, if he wants to serve the public. And if he can't handle this, he can turn his business into a private club.

    mistergus75
    Sorry but its STILL his property.
    If you dont like the policy, get a lawyer and sue for discrimination or whatever.

    Being open to the public simply means that you dont have to have some membership or whatever.
    It does NOT mean that the store owner has no rights to refuse service or prohibit whatever he wants to prohibit.
    If its discrimination, he can be sued.
    If its something like a dress code or "NO GUNS", sorry but you have to deal with that in most cases.

    Maybe Ill try wearing my swim trunks at one of those fancy $150 a plate restaurants downtown and see how well that goes.
    I mean, as long as Im wearing something they shouldnt be allowed to toss me out if their 'open to the public', right?

  9. Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    I definitely agree.
    Law or no law I am not supporting antigunners and gun owners who do...well, I guess that makes them traitors to the cause...doesnt it?
    Gun owners who patronize business that are opposed to our second amendment rights are not doing themselves our the rest of the gun owning population any favors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    If you cheat on your wife and she never finds out what have you really taken from her?
    STD's aside....what really was she robbed of?
    Does that make it right?
    Whatever happened to good old fashioned integrity ?
    You have taken emotional intimacy from her. You have created a void between you and her. You have stolen from her and it is an on-going loss for all time. If someone stole some of her jewelery and she did not notice the loss, she still had the loss.

    As far as the business, their loss ends the moment you leave their establishment and they keep the gain they received from your business transaction


    Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    Come on now....you CAN go somewhere else.
    The business owner is an idiot and inviting a crime for certain, by posting a sign...but you CAN choose to simply not go in...so he hasnt really robbed you of anything.
    What if you live in a small town and their is no other business that sells what you need in the area. And if you do disarm because of the sign, he has robbed you of your second amendment right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    So the only qualification of a 'right' is whether we individually consider it 'stupid' or not, right?
    I wonder how easily abused that concept is?
    The only qualification of a "right" in all of human history is what people can enforce through violence. It is sad but it is true. It is nice to say that people have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness but if the other people in their area do not agree and wish to contest those rights through violence, only the winner gets to decide what rights are in effect. The winners have abused that concept throughout human history.

    As we see day in and day out(and the reason this thread even exists), our own government has violated the very rights laid out in the constitution. Our "rights" are abused everyday.

    The real question is if we will lay down our rights in the face of rules created by others for the express purpose of stripping our rights from us.

    The other question is of priority because our world is not black and white. What has a higher priority, our right to carry the proper tools to defend ourselves or the businesses right to take our second amendment right away for the duration of our stay on his property. Again, I agree that the best course is to avoid those businesses all together but for the extremely rare case where that is not a viable option, I would ignore his posted sign and transact my business as quickly as possible and exit the business.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ruger357SP101 View Post
    We have to recognize peoples RIGHTS....agree with them or not...or we may as well burn the Constitution and call it quits.
    The federal government has been doing that for years.


    One final thing, this thread has gotten really out of control. We are arguing minutia with our brothers. I always hate to see people who are on the same side of the 2nd amendment fence going at it tooth and nail over petty BS that takes away from the real fight. Let's all agree to disagree and part as members of the same team. If you are on a team and your teammate makes a play differently than you would have done it, do you quit the team, do you get in a fight with him in the middle of the field during the game??? No, you move on and do the best you can to carry your place on the team.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    And, the Second Amendment is right in the middle of those same rights of equality of religion, race and gender. The right to keep and bear arms simply has not been defined by the US Supreme Court as being equal to the rights to racial, gender and religious equality.
    Ok, so let's think this through...

    If racial discrimination is not okay, then you agree that a business owner gives up some rights to operate a business, right? In truth, the fact that "it's his business" doesn't exempt him from multitudes of regulations, codes, laws, etc., right?

    Even though "it's his business", he can't do as he pleases at all, can he? Once you acknowledge this (which you must), you've lost the argument.

    A business owner doesn't have absolute, total control over his business. He never has. And he never should.

    mistergus

  11. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by mistergus75 View Post
    I don't see any exaggeration and deception. Perhaps you just need to think your positions through a little more.
    No...perhaps YOU do.
    I read your last post and its flawed from the third sentence or so.
    Just because YOU changed your mind doesnt make your views reasonable or logic or consistent with the Constitution.

    What about it? Why would it be ok to discriminate against gun owners but not blacks? His business, right? His "private property", right?
    Absolutely within his 'rights' *IF* he wanted to be sued.

    This guy tried something to that effect, though his reasoning wasnt racist in nature;
    ‘No Speak English, No Service’: Restaurant Owner Removes Controversial Sign After Bombarded With Threats
    ‘No Speak English, No Service’: Restaurant Owner Removes Controversial Sign After Bombarded With Threats | The Blaze

    Did the guy have the RIGHT to put up the sign?
    ABSOLUTELY!
    Just like racist nutcases have the RIGHT to blow their **** into the air.
    Doesnt make it acceptable, but it IS their RIGHT to speak their minds.

    But this isnt about blacks or race where a person has NO control over their skin color.
    This is about the CHOICE to willingly recognize someones RIGHT to prohibit weapons on thier private property or not.

Page 16 of 24 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... 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
  •  
Quantcast