TexasCHLforum.com

Soccerdad1995

thetexan wrote:What if the original 30.06/30.07 law as written by the Legislature stated that there would be no open carry at the Costco store in Frisco, the McDonnalds on East Mockingbird in Dallas and all AutoZone Auto Parts. In that case our right to open carry was never given to us in the first place at those locations. Would we hold those owners in contempt for trampling on a right we were never given by the Legislature? No, we would be cursing the Legislature.

But in the present real life situation if those owners exercise a right that has been equally given to all of us, that is, the right to control his own property, by asking us to not carry on their property, why do we have such disdain for them? The state did not give us an ubiquitous right to carry but a limited right. We have no right of carry on the property of someone who doesn't want it. We all know this.

Why all of the contempt for property owners who don't want weapons? Yes, we can choose to take our business elsewhere, but why? Is it to punish the owners in an effort to make them "pay" for their daring to prevent you from exercising a right you don't even have on their property? Is that the motivation? "You can stop me but I'll show you and make you pay the economic price for exercising your legitimate right...my right to carry is greater than your right to stop me.", which is false on its face since our carry right doesn't even exist on privately owned property unless we are given the "privilege" of carrying on the owner's property by his bestowed consent.

It seems to me that the safety issue is more the point than the owner's philosophical difference on guns and our animosity toward him because of that difference of opinion.

tex

I'm not sure if you are just trying to be provocative here, but let me point out 2 things regarding this post.

First and foremost, the legislature did not "give" us the right to keep and bear arms, either concealed or openly. Unless "legislature" is some fancy new fangled name for our creator. My right to defend me and mine was given to me by my god, not by any man. Governments do not "give" people rights. Governments occasionally enact laws to protect people's rights from other people, and more frequently enact laws to restrict people's rights. Saying that government "gives" you a right is like saying that government "gives" you money. Both are false statements.

Secondly, I do not have contempt or disdain for any property owner that exercises their right, under current law, to threaten me with arrest if I carry a specific type of weapon (handgun) on their property, and/or if I do so in a specific manner (OC vs CC). I believe they are ignorant of relevant facts, misguided, and likely driven by emotion more than logic. I will exercise my right to not do business with them as a result. Both the shop keeper and I are exercising our legal rights. Not sure why anyone assumes there is anything more to it than that.

Soccerdad1995

Abraham wrote:Soccerdad1995,

I understand your perspective, but businesses will do what they do without my or your input, logic be darned, if you will.

While we can criticize (generally to little affect) we do have the option of shopping elsewhere.

The thing I see by many pro-gun folks is a lack of acceptance that businesses have a right to post yes to guns or no.

Like it - Hate it - It doesn't matter.

I don't think you and I disagree at all. I also don't think there are many pro-gun folks who refuse to accept that a business has the right, under current law, to post yes or no to guns. I find that there are some folks (myself included) who don't think that a business should be able to use the arrest powers of the state to enforce their wishes in this regard. But even that wouldn't restrict them from posting. It would just lessen the consequences if someone missed their sign (this is the idea that the law should be changed to remove the criminal penalty for missing a sign). But even among this group, I think pretty much everyone acknowledges and understands the legal rights of a business under the law as it currently is written, which include this power to use government agents (LEO) to enforce their wishes.

But, we should not confuse having a right to do something with thinking there should be no consequences for your actions. I have a legal right to choose not to spend my money somewhere, and to encourage others to do the same, just like a business has their legal rights.

It's like when an employee of the National Football League wants to assert their right to not stand for the National Anthem. They have the right to do that, and their employer has the right to fire them as a result (assuming they are in a right to work state, etc, etc). Sorry for going on a tangent here, and I may be misunderstanding what you mean by a businesses "right" to post signage, so please do not take this as an attack on you, specifically.

Soccerdad1995

Russell wrote:I'm just a drop in the bucket, but after Kroger opened up fairly close to our HEB we have stopped going to HEB all together. Not just because the wife prefers the produce at Kroger, but also because I no longer have to untuck my shirt to go grocery shopping.

HEB is nice and all, but Kroger is equally nice and more 2A friendly.

I've called HEB out on their Facebook page, pointing out that to date no OCer has caused a mass shooting in Kroger. Unsurprisingly they haven't responded. They bill themselves as a bunch of good old down-home Texas loving country folk yet were among the firsts to quickly put up 30.07 signs state wide. Hypocrites.

One of my big problems is with those companies that decided to come out publicly against OC before there was any experience that could show there might be issues, and in some cases, well before the law even went into effect. Whataburger is a big offender here, IMHO. I have no idea what they were trying to accomplish with their immediate reaction. It's not like they were in danger of losing customers to competitors since all the other fast food places took the more responsible approach of waiting to make a decision after evidence was available, post 1/1/16. I feel similarly about HEB, and I definitely make an effort to avoid both of those companies' locations.

Soccerdad1995

Abraham wrote:"Finding a compromise that maintains the largest customer base is just financially sound. "

And, that is the reason 30.07 signs are posted, not because the business is anti-gun, but because they're concerned that significantly more people will be put off than OCers and their revenue will be decreased, i.e., it's a business decision.

It's their decision to make no matter what. All the crying and gnashing of OC teeth notwithstanding...

I disagree. Given that the majority of the public is understandably ignorant on the specifics of the law, any "no guns" sign would have the same reassuring effect as a compliant 30.07 sign. The only difference is that the owner would run a risk that for the 1 day every 6 months that someone actually open carries into their store, some percentage of the other customers who happen to be in the store at that time (percentage would vary by the type of store, etc) might notice the gun, and might be offended enough to change their shopping habits.

I would love to see someone design a sign that said "NO GUNS" in big bold letters and then went on to explain in smaller letters that the sign does not apply to licensed LTC holders, but that anyone choosing to enter with a visible firearm is asked to please conduct themselves in a calm and mature manner so as not to frighten the special snowflakes that tend to be scared of inanimate objects. The sheeple will stop reading after "NO GUNS". LTC holders will read the whole thing and may get a chuckle out of it while knowing that the owner is trying to do the right thing in a tough spot.

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 4 matches

Re: Do you refuse to do business with 30.06 & 30.07 businesses?

Re: Do you refuse to do business with 30.06 & 30.07 businesses?

Re: Do you refuse to do business with 30.06 & 30.07 businesses?

Re: Do you refuse to do business with 30.06 & 30.07 businesses?