Search found 5 matches
Return to “Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry”
- Thu May 14, 2015 9:32 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
- Replies: 249
- Views: 45680
Re: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
Looks like they're working late tonight.
- Tue May 12, 2015 5:32 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
- Replies: 249
- Views: 45680
Re: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
Don't worry too much Scooter. I agree with you on letting the market figure it out. However, I can also say that I and many people I know wouldn't go into a business that said only this group or that group. I don't want anything to do with folks with that kind of attitude.ScooterSissy wrote:You may not like my answers (they've made me unpopular in a number of conversations)Taypo wrote:OK, let's take this to an extreme for argument's sake, shall we? If a movie theater/restaurant/convention center posted a sign out front that said "No Whites allowed," do you think that would fly? How about "No Christians?"ScooterSissy wrote:I'm a little lost on the last one. If you're talking about a government facility, I agree; but they aren't permitted to do so now by law, some cities/counties just do it in spite of the law. If you're talking about private businesses, I have to disagree. They should be permitted to disallow guns for any reason they choose. I'm a big believer in 2A rights, but I'm also a believer in property rights. I'll let them know my displeasure by using my wallet.Taypo wrote:Personally, I'm more disappointed in the process than I am in the individual bills. The legislature seems to be a joke right now.
I flip flop on the merits of OC, but I'm in total agreement that campus carry should be available. I also think 30.06 needs to be reexamined to determine some form of requirements for posting. Being uncomfortable with guns shouldn't give a location the ability to deny a right.
If you honestly believe 2A grants everyone the power to carry, then how is it different than racial/religious/orientation discrimination?
Please do keep in mind that I'm very much middle of the road on this, but I'm curious to see where the line is for folks.
First, the legal reasons - Race and Religion are protected classes. Carrying a firearm is not (nor is deciding not to wear shoes, or a shirt, see more on that in a moment).
That said, legal reasoning aside - I think providing protected classes in situations like this is a mistake, unless those being discriminated against can show that there are no other publicly available similar facilities available. That's right, I believe that a business owner should be able to put up a "no whites" or "no Christians", I say let them; and then let their customers decide what they want to do with that information. I can almost bet you that a business will open up across the street (or near by) that will allow those groups being discriminated against. The more open business will prosper.
However, the comparison isn't totally valid, since as I said, race and religion are protected classes. Gun carrying is not (nor do I think it should be). A more accurate comparison would be "no shirt, no shoes, no service" signs. It is my right to decide to not wear shoes or a shirt. It's also a right for a business to refuse to let me in if they don't like that. Both are as things should be (in my opinion).
- Mon May 11, 2015 6:43 am
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
- Replies: 249
- Views: 45680
Re: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
Kindamojo84 wrote:nightmare69 wrote:I've always supported the Liberian party vs the same old R and D. Even though I have religious beliefs that go against certain things (abortion, gay marriage) I understand that not everyone shares my beliefs and therefor should be able to decide what is best for themselves and their own situation. As long as it does not interfere with me directly or my pursuit of happiness then frankly it's none of my business. Off topic I know.CJD wrote:It's less the shenanigans of the other parties, and more the ideals, that make libertarianism great. A small government, which minds it's own business, and is not in the business of banning things. Allows people to decide what is best for themselves, as long as they do not harm others. What's not to like? I believe the only reason everyone ISN'T libertarian is because they have personal beliefs that they think everyone else should HAVE to follow. Ideas so good they should be mandatory. Nobody likes to mind their own business.canvasbck wrote:With the chronic shenanigans in DC and Austin, it's hard to NOT be a card carrying Libertarian.
A little humor, The Libertarian Police Department
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-sh ... department" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
but more
- Thu May 07, 2015 2:50 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
- Replies: 249
- Views: 45680
Re: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
I know what you mean, but respectfully, if it affects my daughter it affects me personally.Tracker wrote:If OC were to die they wasted a lot of pro-gun political capital... so I believe we'll get some form of OC. I'm hoping this maneuver works. Campus carry doesn't affect me, personally, but it affects my daughter and friends who work at a university.
- Thu May 07, 2015 2:02 pm
- Forum: 2015 Legislative Session
- Topic: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
- Replies: 249
- Views: 45680
Re: Campus Carry revived, attached to open carry
I can understand everyone's apprehension about all this working out. It is a big chunk to swallow all at once wen we're used to baby steps. Although, it seems like the time might be just right after so many other states have passed so much pro-gun legislation recently and so many other anti-gun actions being taken by the federal government. Seems like states are flexing their independent muscles in a few areas and this is one of those areas.