TexasCHLforum.com

switch wrote:Mr business owner, why did you put up a 30.06 sign?
Who does it apply to? (HINT: Only LTC)
You realize it does NOT apply to criminals?
What does a LTC have to do before he licensed?
So you disarmed the LTC but did nothing to disarm the criminal? To protect the LTC?

Well, they probably would not want me on the jury either. :)

This is at the core of requiring businesses that post 30.06 signs to have metal detectors.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:Rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. If I am on someone’s property at their invitation or lawfully otherwise, they have the right to tell me what I can or cannot do. They also have the responsibility to ensure my safety and security.

completely with this part of your post.

I think we are getting too detailed when we talk about requiring metal detectors, etc. If the law simply said that a business posting a 30.06 and 30.07 sign is responsible for ensuring the safety of their forcibly unarmed customers, that should be enough.

It would be up to the business to determine how they go about providing safety to their customers. One way would be by installing metal detectors. Another would be by hiring armed guards. If something bad happens and a customer is the victim of a violent crime, a jury could decide whether the business took all reasonable precautions or whether the business was negligent in their duty.

Of course, the business could avoid this increased responsibility by taking down their signs....

But it could be a few years for a test case plus waiting for the outcome and waiting for the signs to come down. At my age that might mean they won’t come down in my lifetime.

If the law required metal detectors for just the 30.06 sign, I would bet that within a week of the law passing, you wouldn’t be able to find a 30.06 sign.

Mel wrote:Metal detectors detect many thing besides guns. How long do you think this procedure would last?

Every time you go into a store you must place your keys, pocket knife, change, watch, belt buckle, pens, cell phones, etc. etc..........in a tray, go through the detector, then re-dress like you do at the airport.

"the solution is simple. Take down the 30.06 signs"

Everyone seems to be missing the point of my post. Did I word it poorly? I am not trying to get businesses to install metal detectors.

Middle Age Russ wrote:While I like VoiceofReason's suggestion regarding the mandated use of metal detectors to enable legally effective signage from the standpoint that it would almost certainly remove the need to disarm before entering most of the places that are currently posted, I think it goes too far on another level. I am not a small business owner, but it would seem to me that the burden thus placed on a business to install not only signage but also a metal detector is a financially onerous infringement of their property rights. The signage requirement is one thing -- fairly inexpensively and easily implemented if the business owner desires to limit the carrying of arms -- but additional physical access requirements put an undue burden on the property/business owner.

Do I desire to carry everywhere I want without restriction? Sure. But I also recognize that property rights are no less important in the grand scheme of things than, say, the rights to express or to protect oneself.

Rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. If I am on someone’s property at their invitation or lawfully otherwise, they have the right to tell me what I can or cannot do. They also have the responsibility to ensure my safety and security.

How many times on this forum has it been pointed out that “criminals don’t obey signs”? I believe the case could be made that if a property owner denies me the means to protect myself then he has the responsibility to protect me from a criminal carrying a gun past his sign.

If the property/business owner wants to avoid the undue burden the added physical access requirements puts on them then the solution is simple. Take down the signs.

I have to respectfully disagree with you Russ that property rights are no less important than, the rights to protect oneself. Lets say you were hunting, got lost and ended up on some ranch. The property owner comes out of his house, raises a gun and points it at you. If he kills you, he goes to prison. If you kill him, you would go home.

I agree with you WildBill that many of the larger stores have detectors to prevent theft, but still it continues. But it is a deterrent and I submit that without those detectors theft would be much worse than it is now.

I tried a couple of times on this forum to get people to consider this exact scenario to no avail. It seemed very few members thought it could happen. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=32747&hilit bottom of page.
I also suggested a couple of ways to deal with the signs posted at businesses. I felt like I was just wasting my time.

Well here goes again. We need legislation requiring any business or other establishment that posts 30.06 to have metal detectors at all entrances and armed security at those entrances. This would prevent criminals from just carrying past the signs and 99% of all 30.06 signs would be taken down within a week, even those that have been there for years.

Do you think businesses would spend the money to put in metal detectors, or take down the signs? If MDA or any other antigun group opposed this legislation it would turn a glaring spotlight on the fact they are not trying to reduce “gun violence” they are just trying to disarm law abiding people. The solution is there.

The Annoyed Man wrote:His post has been reported. Nothing like a troll.......... And Iike I said in AndyC's thread...... "What is it with you people that everything boils down to the sexual?"

Perverts is what they are.

Tam when most guys hit puberty the testosterone kicks in and everything becomes about sex. After high school and four years in the military I started to realize there is more to life than sex. When this person gets out of high school he/she may or may not do the same.

It really makes them mad to realize that someone else would defend themselves while they cowered in the corner and begged not to be hurt.