TexasCHLforum.com

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...

apvonkanel wrote:
I think your sentiment regarding 30.07 is spot on. I would even go so far as to say that 30.06 does not explicitly mean anti-gun. It's an "All chickens are birds, but not all birds are chickens" situation. To some 30.07 is dress-code to some it's political. While I would say that most 30.06 is anti-gun, I can't say that every single business posting 30.06 is anti-gun. Until I speak with the person on whom the final decision rested I can't say that I know why they posted it. I can assume that it's usually anti-gun, but to assume that it's always anti-gun is to assume that I know everything about the business. 30.07 can be anti-gun, or it can be smart business. Honestly, I don't blame a business that wants to keep revenue from both the moderately pro 2A and moderately anti-gun sides. 30.07 (without 30.06) only alienates the more severe advocates of either side, while maintaining the bulk of a customer base. Unless you started a business purely on constitutional principal, I assume you wanted some revenue from the business. Finding a compromise that maintains the largest customer base is just financially sound.

That being said: since the bulk of my revenue does not come from a business I own, anything I'm saying is just armchair QB talk anyway.