TexasCHLforum.com

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I want to better understand your position on property rights, so I have a few questions I would like to ask.

• 1. Do you make any distinction between commercial and non-commercial property?
  2. Is there any level of government regulation of private property you feel is acceptable? If so, please give examples.
  3. Are you saying you are philosophically against government regulation of property, or are you saying governmental regulations are unconstitutional?

Thanks,
Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:However, I think I get the message; you do not accept any government regulation of any private property, including commercial property. The reason I want to understand your private property rights argument is because it appears to me that 1) there are very few people who oppose the employer parking lot bill on alleged private property rights grounds; and 2) I wanted to know if these opinions are based upon extreme libertarian philosophy. We can deal with legitimate concerns about some details of the bill, but there's nothing we can do to satisfy people who will not accept any regulation of commercial property whatsoever.

Chas., in reaching a compromise between the rights of commercial property owners versus the rights of licensees, it brings to mind the anecdote you shared in class about requiring verbal AND written notice before your fallback 30.06 position. Here is one way to frame it. If a property owner wants to ensure there are no guns or contraband inside cars on their property, they are welcome to forbid cars on their property. But if a business makes the business decision to welcome cars onto their property, then as a consequence they must accept that the cars are an extension of the car owners "castle" -- the business has no property interest on the contents of those vehicles. Their choice.

-Bob