Another casualty of Open Carry

[loktite]

Please stop quoting someone clearly violating forum rules. Only creates more work for mods.

[VoiceofReason]

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.

[VoiceofReason]

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.

[Middle Age Russ]

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.

[WildBill]

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 legislation would not pass and I would not support it. IMO the amount of money spent on metal detectors is irrelevant.
Many of the larger stores already have detectors to prevent theft, but still it continues.
Your proposal just trades one problem for another.

[VoiceofReason]

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.

[WildBill]

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 concede that point.

[suthdj]

Looks like my employer is getting on the 3006 / 07 bandwagon got a email this week a new company policy has the wording for 3006 / 07 but only in English. Waiting to see if they post signs.

[Oldgringo]

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.

TAM is no spring chicken. Maybe he forgot?

[Mel]

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.

[switch]

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.

???? You are trespassing? W/a gun? I suspect it is more likely you'd go to jail for shooting the property owner.

I disagree that his 'property rights' are equal importance to my self-defense rights. He can use deadly for to protect his property - in some cases, sometimes, only at night. I can protect myself 24/7. He wants to do business w/the public, he cannot discriminate for/against race, religion, creed, disability....and should not be able to discriminate against LTC's.

Instead of requiring metal detectors and security, simply change the law that if they disarm LTC's, they are strictly liable for any damages suffered by the LTC or his/her family.

[LTUME1978]

Thought I would update on my situation at work. Still no signs up but that is only because the company that will do the signs has not been able to get there yet (apparently very busy). However, I have never seen so many security people in the lobby of the building before. There have been a few in the tunnels in the past but never in the lobby of the building. Many look like off duty police in suits. There are some "security" in their uniforms (have never seen them in the lobby before either). Then an on duty HPD in uniform was stationed at the elevators for the floors above ours when we went to lunch. We got a notice that there was a "security issue" within the space of one of the tenants in that section of the building and that HPD would be there for one to two weeks.

I have appealed to HR to get a "hall pass" on the 30.06. First response in NO! I am appealing up the ladder. I don't hold out much hope. Was also told that now I can't have a pistol in my vehicle when I use it for company business travel. They were really stirred up over this open carry thing.

Then, while walking through to tunnel to get to the bus stop after work, there was some weirdo walking around cursing at the top of his voice. Things are really getting strange, sure wish I was not disarmed.

[VMI77]

Was also told that now I can't have a pistol in my vehicle when I use it for company business travel. They were really stirred up over this open carry thing.

Can you define using it for company business travel? You mean use reimbursed by the company? What is the nature of the travel? IOW, how is it any different than driving your vehicle to your normal work location? My company suddenly prohibited CC and OC so those of us that used to drive company vehicles can no longer carry in company vehicles. I switched to driving my private vehicle at my own expense. If I did a lot of traveling that might not be practical but I can handle a 2 hour trip on the average of once a month. If I'm driving to a meeting in Houston it's no different than if I'm driving to work.

[VoiceofReason]

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.

[The Annoyed Man]

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.

TAM is no spring chicken. Maybe he forgot?

I remember those years quite well. I ALSO remember that, despite my liberal politics at the time, I would have been terrified to talk to other adults that way. Why? Respect. That's why. Apparently that little piece of coprolite lacks the capacity for it.