YMCA

[Matt78665]

I got the look of horror from my Urologist when I explained why I did not come for my appointment. I told him that the practices 30.06 sign was my sign to look for another Urologist. He said he understood and stated he wished he could carry in the building too.

[BStacks]

The wife and I were at the S Arlington Y this weekend to sign up our daughter for softball. Strapped. I noticed the sign, but the whole thing was ~12" square English and Spanish combined. My wife missed it completely. I ignored it.

[Thomas]

Nevermind

[i8godzilla]

It's best not to say that you didn't care that you broke the law. If not for yourself, then for the CHL community. Thank you.

I think he said he saw a sign that did not meet the legal requirements of a correct posting and he walked right by it. Where did you read that there were laws broken?

[drjoker]

What percentage of the businesses posting these signs are doing so for insurance reasons? Some are run by the anti's, the Brady bunch et al., of course.

Are there any insurance underwriters who can explain what that coverage/exclusion is worth in terms of premium?

I can see that being a factor. Your insurance carrier says "we exclude liability if you allow guns on the premises. To buy an endorsement to delete that exclusion costs $xxx,xxxxx. per year." Some bean counter looks at it and says, why should the shareholders pay for this?

The "insurance" excuse is a big fat libtard lie. It that's true, then how the heck does my local gun shop stay in business with their narrow profit margins, high rent, and 3 salary drawing guys in a store smaller than 2 pickup trucks? If that's true, then how come Starbucks can stay in business? If that's true then how come "Friends of the NRA" events can be hosted without those pesky 30.06 signs? Only a dumb donkey would believe that it is "insurance" reasons that they don't allow CHL holders from carrying.

The "insurance" excuse is just as lame as the "property value" excuse for not letting minorities move into certain neighborhoods. Both are really lame lies. It attaches a seemingly valid economical reason to something so that it is seemingly out of their hands. In reality it is just a big fat lie. That Indian doctor living next to you is not going to lower your property value any more than a CHL shopping at your place of business is going to raise your insurance. Don't believe the hogwash!

[Mike1951]

What percentage of the businesses posting these signs are doing so for insurance reasons? Some are run by the anti's, the Brady bunch et al., of course.

Are there any insurance underwriters who can explain what that coverage/exclusion is worth in terms of premium?

I can see that being a factor. Your insurance carrier says "we exclude liability if you allow guns on the premises. To buy an endorsement to delete that exclusion costs $xxx,xxxxx. per year." Some bean counter looks at it and says, why should the shareholders pay for this?

The "insurance" excuse is a big fat libtard lie. It that's true, then how the heck does my local gun shop stay in business with their narrow profit margins, high rent, and 3 salary drawing guys in a store smaller than 2 pickup trucks? If that's true, then how come Starbucks can stay in business? If that's true then how come "Friends of the NRA" events can be hosted without those pesky 30.06 signs? Only a dumb donkey would believe that it is "insurance" reasons that they don't allow CHL holders from carrying.

The "insurance" excuse is just as lame as the "property value" excuse for not letting minorities move into certain neighborhoods. Both are really lame lies. It attaches a seemingly valid economical reason to something so that it is seemingly out of their hands. In reality it is just a big fat lie. That Indian doctor living next to you is not going to lower your property value any more than a CHL shopping at your place of business is going to raise your insurance. Don't believe the hogwash!

I'm sure it's often a convenient excuse. However, James Dark, who preceded Mr. Cotton as Exec Dir of the TSRA, confirmed that they were required to post their Mesquite gun show 30.06 to obtain insurance. I certainly have no reason to doubt his statement.

[i8godzilla]

I'm sure it's often a convenient excuse. However, James Dark, who preceded Mr. Cotton as Exec Dir of the TSRA, confirmed that they were required to post their Mesquite gun show 30.06 to obtain insurance. I certainly have no reason to doubt his statement.

Event insurance is not the same as typical slip and fall business coverage.