l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Why CC Holders Should Ignore Anti-Gun Signs Posted in Stores
May 23, 2014 by Warner Todd Huston
They are popping up all across the country, little stickers on the front
doors of businesses, restaurants and retail outlets informing concealed
carry holders that they are not welcome to carry their legal firearm inside.
But if you are a concealed carry holder you should ignore these attempts to
curtail your rights. If you are legally armed, feel absolutely free to
enter and patronize those stores with your firearm no matter what these anti
-Constitution store owners want.
First of all, these stores have no right whatever to tell you that you aren
’t allowed to observe your Second Amendment rights inside their
establishments. No mere shop owner has the capability or the right to
prevent Americans from enjoying their Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
This may sound like a contradiction for many conservatives. After all, most
conservatives and gun owners are very supportive of rights in general and
the right of private property owners to do what they want on their own
property is no less important than our Second Amendment rights. So, how can
conservatives and gun owners on one hand claim to support private property
rights yet on the other feel it perfectly OK to tell the owner of that
property that they cannot ban a CC carrier’s gun inside?
For one thing, the ship has sailed on the claim that owners of private
property have free reign to do anything they want on their property. The
Supreme Court has repeatedly, for instance, told business owners that they
cannot discriminate against patrons based on their sex, race, creed et al.
The law states that a mere store owner cannot hamper people’s civil and
Constitutional rights just because they have private property rights. One
right, in other words, does not trump all–or any single–other rights.
Therefore, it is perfectly logical to state that if a store cannot refuse to
serve a gay or a person of a particular race or religion because this
refusal violates their Constitutional rights, then a store owner cannot act
to prevent a patron from observing their Second Amendment rights, either.
But, some may still be stuck on the whole idea that a private business has
certain rights to say what they want allowed on their own premises. Here a
quote from Thomas Jefferson reveals why a business has no right to summarily
remove a patron’s Second Amendment rights.
In his Report on Navigation of the Mississippi, 1792, Thomas Jefferson wrote
the following: “It is a principle that the right to a thing gives a right
to the means without which it could not be used, that is to say, that the
means follow their end.”
In other words, if a shop owner says he isn’t curtailing your Second
Amendment rights by just keeping you from carrying in his shop, he is not
correct. For telling someone they cannot have the tools (the gun, in this
case) to observe their right then they are essentially barred from having
those rights. This, incidentally, is a good argument against ammunition
restrictions, too.
There is also a safety issue to consider. The whole reason that every state
in the union has enacted concealed carry laws was to give citizens the means
to prevent crime. A cc holder carrying his gun is just as much for the
safety of those around him as it is for himself. If a store, then, is
telling patrons not to carry their firearms, that store is inviting
criminals to prey upon their patrons.
Here it is apropos to note that a restaurant in Durham, North Carolina was
recently robbed at gunpoint even though it had its little “no guns” signs
on its front door. Note that the sign only prevented legal, law-abiding
citizens the right to protect themselves. It didn’t stop any crime–in fact
it may have invited it.
Then there is the whole point of a concealed carry license holder carrying a
concealed weapon. A concealed weapon is not visible to those around the
carrier. Therefore, if no one else even knows you are carrying, this cannot
possibly hurt the store. This means a shop owner’s whining about your gun
is nothing else but a political act and his political ideology does not
trump your legal right to carry.
Speaking of legality, if the state says you are legally allowed to carry
your firearm, how is it that a shop owner imagines he has the right to trump
even state law?
Many store owners, though, are telling gun owners that this is no big deal.
An easy solution, they say, is that gun owners should just leave their guns
in their cars. This is an entirely dangerous thing to do. Leaving a gun
unattended in a car invites break ins and theft. If my car gets broken into
and my gun stolen while I am in Starbucks shouldn’t the coffee shop be held
liable? After all, they insisted I leave my gun in may car before I went in
for some coffee, didn’t they?
In the end, gun owners who are legally carrying their firearms should feel
free to ignore these little no gun signs. These signs do not hold any legal
restrictions over your right to carry. Certainly as a gun owner you may
realize that these businesses are telling you that they do not want your
business and you may just refuse to spend your money with them. But if you
don’t care what these shop owners think and you like their wares, then feel
free to ignore their powerless little signs and patronize them with your
gun.
So, yes, dear store owner. Your little sign means nothing to me. It has no
force of law and your little sign cannot trump my Constitutional rights. I
will ignore your sign and carry my gun into your establishment whether you
like it or not. | j*****v
发帖数: 7717 | 2 我不支持这个观点。
让私人业主有权力决定是否准许ccw。
但是既然是私人业主自己的决定，如果出现因为遵守店规而无法自卫的情况，一旦被受
害者告，业主要对自己的决定负责，要么赔钱要么坐牢。
如果有很多业主被告得损失惨重，这种事情就会变少 | q***x
发帖数: 94 | 3 http://news.yahoo.com/suspect-california-rampage-blamed-aloof-w
加州美丽的ＵＣＳＢ校园，确实很ＳＢ，肯定校方规定不准合法拥枪，即使允许，加州
洗脑的ＳＢ也绝大多数不懂不会不用。一个有精神病的开ＢＭＷ的好莱坞富家子弟，枪
刀并用，杀了４男二女，如入无人之境。
这就是对所谓学校，私人企业，教会，违反宪法，不准拥枪的答案，自食其果。
其实逻辑很简单。因为全世界三权都是寡头把持，古今中外历史和现实证明政府杀戮平
民最多，平民必须拥枪，而且需要长距离大弹匣的自动步枪，至少半自动。有了平衡三
权寡头力量的长枪，平民就须日常携带手枪，就像军队一样，手枪作为ＳＩＤＥ ＡＲ
Ｍ，防止普通犯罪。
私人财产私人作主，是主要原则但不可绝对，就如同在私人土地上开矿开厂，业主也得
遵守他人利益，他人利益的体现就是相关法律。
私人财产主要分两种，一种是不牵涉公众利益，一种是深入相关公众利益。比如ＢＬＡ
ＣＫＳＴＯＮＥ几个巨头自己的ＭＡＮＳＩＯＮ，管他什么规定都是他自己的事;可是
ＢＬＡＣＫＳＴＯＮＥ拥有美国１０％+的ＲＥＮＴＡＬ ＰＲＯＰＥＲＴＹ，他规定
反枪反宪法就非法剥夺至少５％美国人宪法拥枪的权利。相关公众利益的私产反枪是很
荒谬的。不喜欢枪就到王八朝和北朝鲜去做生意。
寡头之所以强大，因为普通人都跪着。现在私人公司公开犯法反枪反宪法，也是因为多
数人精神和现实中主动和被动的跪着。随着更多的人觉醒，更多的平民领袖涌现，如大
义凛然上ＹＯＵＴＵＢＥ宣言武装对抗政府暴徒的内华达民兵领袖，这些ＢＳ都会被清
掉。
inside.
to
anti
【在 l****z 的大作中提到】
: Why CC Holders Should Ignore Anti-Gun Signs Posted in Stores
: May 23, 2014 by Warner Todd Huston
: They are popping up all across the country, little stickers on the front
: doors of businesses, restaurants and retail outlets informing concealed
: carry holders that they are not welcome to carry their legal firearm inside.
: But if you are a concealed carry holder you should ignore these attempts to
: curtail your rights. If you are legally armed, feel absolutely free to
: enter and patronize those stores with your firearm no matter what these anti
: -Constitution store owners want.
: First of all, these stores have no right whatever to tell you that you aren
| d****e
发帖数: 2856 | 4 私人产业，有权对自己的产业范围内做出规定，但是同时也要承担责任。
You live under my roof, you live by my rules. | T******g
发帖数: 21328 | 5 强迫别人不能自卫，然后出事，应该有liability |
|
