One always has to ruin it for others

[The Rabbi]

I agree.

I have the right to not have to defend myself against the idiot whose gun went off in the Chipotle when it fell out of his pocket.

Guns dont go off because they fall out of a pocket.
/dunce

Buy they do in the movies...

And they also have self-reloading magazines to hundreds of rounds. And you can turn them sidways and still hit the target!

 

[TemplarKormac]

I'm still waiting on these posters Pogo was supposed to send my way. Might I call his bluff here?

 

[RKMBrown]

Guns dont go off because they fall out of a pocket.
/dunce

Buy they do in the movies...

And they also have self-reloading magazines to hundreds of rounds. And you can turn them sidways and still hit the target!

I love it when the ninja girls do all the epic fatality kills while practicing their cheer-leading routines. Uh oh... is that gonna get me in trouble?

 

[kaz]

So how does a restraunt's policy of identifying and disarming all people who enter their establishment work with the right to carry a concealed weapon?

You don't have the right to search people. And people with CC permits aren't obliged to tell you they're packing. That's rather the point of concealed carry.

gads progressives are twits. And they will scream the loudest if someone doesn't die trying to defend their stupid asses when they get in trouble.

Concealed carry is a right limiting GOVERNMENT, it is not a right to infringe on other people's property rights. If someone is violating your right by bringing a gun onto YOUR property, you have the right to call the police. A carry permit does not permit you to infringe on other people's rights to their own property.

And is my person my property?

Again - I have the right to own guns. I should also have the right not to be next to someone with a gun.

If you're going to again accuse me of wanting to blame RWs - fuck off.

If you want to have an adult conversation, I'm willing to read.

Either you're very confused or you hit "Quote" for the wrong post

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Self defense is a human right.

I agree.

I have the right to not have to defend myself against the idiot whose gun went off in the Chipotle when it fell out of his pocket.

Guns dont go off because they fall out of a pocket.
/dunce

That one did.

Second Amendment Man Shoots Defenseless Chipotle Restaurant, Goes Free

But actually, it fell out of his backpack.

You gonna tell me that's what made it go off?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Self defense is a human right.

I agree.

I have the right to not have to defend myself against the idiot whose gun went off in the Chipotle when it fell out of his pocket.

Guns dont go off because they fall out of a pocket.
/dunce

That one did.

Second Amendment Man Shoots Defenseless Chipotle Restaurant, Goes Free

But actually, it fell out of his backpack.

You gonna tell me that's what made it go off?

BTW, this also means the safety was off.

Go ahead and defend that.

 

[Pogo]

I'm still waiting on these posters Pogo was supposed to send my way. Might I call his bluff here?

What is this, a limited time offer? 37 minutes and you want action already? I tellya these kids today, they want everything yesterday.
No you might not. Posts don't expire, dood - they is forever. This one goes in the quiver. The quiver is patient.

Leave us just wait for a poster to make the point that guns are for self defense in the next "guns are god" thread, and then ... out comes the quiver, me and my arrow, and bingo, you're famous.

Shouldn't be a long wait for a thread like that -- after all this is America.

 

[Pogo]

A sign doesn't trump my 2nd Amendment rights. And as we all know, gun free zones don't really stop gun violence. So yes, I would defy that sign. Unless it's posted I won't comply. I will keep my weapon concealed regardless of what Chipotle, or Luddly Neddite says.

And to answer your question? I don't own a firearm, but my father does. And we both agree that a "no guns allowed" sign doesn't trump his concealed carry permit. And it would be interesting to see you force any gun owner to do anything, without them putting a bullet in your head.

So you're saying gun owners are all violent potential murderers?

Also good to know.

I'll be referring a few posters your way so you can make that case. And thanks in advance.

@Pogo

An intentional mischaracterization of my post. That's playing dirty.

I am referring to forcing a gun owner to submit strip searches, forcing them to bear their weapon without just cause. The operative word is "force." You can't force anyone to do anything without just cause. Please, keep your horses in the stable, Pogo.

Luddly thinks he's some sort of vigilante. I'd love to see him take his Batman routine and try that on a law abiding gun owner.

Hey, I bolded the whole sentence. What's missing?

Yanno I can always use a good quote for a sigline. Windsock and NutHouse keep me stocked, but the people demand variety and I have to give the market what it wants...

 

[koshergrl]

Good grief.

 

[OKTexas]

Really, as if you would actually be courteous enough to follow the rules in someone else's house.

Really, as if I expected you to be courteous enough to care about my Constitutional rights.

"Courteous and rights" - you really are missing the boat today.

But if you're going to say something that absurd, how about the courtesy not to endanger others by hiding a gun on your person and then sitting down next to me?

Don't others have the right to be safe from chicken shit nutters who are scared to leave the house without a gun clutched to their heaving bosom??

So I guess you feel the same way around law enforcement officers?

 

[TemplarKormac]

No, buddy, you are NOT a libertarian.



Which makes you an anarchist, not a libertarian.



You just outed yourself with no help from me.

You're blind.

Correct, unless a notice is posted, which you just said in your opening comments you would ignore anyway. That is not libertarianism.

I would still ignore the sign, dude. As Professor points out, the restaurant doesn't really care. There is little the waitstaff can do, and rather than cause a conflict, the gun owner would be allowed to enter, rendering the sign moot anyway. I won't be told what my views are or aren't, OK my friend?

TK, the wait staff's orders are this. (1) if a gun is visible, the customer is asked to leave; (2) if he refuses the police are called; (3) even if there are only loud voices, the customer can be arrested as a threat; and (4) the judge, if state law allows, can revoke the owner's right to bear arms in public.

Stop the testerone and start thinking.

That's 'testosterone.'

Anyhow, if the sign does not post any applicable statutes with the warning, it is legally unenforceable. Stop the name calling and start researching the law.

Yes they can tell you to leave, but that is only if they see you with it. But the sign itself will not stop a gun owner or an armed criminal from entering anyway.

For example:

No Guns Allowed

Pursuant to (place pertinent law citations here)

It also raises another question too, if I am to obey this sign, should I foist the responsibility of my safety upon the proprietor of the establishment? Since I cannot reasonably defend myself against an armed assailant, who should I charge with my protection?

 

[TemplarKormac]

So you're saying gun owners are all violent potential murderers?

Also good to know.

I'll be referring a few posters your way so you can make that case. And thanks in advance.

@Pogo

An intentional mischaracterization of my post. That's playing dirty.

I am referring to forcing a gun owner to submit strip searches, forcing them to bear their weapon without just cause. The operative word is "force." You can't force anyone to do anything without just cause. Please, keep your horses in the stable, Pogo.

Luddly thinks he's some sort of vigilante. I'd love to see him take his Batman routine and try that on a law abiding gun owner.

Hey, I bolded the whole sentence. What's missing?

Yanno I can always use a good quote for a sigline. Windsock and NutHouse keep me stocked, but the people demand variety and I have to give the market what it wants...

What's missing? The fact I never said all gun owners were "violent potential murderers." It was totally asinine, as in you putting words in my mouth. C'mon man.

 

[OKTexas]

I support the right to own guns but I also believe guns should be a choice.

And yet you consistently advocate taking that choice away from people.

No one should be able to force others to be around guns if they don't wish to be.

Nobody is forcing you to go outside your house.

I have never ever "advocate taking that choice away from people". If you say that, you are lying and you know it.



So you think I should hide from gun toting crazies?

Nope.

If you don't have the balls to leave the house without your pacifier/fake penis, that's your problem. The few nutters do not get to take the rights away from the rest of us.

And that is a right I will fight for - the right to be free from whiny little he-men wannabes who put me and my family in danger.

You are fucking insane, the mere presence of a gun does not endanger anyone, and your name calling just demonstrates the weakness of your argument.

 

[Pogo]

I would still ignore the sign, dude. As Professor points out, the restaurant doesn't really care. There is little the waitstaff can do, and rather than cause a conflict, the gun owner would be allowed to enter, rendering the sign moot anyway. I won't be told what my views are or aren't, OK my friend?

TK, the wait staff's orders are this. (1) if a gun is visible, the customer is asked to leave; (2) if he refuses the police are called; (3) even if there are only loud voices, the customer can be arrested as a threat; and (4) the judge, if state law allows, can revoke the owner's right to bear arms in public.

Stop the testerone and start thinking.

That's 'testosterone.'

Anyhow, if the sign does not post any applicable statutes with the warning, it is legally unenforceable. Stop the name calling and start researching the law.

Yes they can tell you to leave, but that is only if they see you with it. But the sign itself will not stop a gun owner or an armed criminal from entering anyway.

For example:

No Guns Allowed

Pursuant to (place pertinent law citations here)

It also raises another question too, if I am to obey this sign, should I foist the responsibility of my safety upon the proprietor of the establishment? Since I cannot reasonably defend myself against an armed assailant, who should I charge with my protection?

The proprietor. Which in this case is Marvel Comics.

 

[RKMBrown]

I agree.

I have the right to not have to defend myself against the idiot whose gun went off in the Chipotle when it fell out of his pocket.

Guns dont go off because they fall out of a pocket.
/dunce

That one did.

Second Amendment Man Shoots Defenseless Chipotle Restaurant, Goes Free

But actually, it fell out of his backpack.

You gonna tell me that's what made it go off?

BTW, this also means the safety was off.

Go ahead and defend that.

One in the chamber, cocked, no safety, and/or loose in the bag with some way to pull the trigger? WTF? What did he do tie a string to the trigger to hold the gun down in his bag?

Well yeah I suppose one can be stupid enough to accidentally fire a weapon.

 

[Pogo]

@Pogo

An intentional mischaracterization of my post. That's playing dirty.

I am referring to forcing a gun owner to submit strip searches, forcing them to bear their weapon without just cause. The operative word is "force." You can't force anyone to do anything without just cause. Please, keep your horses in the stable, Pogo.

Luddly thinks he's some sort of vigilante. I'd love to see him take his Batman routine and try that on a law abiding gun owner.

Hey, I bolded the whole sentence. What's missing?

Yanno I can always use a good quote for a sigline. Windsock and NutHouse keep me stocked, but the people demand variety and I have to give the market what it wants...

What's missing? The fact I never said all gun owners were "violent potential murderers." It was totally asinine.

You didn't say that; that's my presumption from putting a bullet in someone's head. You are correct; just because you took a bullet to the head doesn't mean you died.

Don't worry, I'd be quoting you, not myself. I don't make quotes up; Steve McRacist has that gig sewn up.

 

[Darkwind]

Chipotle: Don't bring guns in our stores: Associated Press Business News - MSN Money

NEW YORK (AP) - Chipotle is asking customers not to bring firearms into its stores after it says gun rights advocates brought military-style assault rifles into one of its restaurants in Texas.

The Denver-based company notes that it has traditionally complied with local laws regarding open and concealed firearms.

But in a statement Monday, the company said that "the display of firearms in our restaurants has now created an environment that is potentially intimidating or uncomfortable for many of our customers."

The announcement came after a petition by Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, which has called on other companies to ban firearms in their stores as well. The group said its petition was in reaction to open-carry gun activists appearing at a Dallas-area Chipotle restaurant over the weekend.

Erika Soto Lamb, a spokeswoman for the group, said she thought the move by Chipotle was a "bold statement," especially considering its previous stance of complying with local laws.

Many states allow people to carry licensed guns in some way, but some businesses exercise their right to ban firearms.

By that one, you are of course, referring to "Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America".

Simply because one group of people are uncomfortable by citizens exercising their rights does not mean we should allow them to ruin it for everyone.

 

[OKTexas]

So, what exactly are you going to do if a business doesn't want to allow you in because you're carrying a gun? Stage a protest? "Stand your ground"? Get into a gun battle with law enforcement? What does "fuck them" mean?

No, keep my concealed weapon concealed. End of problem.

What rankles me is how they knuckled under to the gun grabber group, and of course they cannot guarantee someone will come in there with a firearm and cause harm. So basically they just disarm the good people, and the "bad" people can ignore the request.

Exactly.

Criminals are sneaky. They're not gonna wear their gun wear law abiding citizens can see them. They'll sneak them past 'not allowed' signs and then laugh about it.

Only crooks would sneak a gun in.

If you're not a criminal, you'll have the balls to carry in the open.

Open carry is not legal in all states, get a fucking grip already.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Hey, I bolded the whole sentence. What's missing?

Yanno I can always use a good quote for a sigline. Windsock and NutHouse keep me stocked, but the people demand variety and I have to give the market what it wants...

What's missing? The fact I never said all gun owners were "violent potential murderers." It was totally asinine.

You didn't say that; that's my presumption from putting a bullet in someone's head. You are correct; just because you took a bullet to the head doesn't mean you died.

Don't worry, I'd be quoting you, not myself. I don't make quotes up; Steve McRacist has that gig sewn up.

English please? That post right there shows you cherry picked the quote. C'mon man.

 

[OKTexas]

OK, I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier, but I'm going to jump in with my own humble opinion. I really don't think the restaurant gives a royal damn whether its customers are armed or not. What the restaurant objects to is customers displaying certain types of weapons openly in a way that frightens the staff and other customers.

I am reasonably certain that if you have a CONCEALED weapon the waitstaff is not going to strip-search you in an attempt to find it. If they do, don't tip them. So, gun owners, bring your CONCEALED weapons into the restaurant (no one will ever know) and play well with others. Just leave your military-style assault rifles at home. I am not surprised that some of the employees were scared. I am surprised that the gun owners did not anticipate this reaction.

Maybe it's time people realize that not everyone with a gun is a criminal. If just the sight of a gun scares someone maybe they need help.