Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Gun Free Zone Liability
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aries" data-source="post: 3333687" data-attributes="member: 44328"><p>I didn't say home, I just said property.</p><p></p><p>No, I don't think there really is a difference... except that there is a presumption that you are NOT invited into my home until you are, but you ARE invited into my business until you are NOT. But business owners can un-invite you for many reasons, including that they don't want you to have a gun on their property. The sign simply tells you that your invitation is withdrawn as long as you have a gun.</p><p></p><p>Here is another scenario to consider. You're concerned about the risk of an armed robber coming in while you are unarmed, but could the business owner (or his customers) be concerned about the risk that someone (not any of us here who are all well trained, intelligent, experienced, and responsible of course... you know, one of those OTHER idiots...) could bring a gun in and accidentally shoot one of his other patrons? Is he then responsible for that as well, because he did NOT have a no gun sign? Maybe the business owner believes that he IS protecting his customers by not allowing guns, but he should not have a right to make that decision?</p><p></p><p>And if you require him to provide armed guards to protect you while you comply with the no gun sign, you realize that costs more, and that cost will be passed on to his customers. So your demand may result in his prices being so high that you are forced to find another store, and/or he goes out of business. Then you REALLY have no choice. But at least his sign will be down.</p><p></p><p>(but honestly, I don't think any of you expect him to provide protection, I think you just don't want him to have the right to ask you not to bring a gun onto his property)</p><p></p><p>This is essentially true, because you simply cannot remove every risk. Life is dangerous. You have to make the best choices you can, as does every business owner. I don't think we should take away their rights unnecessarily, even if I don't like their decision.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aries, post: 3333687, member: 44328"] I didn't say home, I just said property. No, I don't think there really is a difference... except that there is a presumption that you are NOT invited into my home until you are, but you ARE invited into my business until you are NOT. But business owners can un-invite you for many reasons, including that they don't want you to have a gun on their property. The sign simply tells you that your invitation is withdrawn as long as you have a gun. Here is another scenario to consider. You're concerned about the risk of an armed robber coming in while you are unarmed, but could the business owner (or his customers) be concerned about the risk that someone (not any of us here who are all well trained, intelligent, experienced, and responsible of course... you know, one of those OTHER idiots...) could bring a gun in and accidentally shoot one of his other patrons? Is he then responsible for that as well, because he did NOT have a no gun sign? Maybe the business owner believes that he IS protecting his customers by not allowing guns, but he should not have a right to make that decision? And if you require him to provide armed guards to protect you while you comply with the no gun sign, you realize that costs more, and that cost will be passed on to his customers. So your demand may result in his prices being so high that you are forced to find another store, and/or he goes out of business. Then you REALLY have no choice. But at least his sign will be down. (but honestly, I don't think any of you expect him to provide protection, I think you just don't want him to have the right to ask you not to bring a gun onto his property) This is essentially true, because you simply cannot remove every risk. Life is dangerous. You have to make the best choices you can, as does every business owner. I don't think we should take away their rights unnecessarily, even if I don't like their decision. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Gun Free Zone Liability
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom