As a matter of respect?

[mappow]

My 2 cents.
NO I do not notify "Friends" if I CC, what would be the point? NOW, if I enter one of my friends property, I asked if I'm allowed to carry on their property. Have done that with the in-laws as well. SC State Law mandates its, and I would agree that it affords the property owner his due right over his property to decide if I can be armed on HIS property. If not the Law in some States, it just plain out of respect for another's property rights.

 

[Treo]

When I took my CHP class the instructor (who was a total Fudd) told us that any time he went somewhere that had a security guard he informed the guard that he was carrying and asked if it was OK. Never understood why.

IMO it's just a way to brag about having a permit

 

[NavyLCDR]

SC State Law mandates its, and I would agree that it affords the property owner his due right over his property to decide if I can be armed on HIS property. If not the Law in some States, it just plain out of respect for another's property rights.

Setting the requirement of law aside, why do you feel YOUR gun, in YOUR lawful possession, under YOUR control should be any different than a cell phone, car keys, or pocket knife in your pocket? Doesn't the property owner have equal rights to prohibit those items as well? Why do you feel the need to single out the gun amongst all other possessions to tell the property owner about? And, don't shop owners/propietors have equal rights over their property as home owners do, so do you ask every business propietor if your gun is OK in their store, even when not required to do so by law?

 

[BluesStringer]

I wouldn't be offended if someone asked me not to carry in their home. It's their right to do so and they have their reasons.

I said in my first post in this thread that I would not be offended either. I wouldn't treat them differently, I would continue to welcome them into my home, I just wouldn't disarm, and instead, honor their wishes and leave.

Nor would I ever base a friendship on whether someone allowed me to carry in their home or not.

I haven't asserted that a friendship would be based on someone allowing me to carry in their home, I simply said that if my honoring their wishes and leaving instead of disarming was seen as offensive, it would be their demands that created the stress in the relationship, not my acquiescence to those demands.

I find it a bit hypocritical that some who belong to a group of people who're so concerned about rights (i.e. gun owners/carriers) would be so quick to take offense at others excercising their rights.[/b]

And I find it utterly baffling how you can assign hypocrisy to the act of honoring a property owner's wishes and leaving rather than disarming. Perhaps you should refresh your understanding of what hypocrisy is. It certainly isn't stating a position and then acting entirely consistent with that position.

I won't call it hypocrisy, but it does seem a bit incongruous to me that some members of a site whose very title describes its devotion to protecting citizens' rights to carry, draw such an unequivocal line at the threshold to their front door for those whom they claim to have deep and abiding friendships with. Nevermind strangers, that's not what we've been talking about. The question was posed about good friends, and the OP's subsequent posts reinforced that meme.

There are many costs associated with one's decision to carry. All the material things necessary to carry concealed are relatively expensive and obvious. But there are intangibles too, and perhaps having to reevaluate friendships is one of them. It never has been for me. As I said from the start, the question is moot for me as I can't even recall the last time I was sitting in someone else's living room. That's not to say we don't have good friends or never do anything with them, but for whatever reason, it's just worked out that when we get together with friends, it's to go to a concert or out to dinner or whatever. In any case, my participation in this thread was on the basis of a hypothetical set of circumstances presented in the OP, and I commented on that basis. Hypothetically-speaking, it's possible that my commitment to always be in direct control of my weapon could be at odds with a good friend's house rules, and, still hypothetically-speaking, their sudden "becoming aware" of my carrying a gun could present a problem of trust for either or both of us that could, hypothetically-speaking, result in the termination of said existing friendship. That would indeed be a steep cost associated with my decisions concerning control of my weapon, but either one of us would have a valid claim to a break in trust. Once trust is lost, or many times, once it's even slightly challenged between friends, losing the friendship altogether is often not far behind. At least that's been my life's experience.

But it occurs to me that you have it exactly backwards when you say that you would never base a friendship on whether or not you were allowed to carry in someone's home. In point of fact, the hypothetical presented depicts an existing friendship upon which the property owner imposes new boundaries that force an unwanted choice on their so-called friend. At least the choice would be unwanted for me. For those that say no problem, I don't mind locking my gun out of reach, that's fine. We all have to prioritize and compromise to whatever degree our conscience and self-respect allows, and that's all I've done here in working through a hypotheitcal situation that was presented as a topic for discussion, the fact that the person posing the hypothetical came back seeming quite indignant that many responses went counter to his own answers to his own questions notwithstanding. Go figure. But anyway, the existing friendship would've been built with me carrying and just never saying anything about it. Somehow, at some unexplained point in time of this trusting friendship, we are to assume that an overriding and irresistible sense of obligation to disclose that I carry a gun washes over me, lest I should feel cutting pangs of guilt for not protecting my friend's property rights (huh???). And when I do, my friend forces a choice on me: Disarm or hit the road. I say no problem and hit the road without a word of argument or any hint of having taken offense. In this scenario, the friendship wasn't based on anything having to do with the carrying of guns. No, it was the termination of the friendship that was based on guns, and it was the property owner whose demands I acquiesced to who stopped coming around to my house based on me being a gun carrier that ended the friendship.

You "full-disclosure" guys have a very one-sided view of friendship it would seem.

Blues

 

[B2Tall]

I haven't asserted that a friendship would be based on someone allowing me to carry in their home, I simply said that if my honoring their wishes and leaving instead of disarming was seen as offensive, it would be their demands that created the stress in the relationship, not my acquiescence to those demands.

And it could just as easily be said that the "stress" was caused by your desire to bring an unwanted firearm into their home. It cuts both ways. For me, it wouldn't even be an issue.

And I find it utterly baffling how you can assign hypocrisy to the act of honoring a property owner's wishes and leaving rather than disarming.

It's the over-the-top reaction by some on this site, not necessarily you in particular. Also, I completely undestand the meaning of the word "hypocrisy" and it's uses. It's entirely hypocritical for someone to demand their own rights and then turn around and pooh-pooh others for doing the same.

You "full-disclosure" guys have a very one-sided view of friendship it would seem.

Blues

I'm not a "full disclosure" guy. I'm speaking of an instance where you know that the person doesn't want a gun in their home for whatever reasons. I do now, and always will, continue to respect their rights as a private property owner....and I won't kick and scream about it nor will I think any less of them in terms of friendship.

 

[Axeanda45]

No it doesn't. But it does make it the law. You may not agree but you'll need a SCOTUS decision to win the argument.



You called me a troll for poviding facts found in federal court decisions.

The cases I presented aren't my opinion. Follow the link and read the actual court decisions from which the info was derived.

Again, you spout off your ignorance with pride.... can you not wrap your head around the extremely simple FACT that ANY law that has anything to do with firearms INFRINGES on that which the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND SAYS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON????

Therefore, it is UNLAWFUL!!!!!!! Period, end of story, go home with your tail between your legs and shut the hell up....

Attempting to defend your position by using Un-Constitutional laws and Un-Constitutional findings made by usurpers and treasonous judges does NOT make your case, it only further proves my point that you (and those like you) do NOT know what our rights are and are actually fighting AGAINST that which you THINK you are fighting FOR....... Do us all a favor and get a firm foundation of the REAL law BEFORE spouting of opinions about it...

 

[walt629]

Most of the time when people join an Internet forum it isn’t to have their beliefs challenged, it’s because they want validation of those beliefs from like-minded people.

Who are you referring to this time Treo? I asked the question to have a discussion on the board and get feed back from people with common interest. Unfortunately instead of discussions we get the "I'm right! You're wrong" response from way too many people. And I'm as guilty as the next of doing that when I feel strongly about a subject.

Too many people are willing to verbally attack another just because their point of view or opinion do not coincide with our own.

I ask a simple question. Some give what I consider honest answers but the majority of the responses are another attack against what they deem to be erroneous behavior for someone that conceals. Mr A doesn't do it like Mr. B does so Mr.B begins an immediate attack on Mr.A because Mr.A isn't a good representative of what Mr.B believes.

If I put something on the board, I expect to get answers, Some will agree with my point and some will differ. If there is a differing opinion I don't agree with (Duh!) I respond. It's called a conversation. I refuse to let open ended comments go unanswered.

There are some on the site that I find myself at odds with more often that I'm in agreement with, and you're one of them Treo. But that is not to say that I haven't found some of what you bring to the table to be enlightening (don't get a big head :-/) Just because we have a difference of opinion doesn't mean we can't have a conversation about it. Right?

 

[walt629]

You exhibit some dangerous traits in a firearm owner:
- Emotional response to a fact or opinion, including anger and name calling.
- The belief that one isn't required to leave a premise when told to do so.
- The attitude that your opinion supercedes the law.

--KACHALSKY V. COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER--

Federal Court Decision determines that denial of a license to carry a handgun is not a violation of the second amendment - Sept. 2011 - Link Removed. The written federal court ruling specifically makes the following statements.

[size=+2]CLIP! for expediency[/size]



--

Mentioned this thread to our attorney a little while ago. He provided the citations. But I forgot, you regularly challenge some very smart attorneys on this forum. Education is a wonderful thing... it will set you free!

Awww Jeez BC! You're givin me a headache! But thanks for the information.

 

[BC1]

Again, you spout off your ignorance with pride.... can you not wrap your head around the extremely simple FACT that ANY law that has anything to do with firearms INFRINGES on that which the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND SAYS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON????

Therefore, it is UNLAWFUL!!!!!!! Period, end of story, go home with your tail between your legs and shut the hell up....

Attempting to defend your position by using Un-Constitutional laws and Un-Constitutional findings made by usurpers and treasonous judges does NOT make your case, it only further proves my point that you (and those like you) do NOT know what our rights are and are actually fighting AGAINST that which you THINK you are fighting FOR....... Do us all a favor and get a firm foundation of the REAL law BEFORE spouting of opinions about it...

This is not MY position. These are the facts of two of the most important landmark rulings in history. If you're going to further your cause of unfettered right to bear arms you need to know this stuff. Perhaps someday when you won't leave a person's property you'll get to test the law.

 

[BluesStringer]

And it could just as easily be said that the "stress" was caused by your desire to bring an unwanted firearm into their home. It cuts both ways. For me, it wouldn't even be an issue.

This is getting rather ridiculous. The goal posts keep moving. Here's the basic circular logic being presented here:

Question: Would you feel a sense of obligation to disclose to your good friends that you're carrying before entering their home?

Answer: No, I never tell anyone I'm carrying.

Comment: No one is allowed in my home while carrying, and dammit, I mean NO ONE!

Suggestion: Perhaps some signage informing all comers of that fact would preclude any misunderstandings, hurt feelings, challenges to trust etc. etc. etc.

Response to suggestion: Nope, I never make my security plans known to anyone!

Response to that response: BINGO! Neither do I! That's why I never tell anyone I'm carrying!

Third generation response: Yeah, well, you damn well better tell ME if you come to MY home or you'll be guilty of trampling on MY property rights and breaking the trust of ME, your oh-so-good-friend!

Fourth gen response: Dude, if you would've just told me how you felt about guns in your home, it never would've become a bone of contention between us.

Ex-friend says: I NEVER tell ANYONE about my security plans! Got it??

Of course, I'm paraphrasing here and exaggerating the tone of some of the posts for satirical effect, but really, the circular logic is blatant, and it's not coming from the side that says they'd leave without argument the instant they were made aware of their friend's rules.

And I neither implied nor stated any "desire" to bring an "unwanted" gun onto anyone's property. I carry everywhere I go, period. I never spontaneously disclose to anyone that I'm carrying, period. If the property owner doesn't like signs and thinks it's incumbent upon his visitors to disclose everything they have on their person before entering his home, our respective rules for how we conduct ourselves pretty much cancels each other out since he won't disclose his rules and I won't disclose the contents of my waistband. So cool, we go on just exactly like how we've been going while this deep, trusting, abiding friendship was developing; blissfully ignorant of who each other is and what we expect/demand of each other in each other's homes! Ain't friendship just grand? LOL Good grief, this is ridiculous.

It's the over-the-top reaction by some on this site, not necessarily you in particular. Also, I completely undestand the meaning of the word "hypocrisy" and it's uses. It's entirely hypocritical for someone to demand their own rights and then turn around and pooh-pooh others for doing the same.

Well, perhaps you could be a little more careful with that "Reply With Quote" button then, because you used the word "hypocritical" in direct response to a quote of mine. I haven't pooh-pooh'ed anyone asserting their rights. I have accepted the property owner's wishes in the hypothetical from my first post in this thread. Even in this quote above you don't acknowledge that fact, and fudge on letting me off the hypocrisy hook by saying that wasn't "necessarily" directed at me "in particular." So maybe I'm just a hypocrite in general then? Whatever, if it doesn't apply to me, don't quote me and then respond directly to the quote saying it's somehow hypocritical. Seems rather elementary. Link Removed

I'm not a "full disclosure" guy. I'm speaking of an instance where you know that the person doesn't want a gun in their home for whatever reasons.

Would someone please sink those goal posts in a concrete footing? I'm getting tired of chasing them all over the field! The OP asked the question if, out of an abundance of sensitivity and respect for a good friend's house rules, would you ask permission before entering their home with a concealed firearm. Clearly, the hypothetical did not include we, as concealed carriers, knowing that our friend had an objection to guns in his home.

I do now, and always will, continue to respect their rights as a private property owner....and I won't kick and scream about it...

Again I have to wonder why the heck you're saying this in response to anything I've said. I have said nothing that deviates at all from this exact train of thought. Do you just like to argue or what?

...nor will I think any less of them in terms of friendship.

And this too I have said. However, your myopic, self-centric, one-sided view of friendship ignores the strong possibility that when this good friend finds out the terrible secret that you've been carrying every single time you've ever gotten together, whether in his home or otherwise, he may well extend his distrust of your judgment beyond his property lines. Like I said, once trust is even slightly challenged, it's hardly uncommon for it to end up being fatal to a strong, enduring friendship. Not impossible, granted, but not uncommon for it to go that way either. In short, the decision ain't just gonna be in your hands.

Blues

 

[B2Tall]

OK Blue, here's what I quoted:

Exactly. Like I said, c'est la vie. I will respect and abide by their decision, but it is their decision that stressed the relationship, not my decision to operate under the same set of rules for myself that I have operated under for more than 30 years. I won't allow my own government to disarm me without at least passive resistence. Why on Earth would I allow a so-called friend to?

Blues

Obviously, in your little scenario the "friend" knows you're carrying otherwise he wouldn't have an opportunity to object. Right?? Riiiight?? So this isn't about "should I tell". You've made it clear the homeowner already knows you're packing.

Their decision stressed the friendship?? Obviously you're the one stressed...you're the one altering the friendship based on their decision.

Now they're a "so-called" friend?? I thought you said your friendship would have no bearing on such a decision?? If I'm moving the goal posts as you seem to think it's only because you keep doing a song-and-dance all over the field!

I'll correct myself. You are a hypocrite. Your "respect my rights and like it but don't expect me to respect yours" attitude makes that obvious.

 

[BluesStringer]

Obviously, in your little scenario the "friend" knows you're carrying otherwise he wouldn't have an opportunity to object. Right?? Riiiight?? So this isn't about "should I tell". You've made it clear the homeowner already knows you're packing.

Their decision stressed the friendship?? Obviously you're the one stressed...you're the one altering the friendship based on their decision.

Now they're a "so-called" friend?? I thought you said your friendship would have no bearing on such a decision?? If I'm moving the goal posts as you seem to think it's only because you keep doing a song-and-dance all over the field!

I'll correct myself. You are a hypocrite. Your "respect my rights and like it but don't expect me to respect yours" attitude makes that obvious.

You're freakin' insane B2Tall. It never was "my" scenario to begin with. I participated in sussing out a hypothetical scenario which I said from the start would be very unlikely that I would ever find myself involved in. How about you flip on your intellectual-honesty switch, and read the previous post of mine to the one you quoted and claim represents hypocrisy. The flow of conversation lead to the post you quoted, it didn't just appear in a vacuum. I have been nothing but consistent throughout, and you have been nothing but unjustifiably argumentative and abrasive, even though on almost every point being discussed, we agree. Only one thing do we disagree on that I can see; You would willingly lock your weapon out of reach in the hypothetical, and I would politely and without argument take my leave, but both options are wholly respectful of the property owner's rights, so your, "You are a hypocrite. Your "respect my rights and like it but don't expect me to respect yours" attitude makes that obvious" is complete and utter crap.*

Good night.

Blues

*Edited for clarity.

 

[Treo]

Who are you referring to this time Treo?

It is a general observation that I actually made a long time ago in a forum far, far, away.

I seen too many threads started in which the OP (not to say you) gets bent completely out of shape when people disagree w/ him.

I've done it myself.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Blue you make me smile. I hope you stay on this forum.

 

[NavyLCDR]

You're freakin' insane B2Tall.

Somebody else gets it! Welcome to my band of Constitutional Trolls, BluesStringer! (You're in good company.... trust me.... I'm from the government, after all!)

Blue you make me smile. I hope you stay on this forum.

Me too!

 

[JimPage]

I hate these threads where people on the same side of the overall issue nit pic about details and become so full of ad hominen attacks. It makes all RKBA supporters look idiotic. I must say BC1 appears to be the most rational and the best informed. At the very least he understand where we stand legally and what things we need to work on.

As for my position on carry in my home, I'll tell you when get here, but it will be my decision!

 

[NavyLCDR]

I hate these threads where people on the same side of the overall issue nit pic about details and become so full of ad hominen attacks. It makes all RKBA supporters look idiotic. I must say BC1 appears to be the most rational and the best informed. At the very least he understand where we stand legally and what things we need to work on.

As for my position on carry in my home, I'll tell you when get here, but it will be my decision!

Spoken like a true resident of New York! God Bless Bloomberg! See, that's what you, BC1 and Bloomberg have in common - you all want to decide who gets to carry guns and who doesn't in your "house", because we don't people "opening up" and shooting up the place, right? To wit:

I'll decide when deadly force gets used. I don't want anyone to use their discretion and "open up" in my home.

That's the common thread that binds you, BC1 and Bloomberg together - you don't trust Joe Citizen to carry a gun, except for maybe those few citizens that meet YOUR requirements and standards to carry; therefore, Joe Citizen should lay down their arms in your presence and trust you to protect them. To wit:

In my home I will always maintain control and keep the benefit of better protection than my guests... the very essence of a castle doctrine.

Sounds like some promises I have heard from quite a few politicians.

I hate these threads where people on the same side of the overall issue nit pic about details

I'm sorry, but "I expect you to tell me about your gun" and "your firearm is not welcome in my home" is not being on the same side and goes just a little bit beyond nit picking about details.

 

[B2Tall]

You're freakin' insane B2Tall. It never was "my" scenario to begin with.

Then I guess somebody hacked your account and posted under your name. Better change your password.

Blue, you're like a spoiled brat - both here on this site and apparently out in the world as well. You don't get your way and you throw a tantrum...."Waaaaahhhhh! You won't let me carry in your house so you're not my friend any more!! Waaaahhhhh! You're quoting me directly but I didn't really write that!! Waaaaahhhhh!!"

It's kinda funny but I think it's time you changed your diaper.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Then I guess somebody hacked your account and posted under your name. Better change your password.

Blue, you're like a spoiled brat - both here on this site and apparently out in the world as well. You don't get your way and you throw a tantrum...."Waaaaahhhhh! You won't let me carry in your house so you're not my friend any more!! Waaaahhhhh! You're quoting me directly but I didn't really write that!! Waaaaahhhhh!!"

It's kinda funny but I think it's time you changed your diaper.

Wow, you and Keykutter must be conjoined twins!

 

[BluesStringer]

You're freakin' insane B2Tall.

Then I guess somebody hacked your account and posted under your name. Better change your password.

Blue, you're like a spoiled brat - both here on this site and apparently out in the world as well. You don't get your way and you throw a tantrum...."Waaaaahhhhh! You won't let me carry in your house so you're not my friend any more!! Waaaahhhhh! You're quoting me directly but I didn't really write that!! Waaaaahhhhh!!"

It's kinda funny but I think it's time you changed your diaper.

And with that ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case.