Benefits of carrying concealed and having real priorities.

[Bikenut]

One final thing bikenut... I happened to read this post of yours AFTER I posted the above.....

You said:
Let us make no mistake! I have never said anything about killing or raping! And I challenge you to quote where I have said anything like that! DO NOT put words into my mouth! Stop using the liberal tactics of insult and ridicule hoping to add some kind of validity to your position. It won't work since I have never said anything like that. YOU are the one who keeps talking about killing and raping!

You said it without even realizing you did just by the simple fact of claiming a property owner has "rights" that they simply do not have. (and I have been trying to show you that they dont)

IF a property owner, as you claim, has the "right" to deny anyone else any of their "rights" then just where does the line start or end? YOU claim they have the "right" that I be unarmed and at their mercy, I very simply follow this to the only logical conclusion there can be, and that is if, as you claim, they have the right over me to prohibit me the basic human right of self defense, they have the right (again, you claim they do, and I deny they do) to deny me any and all of my other "rights" as well... I pointed out rape and such as an example of what your argument actually is to get you to think about what you are actually saying....

You CANNOT infringe on others "rights" just because you own the property they are standing on... IF you could (if the truth is what YOU say it is and I am wrong) then you actually DO have the right to rape or kill or steal or anything else you desire to do as long as your name is on the deed or lease/rent papers... Deal with it, YOU are the one who claims you have the RIGHT to deny others theirs.... not me.

Now how can I say something that I never used the words to say? Oh... I get it.... you are attempting to discredit my argument by using sensational words of your own hoping they will stick to me. But it's not working because by now everyone who is still reading this discussion has figured out what your stance is about rights.

Axe... give it up... all your arguments fail simply because you have NO RIGHT to be on/in the property owned by someone else. And since you have no right to be there all that is necessary for you to remain armed is to not go into/onto the property. If you do decide to go in/on that property anyway it is YOU who voluntarily gives up your right to bear arms while there. Oh wait... you have said in an earlier post that you respect the property owner's right but your right to bear arms trumps the property owner's rights so you will ......... SNEAK ... your gun in anyway.

I'm still waiting to hear why you don't man up to your belief that your right to bear arms trumps the property owner's right to ban guns by confronting the property owner with a no guns rule by open carrying instead of sneaking your gun in concealed. After all...if your right to bear arms trumps the property owners rights then you wouldn't be doing anything wrong by open carrying would you? And there wouldn't be any reason to sneak your gun in would there?

Save us all the silly excuse that you used in a past post that by sneaking your gun in you are saving the property owner the embarrassment of seeing how foolish his no guns rule is......

 

[Axeanda45]

So, by reading your words and coming to the conclusion that you claim to have the right to kill me if I dont follow your rules and then pointing out the logical conclusion that if I dont have the right to life on your property (which is final) I then point out that if that is true, then lesser infringements of my rights (which wont kill me, but might make me wish I was dead) must also be in your so-called "rights" on your property to infringe at your will and my not having a "right" to defend myself against cause, you know, I am on your property, so I dont have any rights, according to you... If this is what constitutes "putting words in your mouth" then I am guilty as charged....

 

[Bikenut]

So, by reading your words and coming to the conclusion that you claim to have the right to kill me if I dont follow your rules and then pointing out the logical conclusion that if I dont have the right to life on your property (which is final) I then point out that if that is true, then lesser infringements of my rights (which wont kill me, but might make me wish I was dead) must also be in your so-called "rights" on your property to infringe at your will and my not having a "right" to defend myself against cause, you know, I am on your property, so I dont have any rights, according to you... If this is what constitutes "putting words in your mouth" then I am guilty as charged....

Your admission that YOU use words and attribute them to others who have NOT used those words has been quoted for posterity....

 

[CharlesMorrison]

How's this for you guys....
I went to my local mall. A sign on the door says "No Guns Allowed".
I brought my gun in. I moved about for a period with my gun concealed and no issue.
I made a purchase and as I re-entered the mall, I made sure my gun was exposed.
It only took a few minutes before I was chased down by mall security.
I was told that I was not allowed to have my gun in the mall and that I would have to leave.
When I asked why, I was told it was against policy to be in the mall with my gun. The mall ownership had prohibited guns, aka "the landlord".
I explained that I could cover it up if that would help and was promptly told to leave or the police will be contacted.
I also mentioned my "rights" at which point I was invited to wait for the police and be TRESPASSED OUT THE DOOR....or I could leave post haste.. To which I did.
It would seem that my 2A rights did not exist in that mall..yet they where granted me once I got into my car and drove away!
I hope this one example can help the conversation along..

On a lighter note... I DID make new friends tonight!


Sent from behind Enemy Lines.

 

[Axeanda45]

The first flawed premise is that the Bill of Rights "gives" anything at all. It does not; it merely articulates specified (but not all) unalienable rights that are inherent to the condition of being human, that predate the formation of government or the adoption of any constitution, and that may not properly be deprived from full enfranchisement save when they are abused to the injury of others.

hiding something on your person does not injure others....

This is from a well written article about Rights.....

Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page - 2nd Amendment Supporters


BTW.... exposing a firearm where they are prohibited by the property owner DOES injure their feeeeeeeelings, so by keeping it hidden you can avoid that....

 

[Bikenut]

The first flawed premise is that the Bill of Rights "gives" anything at all. It does not; it merely articulates specified (but not all) unalienable rights that are inherent to the condition of being human, that predate the formation of government or the adoption of any constitution, and that may not properly be deprived from full enfranchisement save when they are abused to the injury of others.

hiding something on your person does not injure others....

This is from a well written article about Rights.....

Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page - 2nd Amendment Supporters


BTW.... exposing a firearm where they are prohibited by the property owner DOES injure their feeeeeeeelings, so by keeping it hidden you can avoid that....

Actually the first flaw is in your belief that you have some kind of right to be on/in the private property owned by someone else. You do not have that right and since you personally do not have any right to be there all the rest of the rights that go along with you being a person also have no right to be on/in that private property.

Whether you like it or not... and regardless of what excuses you present... the private property owner has the private property right, and the power of law, to require you to take your person... and all the personal property you are carrying on/in your person... and all the rights you have as a person... off of/out of his property.

I've asked before.... if you believe that your right to bear arms trumps the private property owner's right to ban guns why don't you confront the property owner with openly carrying your gun in plain sight instead of feeling the need to sneak your gun in? After all... if your right to bear arms actually does trump the property owner's right to ban guns then there is nothing to fear from carrying a gun in plain sight.... right?

So why do you feel it is necessary to sneak your gun in? Are you afraid of being arrested for trespass?

And the article you linked to also says this...

Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page - 2nd Amendment Supporters

In other words, you can't be muzzled beforehand. You CAN yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Any time you feel like it. The government can impose no prior restraint on anything that you may say or write. To do so violates your unalienable rights under the Constitution; the only ones bound by prior restraints in such matters are the government.

I would, however, advise that there actually be a fire. Because if there's not, it's proper for your reckless action to meet with a penalizing response. And if someone is threatened or injured, it's just to expect punishment for your actions and restitution for your victims.

Kindly note that the part I put in bold for emphasis is in addition to being met with a penalizing response. In addition to... not the qualifying criteria.

 

[Axeanda45]

And how has this hidden and unknown to the property owner inanimate object harmed them? You still have failed 100% to express this....

BTW... I have never, ever said I had the "right" to be on their property... go ahead, look back, you wont find it cause I NEVER SAID IT...all of my examples were IF I was on their property....
Geesh, some people......

I just stated the simple fact that IF I was on someones property, I in no way shape or form INFRINGE on their RIGHTS if I am armed..... The worst would be I have ignored their RULES...

 

[Axeanda45]

BTW... the thing you put in BOLD to bolster your argument doesnt.... It actually bolsters mine, because a hidden object you dont know about injures you not at all, no matter how many times you try to claim it does...

 

[Bikenut]

And how has this hidden and unknown to the property owner inanimate object harmed them? You still have failed 100% to express this....

BTW... I have never, ever said I had the "right" to be on their property... go ahead, look back, you wont find it cause I NEVER SAID IT...all of my examples were IF I was on their property....
Geesh, some people......

I just stated the simple fact that IF I was on someones property, I in no way shape or form INFRINGE on their RIGHTS if I am armed..... The worst would be I have ignored their RULES...

The property owner's RULES are the legitimate exercising of their private property right to control their property by refusing entry to folks who carry guns.

Infringe - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

in·fringe
verb \in-ˈfrinj\

: to do something that does not obey or follow (a rule, law, etc.) ( chiefly US )

Perhaps there is some misunderstanding concerning the Bill of Rights only restricting the government from "infringing". It does NOT restrict the private individual from restricting the rights of other private individuals.

And you still haven't answered my question:

Originally posted by Bikenut:
I've asked before.... if you believe that your right to bear arms trumps the private property owner's right to ban guns why don't you confront the property owner with openly carrying your gun in plain sight instead of feeling the need to sneak your gun in? After all... if your right to bear arms actually does trump the property owner's right to ban guns then there is nothing to fear from carrying a gun in plain sight.... right?

So why do you feel it is necessary to sneak your gun in? Are you afraid of being arrested for trespass?

 

[Bikenut]

Originally posted by Bikenut

Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page - 2nd Amendment Supporters

In other words, you can't be muzzled beforehand. You CAN yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Any time you feel like it. The government can impose no prior restraint on anything that you may say or write. To do so violates your unalienable rights under the Constitution; the only ones bound by prior restraints in such matters are the government.

I would, however, advise that there actually be a fire. Because if there's not, it's proper for your reckless action to meet with a penalizing response. And if someone is threatened or injured, it's just to expect punishment for your actions and restitution for your victims.

Kindly note that the part I put in bold for emphasis is in addition to being met with a penalizing response. In addition to... not the qualifying criteria.

BTW... the thing you put in BOLD to bolster your argument doesnt.... It actually bolsters mine, because a hidden object you dont know about injures you not at all, no matter how many times you try to claim it does...

Now what part of... someone being threatened or injured is not the only criteria but... is IN ADDITION... to ... a penalizing response? How about I add underline to the first part then?

 

[Axeanda45]

You still have proven zero, zilch, nada that in inanimate object being carried in my pocket infringes on anyones rights.... YOU have proven nothing by saying ignoring someones rules = infringing on their RIGHTS because it very simply doesnt...... Rules are not Rights, period, end of discussion.... That really bothers you doesnt it?

 

[Bikenut]

You still have proven zero, zilch, nada that in inanimate object being carried in my pocket infringes on anyones rights.... YOU have proven nothing by saying ignoring someones rules = infringing on their RIGHTS because it very simply doesnt...... Rules are not Rights, period, end of discussion.... That really bothers you doesnt it?

Doesn't bother me...you keep bringing it up... and I keep exposing the flaw(s) in your argument(s).

It is immaterial that you don't accept that the private property owner's right to deny you permission to be on/in his property also denies permission to all of the personal property you are carrying and all the rights you have as a person to also be on/in that property... simply by denying the person, you, permission to be there your personal property and your rights also do not have permission to be there. Your lack of acceptance doesn't change the fact that the property owner has that right and the trespass laws stand behind that right by assessing penalties to those who disobey the rules the property owner has in place that lists who does not have his permission.

Now... how about answering this simple question:

I've asked before.... if you believe that your right to bear arms trumps the private property owner's right to ban guns why don't you confront the property owner with openly carrying your gun in plain sight instead of feeling the need to sneak your gun in? After all... if your right to bear arms actually does trump the property owner's right to ban guns then there is nothing to fear from carrying a gun in plain sight.... right?

So why do you feel it is necessary to sneak your gun in? Are you afraid of being arrested for trespass?

 

[Axeanda45]

I win......


Awesome....

 

[stratsrock]

If there is a "no guns" sign It's my place to respect the property owners wishes just as if I had a "no trespassing" sign or "no hunting" sign on my property. I then have to make a choice to take my business elsewhere. I carry to protect myself and my family and not other people. As callous as that sounds I cannot risk my family's future on the decision of a jury and what their views and perceptions of a situation might be.

 

[Axeanda45]

If there is a "no guns" sign It's my place to respect the property owners wishes just as if I had a "no trespassing" sign or "no hunting" sign on my property. I then have to make a choice to take my business elsewhere. I carry to protect myself and my family and not other people. As callous as that sounds I cannot risk my family's future on the decision of a jury and what their views and perceptions of a situation might be.

Where did the jury come from? how did you get "caught"? I carry to protect myself and my family also, THAT IS WHY I CARRY EVERYWHERE I GO THAT DOESNT HAVE METAL DETECTORS...

It is MY PLACE to do ALL I CAN to have the tools needed WHEREVER I HAPPEN TO BE......

 

[stratsrock]

Where did the jury come from? how did you get "caught"? I carry to protect myself and my family also, THAT IS WHY I CARRY EVERYWHERE I GO THAT DOESNT HAVE METAL DETECTORS...

It is MY PLACE to do ALL I CAN to have the tools needed WHEREVER I HAPPEN TO BE......

Chill, it's a worst case scenario not a personal attack.

Is it okay if I hunt on your private property if you have "no hunting" signs posted? I hope not. As I hunter I have to respect your rights as a property owner and move on. Same as I choose when I see a store with a "no guns" sign. I respect the property owner wishes and go elsewhere.

 

[Axeanda45]

Chill, it's a worst case scenario not a personal attack.

Is it okay if I hunt on your private property if you have "no hunting" signs posted? I hope not. As I hunter I have to respect your rights as a property owner and move on. Same as I choose when I see a store with a "no guns" sign. I respect the property owner wishes and go elsewhere.

Hunting on someones property without permission is NOTHING like being barred from having the tools to defend yourself... those are not even near the same thing.....

Wanting someone unarmed is the same as telling them they are your slave while on your property... NONE of their rights exist if the right to carry a tool you dont even know is there is forbidden... RESPECT ALWAYS has to be EARNED.... if you have a sign saying no weapons allowed, you have just PROVEN YOU HAVE ZERO RESPECT FOR OTHERS LIVES..... SO, I ignore your request....

 

[Axeanda45]

If YOU want to follow the property owners RULES, go right ahead, more power to ya dude..... BUT do NOT tell me how to live my life or what I should or should not carry or where..... You consider it respect to follow his rules, I consider it an attack on my personal safety.....

 

[Nightmare45]

Old saying your rights end at my nose, also my private property, I can and do say who may enter my property or business armed, I can also not spend my money where myself and my weapon are not wanted. I respect the right of any property owner to establish who and what may enter their property. Isn't America Great?

 

[Axeanda45]

Your "private property" ends at the soles of my feet.... what I have in my pocket is NOT ANY OF YOUR BUSINESS OR CONCERN, PERIOD.... It is MY PRIVATE PROPERTY (your private property rights do NOT nullify mine)...... My RIGHTS are intact EVERYWHERE I AM...