Do you still conceal carry into posted "No Carry" businesses?

[corneileous]

Do you still conceal carry into posted "No Carry" businesses?

If you are for people's rights why are you willing to disrespect the private property rights of others?

Private property, I will happily respect. Public property on the other hand, why should I respect their rights if they won't respect mine?? Funny, I think I stated that once before.

And just exactly what is a REAL criminal since breaking the law is still breaking the law whether that law be trespass or robbery. Or are you saying that breaking some laws (disrespecting some rights) is just not as bad or as important as breaking other laws (disrespecting other rights)? Are you saying you get to decide which laws (rights) can be ignored because you think they aren't as important as other laws (rights) are?

Seriously?? Well, I don't know about you but, I would be more concerned about the real threat.

But I'm curious. Since you stated earlier that if you had a business that you would happily welcome defensive carry in your store. With that being said, why are you arguing somone else's argument? I mean, I know this is a discussion forum but, why?

By the way there are lots of people who think the right to keep and bear arms should not exist but that doesn't make that the truth.

You're right, that is very true. But let's be reasonable. Do you really think it's the same thing to make that kind of comparison between the right to bear arms and the right to be denied from your right to self defense?

Why do you think you get to decide what method of enforcing private property rights is acceptable?

Again, we are not talking about private property rights.

But to answer your question, I don't carry in a no guns establishment for their protection for them or their property. I carry to protect myself from the REAL criminal that disregards his sign.

Isn't that the same attitude of anti gunners who want to decide what methods of keeping and bearing arms are acceptable?

Again, no. I don't think the above quoted question is the same thing. Once again you are trying to compare two things that shouldn't oughtta be compared.

By the way.... this forum is private property but is open to the public. When you register (come in the door/want to use the property) you agree to abide by the rules of this forum. If you don't abide by those rules the property owner or his representative will ban you (throw you out) and this forum will no longer be open to you yet it will still be............. open to the public.

You're right. But...... I don't have to worry about getting shot or mugged in here. See the difference?

Once again, you are comparing stuff that has no business being compared.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[corneileous]

How the property is used is exactly what the property owner is doing when he exercises his private property right to deny access/entry to anyone who is carrying a gun.

Yet, they let real thugs, murderers crooks and robbers in there everyday be cause their signs don't do jack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
You seem to think that because you can get away with it then it is OK just because you got away with it.

Well, in a way, yeah. Since we are not carrying in there to just basically say eff you to his sign, what he doesn't know isn't going to matter.

Says the guy who says he is for the rights of other people but will disrespect the rights of others as long as they don't find out.

Originally posted by Bikenut:
And that is the attitude of someone who has no respect for rights or the law. Which is what I have been saying all along.

I have respect for the law and people's rights but, why should we respect his rule if he can't respect our right to defend ourselves? Why should we respect what he wants if he can't ensure our safety from the real criminals that should be the ones he needs to worried about in the first place?

The thing is while you have the right to bear arms you do not have any right what so ever to be on/in the private property owned by someone else. Remember that "open to the public" really means "Open to only those individual members of the public who obey the rules for using my property. All others will be thrown out because they have no right to be here in the first place. But I know some will disrespect my rights by... sneaking... their guns in and woe be to them if they get caught." And those who .. sneak ... their gun in know all that because the reason they... sneak.. their gun in is to not get caught and thrown out.

Originally posted by Bikenut:
And if you get caught you will discover the property owner will enforce his rule. Actually you already know he will enforce his rule which is why you know you have to ... sneak... your gun in or you will get caught and suffer the consequences. You can talk all you want but the plain fact is by having to .. sneak.. your gun in you already know you are doing wrong.

Then I'll leave.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See? You already know you are doing wrong because you know you have to leave if you get caught.

Now here is a question for you. If you are so firm in your belief about carrying your gun why are you spending money at an anti gun establishment helping that anti gunner property owner make so much profit he can open another store and ban guns there too? Why are you helping the very thing you are against?

 

[Bikenut]

Why do I argue in favor of private property rights?

Because if we disrespect the rights of others while demanding... or sneaking... our rights be respected then we are nothing more than hypocrites. Hypocrites that the anti gunners can show have no respect for the rights of others and then come back with the argument of:

Why should we respect the right to bear arms when gun carriers don't respect our property rights?

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
How the property is used is exactly what the property owner is doing when he exercises his private property right to deny access/entry to anyone who is carrying a gun.

Yet, they let real thugs, murderers crooks and robbers in there everyday be cause their signs don't do jack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, they let all sorts of criminals in... even trespassers.
/sarcasm

 

[corneileous]

Says the guy who says he is for the rights of other people but will disrespect the rights of others as long as they don't find out.

It sure is funny how you're more interested in my wish to protect myself rather than the dude that goes in there to hold up the place. Why is that? I'm not going in there to inflict harm. He is.

The thing is while you have the right to bear arms you do not have any right what so ever to be on/in the private property owned by someone else. Remember that "open to the public" really means "Open to only those individual members of the public who obey the rules for using my property. All others will be thrown out because they have no right to be here in the first place. But I know some will disrespect my rights by... sneaking... their guns in and woe be to them if they get caught." And those who .. sneak ... their gun in know all that because the reason they... sneak.. their gun in is to not get caught and thrown out.

And neither does the robber but he does it anyway.

Oh but we don't care about the robber. We just care about the one defending himself when the walks in, right?

See? You already know you are doing wrong because you know you have to leave if you get caught.

Well, I wouldn't necessarily say I was doing wrong as compared to the other, but if that's his wish, I'll leave.

Now here is a question for you. If you are so firm in your belief about carrying your gun why are you spending money at an anti gun establishment helping that anti gunner property owner make so much profit he can open another store and ban guns there too? Why are you helping the very thing you are against?

If there was places that I didn't have to go out of my way to go to, I would happily shop where my defensive carry is welcome. But if I have to inconvenience myself a great deal to shop elsewhere, I'm not going to stop carrying just for them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[corneileous]

Yeah, they let all sorts of criminals in... even trespassers.
/sarcasm

Oh my!

Sad thing about it, the one who is just "trespassing" for protection isn't going to stick a gun in your face and demand you empty the register. Maybe even shoot the cashier and somebody else in the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

Originally posted by Bikenut:
Now here is a question for you. If you are so firm in your belief about carrying your gun why are you spending money at an anti gun establishment helping that anti gunner property owner make so much profit he can open another store and ban guns there too? Why are you helping the very thing you are against?

If there was places that I didn't have to go out of my way to go to, I would happily shop where my defensive carry is welcome. But if I have to inconvenience myself a great deal to shop elsewhere, I'm not going to stop carrying just for them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And there you have it folks. Convenience is more important than the rights of others. Got it.

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
Yeah, they let all sorts of criminals in... even trespassers.
/sarcasm

Oh my!

Sad thing about it, the one who is just "trespassing" for protection isn't going to stick a gun in your face and demand you empty the register. Maybe even shoot the cashier and somebody else in the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just because one crime is more heinous than the other doesn't mean it is OK to commit the less heinous crime nor does "just" committing the less heinous crime make one any less a criminal.

The definition of a criminal is one who breaks the law. It doesn't say only those who hurt people when they break the law are criminals...

 

[corneileous]

Do you still conceal carry into posted "No Carry" businesses?

And there you have it folks. Convenience is more important than the rights of others. Got it.

And see folks, mr Bikenut is only concerned about us carrying defensively in a no guns zone rather than the the dude that comes into rob it. Fascinating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[corneileous]

Just because one crime is more heinous than the other doesn't mean it is OK to commit the less heinous crime nor does "just" committing the less heinous crime make one any less a criminal.

The definition of a criminal is one who breaks the law. It doesn't say only those who hurt people when they break the law are criminals...

Moot point but whatever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
And there you have it folks. Convenience is more important than the rights of others. Got it.

And see folks, mr Bikenut is only concerned about us carrying defensively in a no guns zone rather than the the dude that comes into rob it. Fascinating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Incorrect. I am concerned with the hypocrisy of those who say they support the right to bear arms while disrespecting the property rights of others.

But then those who are only concerned with their own personal convenience won't bother with a paltry thing like the rights of others. They will just... sneak... their gun in using all manner of excuses to justify... sneaking... their gun in never understanding that if you have to ... sneak... your gun in then you know you are already doing something wrong.

 

[corneileous]

Do you still conceal carry into posted "No Carry" businesses?

Incorrect.

Sure seems that way. You sure are expending a lot of commentary arguing against it.

Iam concerned with the hypocrisy of those who say they support the right to bear arms while disrespecting the property rights of others.

Yeah, as you should be to those that think it's ok to piss on our rights to defend ourselves. Just because they have the right to put up a sign in hopes that guns, good or bad will stay out of their store, doesn't mean that right is justified with good cause.

But then those who are only concerned with their own personal convenience won't bother with a paltry thing like the rights of others.

Hey, there the ones who put the signs up, not me.

They will just... sneak... their gun in using all manner of excuses to justify... sneaking... their gun in never understanding that if you have to ... sneak... your gun in then you know you are already doing something wrong.

If I have to sneak my gun in there to ensure my safety since the establishment only relies on a sign then so be it.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blueshell]

I have Concealed Carry Permits in four states ....All require that I carry concealed. How is that sneaking?

According to Bikenut if you don't run up to everyone you meet all day everyday and yell "I HAVE A GUN" right in their face then you're 'sneaking'.

Bikenut doesn't know what the words "private" or "descrete" mean.

 

[Blueshell]

How the property is used is exactly what the property owner is doing when he exercises his private property right to deny access/entry to anyone who is carrying a gun.

The property is used in the same way with or without a gun.

 

[corneileous]

Why do I argue in favor of private property rights?

Because if we disrespect the rights of others while demanding... or sneaking... our rights be respected then we are nothing more than hypocrites. Hypocrites that the anti gunners can show have no respect for the rights of others and then come back with the argument of:

Why should we respect the right to bear arms when gun carriers don't respect our property rights?

I guess I get what you're doing for the most part but again, why are you so concerned with this one little aspect? You act like it's a sin that every day, legal gun owners carry in these places unnoticed, not harming a soul. Just going about their business.

Man those people are bad. Can't believe they would do such a thing.

Are you advocating that it's ok to disarm the good people in gun free stores when the bad people abuse them day in and day out? All in the name of respecting their ludicrous rules in hopes that no one will carry in their store?

I still think it's very comical yet disturbing that you keep putting people like me in the same boat as thugs, muggers, murderers and robbers.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

I guess I get what you're doing for the most part but again, why are you so concerned with this one little aspect? You act like it's a sin that every day, legal gun owners carry in these places unnoticed, not harming a soul. Just going about their business.

Man those people are bad. Can't believe they would do such a thing.

Are you advocating that it's ok to disarm the good people in gun free stores when the bad people abuse them day in and day out? All in the name of respecting their ludicrous rules in hopes that no one will carry in their store?

I still think it's very comical yet disturbing that you keep putting people like me in the same boat as thugs, muggers, murderers and robbers.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of some folks expecting their right to bear arms be respected while not only intentionally disrespecting, even bragging about, disrespecting the property rights of others.

When a person... sneaks.. their gun into/onto private property where the owner has exercised his right to deny entry to folks he doesn't want there they are saying that not only do they have the right to bear arms but they also have taken away the owner's right to control who is allowed on/in his property. In short they are saying the owner doesn't have control of who is allowed on/in his property .... they do.

I am pointing out that wanting to be able to defend one's self when in a no gun establishment becomes nothing more than an excuse to justify disrespecting the rights of others for the sake of mere shopping convenience when folks have no right to even be in that no gun establishment in the first place and it is obvious they can protect themselves more effectively by not going there and shopping elsewhere.

I am pointing out that it is ludicrous to rail against businesses being anti gun while actively supporting that anti gun business by spending money there increasing the profits of that anti gun business and helping them to open yet another anti gun business.

I find it disturbing that folks would operate on the idea that being "just" a little bit of a criminal makes it OK to break the law because the law they break for their own convenience isn't as big and bad as some other laws. The "I'm not as bad a criminal as that other guy because my crime isn't a terrible one like his." rationale doesn't change the fact that those who break the law are still criminals.

 

[corneileous]

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of some folks expecting their right to bear arms be respected while not only intentionally disrespecting, even bragging about, disrespecting the property rights of others.

When a person... sneaks.. their gun into/onto private property where the owner has exercised his right to deny entry to folks he doesn't want there they are saying that not only do they have the right to bear arms but they also have taken away the owner's right to control who is allowed on/in his property. In short they are saying the owner doesn't have control of who is allowed on/in his property .... they do.

I am pointing out that wanting to be able to defend one's self when in a no gun establishment becomes nothing more than an excuse to justify disrespecting the rights of others for the sake of mere shopping convenience when folks have no right to even be in that no gun establishment in the first place and it is obvious they can protect themselves more effectively by not going there and shopping elsewhere.

I am pointing out that it is ludicrous to rail against businesses being anti gun while actively supporting that anti gun business by spending money there increasing the profits of that anti gun business and helping them to open yet another anti gun business.

I find it disturbing that folks would operate on the idea that being "just" a little bit of a criminal makes it OK to break the law because the law they break for their own convenience isn't as big and bad as some other laws. The "I'm not as bad a criminal as that other guy because my crime isn't a terrible one like his." rationale doesn't change the fact that those who break the law are still criminals.

I'm starting to find this conversation with you about your opinion supporting these bozo's rights with gun free zones as just as ludicrous.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of some folks expecting their right to bear arms be respected while not only intentionally disrespecting, even bragging about, disrespecting the property rights of others.

When a person... sneaks.. their gun into/onto private property where the owner has exercised his right to deny entry to folks he doesn't want there they are saying that not only do they have the right to bear arms but they also have taken away the owner's right to control who is allowed on/in his property. In short they are saying the owner doesn't have control of who is allowed on/in his property .... they do.

I am pointing out that wanting to be able to defend one's self when in a no gun establishment becomes nothing more than an excuse to justify disrespecting the rights of others for the sake of mere shopping convenience when folks have no right to even be in that no gun establishment in the first place and it is obvious they can protect themselves more effectively by not going there and shopping elsewhere.

I am pointing out that it is ludicrous to rail against businesses being anti gun while actively supporting that anti gun business by spending money there increasing the profits of that anti gun business and helping them to open yet another anti gun business.

I find it disturbing that folks would operate on the idea that being "just" a little bit of a criminal makes it OK to break the law because the law they break for their own convenience isn't as big and bad as some other laws. The "I'm not as bad a criminal as that other guy because my crime isn't a terrible one like his." rationale doesn't change the fact that those who break the law are still criminals.

I'm starting to find this conversation with you about your opinion supporting these bozo's rights with gun free zones as just as ludicrous.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not the least bit surprised you would consider other people who have rights you don't like as being bozos. The only rights that matter are the one's you like right? Have a nice day.

 

[corneileous]

Do you still conceal carry into posted "No Carry" businesses?

I am not the least bit surprised you would consider other people who have rights you don't like as being bozos. The only rights that matter are the one's you like right? Have a nice day.

Wow. Still thinkin' this is a personal matter about what I like versus the world..... Un-freaking-believable.

Yeah, you keep right on with your tunnel vision and only viewing from the perspective about disruption of rights and not the REAL picture about letting business owners have a right that shouldn't even be a RIGHT in the first place!!

I'm going to keep carrying my protection in these stores that invite robberies with their "Violence Welcome" sign. Don't like it? Tough [emoji90]....




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk