Ignoring Gun Buster signage.
- Thread starter Ruger357SP101
- Start date
- Status
Ruger357SP101
Banned
Isnt it funny you ran to find out when I started and stopped but not your comrades? ;-)
Bias much?
pyth0n
New member
The sign is the first reasonable notice. It does not have to be verbal and the owner, manager etc. does not have to ask a second time.
Ruger357SP101
Banned
IN other words in old N's world here the property owner has no rights and Navy and his commie buddies are free to disregard the property owners wishes for HIS business.
Just the type we want running our country ;-)
It would be sort of sad if it werent so ironic given that Navy and his kind would whine at such a high pitch as to break every glass in the house if anyone infringed on a single right of theirs on THEIR private property.
Maybe one of you who live down the road from these commies could park one of your old cars in these guys front yards and leave it there....I mean, since a property owner has no rights according to these nuts.
Seeya
New member
I now feel sorry for you that this is your life and you have nothing better to do. Because this has been a waste of all involved's time, non productive and not helpful to anyone.
And so I encourage everyone to shun you as I will be doing from now on.
Good Day and May God Look after you.
The Only Easy Day Was Yesterday
Punch
New member
No, only wrong in Ohio (and some others). Several states, including my own, specify what constitutes legal signage. Signs that do not meet these rules are NULL and VOID. In addition, a private property owner is not allowed to restrict the possession of a handgun carried by a CHP holder in a vehicle on any property accessible by the public as long as the weapon stays in the car. The same goes for an employer. An employer may only restrict the possession of a CHP holders firearm in company vehicles. They have no right to restrict the possession of a firearm by any CHP holding employee in a private vehicle parked on any lot accessible by the public. In Nebraska, this rule is by default. In other states such as Oklahoma, and I believe Florida, the rule is specifically mandated by law.
To give an example of how important firearm rights are in my state (as opposed to private property rights), owning and carrying of firearms are protected by the FIRST amendment of our State Constitution. The CHP law states that a concealed handgun may be carried by a CHP holder ANYWHERE IN THE STATE that is not specifically prohibited by law. The law is pretty clear where you cannot carry, and who can tell you where you can and cannot carry. In addition, state law specifically preempts all local laws and ordinances as regards a CHP holder, including all laws or ordinances regarding owning, possessing, transporting, registering and carrying of concealed firearms. These kind of protection are NOT given to property owners, and in fact what you can do you your supposed private property is HEAVILY restricted by laws, regulations and ordinances; at the state level, county level, municipal level, and even by homeowners associations. It would seem to me that gun owners have many rights in this state, while private property owners have little right. A right is hardly a right when nearly anyone can infringe upon it.
Punch
New member
Now you have made me feel guilty. It is Lent, and I really should not enjoy toying with idiots as much as I have in this thread. Thank you for providing me with an example of how I should have handled this. I will try to follow it.
Ruger357SP101
Banned
Hilarious since I see that your fat rump is sitting behind a PC screen right now posting here just like I am ;-)
Sure its been helpful
Did you make the naive mistake of thinking that the motivation was to change anyones mind here?
Or is it that youre so naive you think no one else is reading here?
Theres more going on here than you know.
Who cares ?
No one asked you to post here, dude.
Turn your phasers to 'shun' ;-)
Ruger357SP101
Banned
Uh...yeah....you disagree then prove me right....ok :wacko:
Fine.
Did you somehow MISS the point I made that wasnt about the content of a sign but was more about the POSTED SIGN itself?
Which Im not talking about....never have been.
What you do in a parking lot has little to do with walking into the building.
Not going to kill many people in the store with the gun locked up in the trunk, are we?
And you are MISSING the POINT of this discussion entirely which ISNT about the LAW, but is about gun owners bitching about their rights being respected while THEY disrespect the rights of businesses.
To HELL with the laws....do YOU honor the business owners RIGHT to say NO GUNS on his property or not?
If you dont, then youre as bad as the few others here who dont.
Dont whine like a spanked girl when YOUR rights are infringed if you cant respect someone elses.
Hmmm.
So shouldnt you be complaining about those places you cant lawfully carry?
What right does the STATE have to prohibit CCW if private property owners are denied that right?
You dont find that contradictory?
And as I said somewhere here, since private property owners apparently dont have many rights, I guess we can just park our damned cars in their front yards whenever we want to...I mean, no one is being 'hurt', right?
Punch
New member
Well, I am rather large, but not one that makes threats. The point was that you make a lot of assumptions about people while knowing very little about them. What one posts on an internet forum is not the big picture. If I were to judge you by what you write, I would think that you were a pathetic creature living in your mom's basement with an IQ of less than room temperature. I would guess that your parents were related other than by marriage and that the only way that you could reach climax with a woman is if she says "no daddy, please not that again". However, I do NOT know you other than from your posts, and only on this particular subject at that, so I CANNOT say with any certainty that any of the impressions that I have of you are in any way accurate. Consequently, I would not accuse you of such.
As to respecting rights, I do not believe in "rights". A person has only the rights that they are prepared to secure by force. This applies to people as well as governments. So, if a property owner is prepared to keep me off his property by force, I pretty much have a choice to make. I will probably follow his wishes unless there is something that I REALLY need to do on his property (seldom the case). However, if his entire effort to disarm me is to post some sign that is not even legally posted under the laws of this state, I feel no compelling need to pay much attention to his wishes. I assume that he wants me to buy something, and that is what I am there to do, not discuss his opinion on gun ownership and concealed carry. I believe that a person only has the "right" to tell me what to do if he has the means to enforce what he is telling me. Otherwise, he can pretty well kiss my hind end. I really do not consider this at all hypocritical since I also do not believe that I have any right to tell anyone else what to do unless I feel strongly enough about it to force him to do it, possibly at my peril.
Now, my impression of you is that your seemingly small mind is likely to be unable to understand the above concept, and that you would have to have someone tell you what to think about this since it seems that you really like to have people tell you what to do and have all kinds of laws to follow. However, as I said above, I really do not know you at all, and I may be surprised to even receive an intelligent, thoughtful, and coherent response from you. You may even display some higher wisdom (although it seems to be hidden up to this point). In any case, if you do not hear from me in the next few hours, it is not because I have tired from toying with you. It is just that I have laughed so hard that my stomach hurts and I really need to lay down and rest. And besides, I did promise Seeya that I would follow his example and refrain from this activity.
Ruger357SP101
Banned
No, youre just assuming things you dont know.
WELL BEFORE you chimed in here friend, this discussion was going on in a few different threads.
That you missed it doesnt negate that fact.
Thats pretty ironic because with a few of you guys Im picturing overweight, yellow toothed, middle aged, backwoods hicks wanting to shoot up the woods with machine guns because its their 'right' to hunt with a full auto weapon...hyuck :wacko:
Close?
Ruger357SP101
Banned
Thats pretty good because what youre saying in essence is that you can trample anyone elses rights UNLESS they are willing and able to stop you with force.
We REALLY need your lunatic fringe sort running this country, for sure..../sarcasm.
The Realist
New member
Ruger357SP101
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Realist View Post
Rugerboy You are ignorant.I stand by this. Ignorant = lacking in knowledge
uh huh.
Just slap me awake when youre done defending your abuse of someone elses rights. Try not abusing the rights of the rest of us who choose to defend ourselves.
Quote:
Have you even left your little puddle of muck you live in to experience any other part of the world. This is a global forum and you are trying to impose your own little narrow minded view on everyone else.
Sorry pal, irrelevant. Very relevant your view is not the world view. This is a forum for the exchange of ideas and viewpoints. Yours included. But not everyone has to agree with you or they are automatically wrong.
The world is the world...it doesnt matter where you trample someone elses rights...its STILL WRONG. Correct it is WRONG to trample on the rights of those who chose to carry for self defense.
Quote:
Take a look at California for example where a business may not post a no CCW sign at all. PERIOD.There a business is NOT private property.
Actually it IS private property because a PRIVATE entity OWNS it. Wrong ! Walmart, Target, Home Depot et al are not privately owned. They are publically traded. Your house is private because only you own it.
That CA ignores the rights of the individual in the matter doesnt change that fact.
You know whats funny?
If CAs law affected YOU adversely youd be having a **** fit over it....just admit it.
Quote:
If you are open to the public that means the whole public. You surrendered your private property rights when you accepted a business license Unless you are a private membership business your little rule means nothing.
Well sorry for your luck but most of the United States of America isnt like Kommifornia. Wrong again. Sorry for you to live in Ohio that allows a business to trample your rights.
And thank God for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Realist View Post
Rugerboy You are ignorant.I stand by this. Ignorant = lacking in knowledge
uh huh.
Just slap me awake when youre done defending your abuse of someone elses rights. Try not abusing the rights of the rest of us who choose to defend ourselves.
Quote:
Have you even left your little puddle of muck you live in to experience any other part of the world. This is a global forum and you are trying to impose your own little narrow minded view on everyone else.
Sorry pal, irrelevant. Very relevant your view is not the world view. This is a forum for the exchange of ideas and viewpoints. Yours included. But not everyone has to agree with you or they are automatically wrong.
The world is the world...it doesnt matter where you trample someone elses rights...its STILL WRONG. Correct it is WRONG to trample on the rights of those who chose to carry for self defense.
Quote:
Take a look at California for example where a business may not post a no CCW sign at all. PERIOD.There a business is NOT private property.
Actually it IS private property because a PRIVATE entity OWNS it. Wrong ! Walmart, Target, Home Depot et al are not privately owned. They are publically traded. Your house is private because only you own it.
That CA ignores the rights of the individual in the matter doesnt change that fact.
You know whats funny?
If CAs law affected YOU adversely youd be having a **** fit over it....just admit it.
Quote:
If you are open to the public that means the whole public. You surrendered your private property rights when you accepted a business license Unless you are a private membership business your little rule means nothing.
Well sorry for your luck but most of the United States of America isnt like Kommifornia. Wrong again. Sorry for you to live in Ohio that allows a business to trample your rights.
And thank God for that.
Ruger357SP101
Banned
WOW.
I guess I pegged you dead on target then.
Youre basically a closet felon who simply hasnt done the crime yet but clearly has thought about it enough.
I dont see a man with integrity here.
I see one who is only controlling himself because the two shotguns I have sitting by the bed and the 357 magnum on my hip might stop his ass dead in his tracks if he 'REALLY has need" of something on my property.
Frankly your actually scarier, in a demented sort of way, than the other guys here except for the cop killer from the other thread.
How about moving to Ohio?
I'll be the guy turning your ass into the authorities ;-)
Wrong.
He posted the sign for a reason. He CLEARLY doesnt want your business if you are carrying a gun...which based on what Im seeing from your posts is something you probably shouldnt lawfully be allowed to do.
You sound like an ex convict...or shortly to be an ex con.
Frankly your type is one reason I carry a gun, based on your own description.
So theres no such thing as honor and intregrity in your perverse little world...only the threat of lethal force keeps you from taking what another man owns from the sounds of it.
Contrary to what you learned in prison, the real world doesnt work like that here in America.
Ruger357SP101
Banned
I understand completely.
You are the sort that makes the rest of us carry guns because your type clearly has no grasp of another mans rights or property. Youve made that VERY clear here.
Thats pretty funny, you know?
Having someone who just admitted that he'll take what he wants from anyone he wants to take from unless they forcibly stop him.
I think you might want to seek professional help and not worry yourself too much about how intelligent you feel my responses are.
Please...let me know when youre done toying with me, friend.
Ruger357SP101
Banned
Then maybe you can explain the tow away signs at our walmarts here that indicate that it IS private property
Lakeland Man
New member
You're very close to being right. But to simplify things even further, look at it this way...There is a property. Either it is owned by the government (fed, state, county, city, etc) in which case it is public property, or it owned by a private entity (i.e. business, co-op, individual, etc) which makes it private property. A business property is still private property. It doesn't matter whether the public is invited or not.
Also, lets look at that concept, the invitation. If I bought a building on 5th Avenue in NYC (yeah, I;m a billionaire. LOL), that would be private property. I own that building. I have all the rights that any other property owner would have. So then I open my building and make it into a business. I invite the public in. I still have all the same rights as the property owner that I had yesterday before I opened my doors. I can ask them to leave and they have to comply or be charged with trespassing.
But lets look at the sidewalk outside my business. I don't own that space. That is owned by the City of New York. I can't forbid anyone from doing anything legal there. Someone can march, and carry signs, and stand on a box and extoll the evils of eating broccoli if they want. As long as they don't create a public nuisance, and don't block the entrance to my business, I can't do anything about it. I can ask them to leave and they can laugh in my face.
Now suppose the planets all aligned and NYC decided to allow the carrying of handguns. I have no say if someone carries on the sidewalk in front of my business. I don't own the sidewalk. But the minute they step foot in my business, I have a say in the matter.
Its a common misconception that a business is public property. But the reality is that it is still privately owned so it is private property.
Public property can also be divided up into categories (i.e. parks, public areas, military installations, etc) but in the eyes of the law, it is still public.
As I stated, I had to become very familiar with these distinctions when I was the Director of Security at that mall.
On a side note, the mall forbid the carry of weapons on the property. I would not shop there when I wasn't working for just that reason. About 2 years after I left that job and moved away, there was at least 1 shooting in the mall, and I think there may have been others. I don't remember. I have always wondered how the mall owners liked their policy after that.
Ruger357SP101
Banned
Great post.
Lakeland Man
New member
Here is the definition of Public Property:
Public property is property which is owned collectively by the people as a whole. This is in contrast to private property, owned by a individual person or artificial entities that represent the financial interests of persons, such as corporations.[1] State ownership, also called public ownership, government ownership or state property, are property interests that are vested in the state, rather than an individual or communities.[2]
Public property is property which is owned collectively by the people as a whole. This is in contrast to private property, owned by a individual person or artificial entities that represent the financial interests of persons, such as corporations.[1] State ownership, also called public ownership, government ownership or state property, are property interests that are vested in the state, rather than an individual or communities.[2]
- Status
