Ikea

[I DOUBT IT]

The spousal unit and I went to Ikea last weekend and, though we've been there a bunch of times, that was the first time I saw the gun sticker with the universal NYET over it and the words "Weapon-free zone" under it at the main entrance.

It didn't change a single thing: I still carried my XD right into the store as always.

Where I live, these sorts of signs are a mere suggestion (to criminals, that here is possibly a good place to find victims), and I cheerfully ignore them. If somehow the presence of my weapon becomes known and somebody starts to whine about it, I'll just leave when/if asked as per state law.

No problem.

I don't feel the need to deprive myself of kickass Scandinavian designed products simply because the retailer is a wuss.

 

[cmj0968]

I've done the same on many occasions, including Ikea. I don't pay any attention to the signage. They will have to ask me to leave if it's that important to them.

 

[Just4Fun23]

I am pro carry, but gleefully ignoring a businesses request to run THEIR business as they legally see fit is the same as denying someone their rights in any other form. Why not ask the store manager if they will allow it? You never know who else is pro 2A and avoid forcing someone to tolerate your rights over their right. That's my opinion and you can take it or not, but to cheerfully ignore someone in their stance is disrespectful.

 

[cmj0968]

I agree, it is disrespectful, but I don't care. So is demanding that I give up my right in order to business with someone. I recognize that it seems harsh. I'm just tired of tip toeing around because of someone else. Maybe my approach and feelings will change, but today, the burden is on someone else. Sure, I could take my business elsewhere, but I choose my own approach. If my wife decides to go to the mall, I choose to go with her. I'm not going to let a sign in the window, that the boogie man will ignore, deter me from doing the right thing. Protecting my wife. Bad people do bad things, regardless of the sign in the window. I really do appreciate the feedback though. Listening to the views of others helps me keep my feet on the ground.

 

[Bigcarlover]

I am pro carry, but gleefully ignoring a businesses request to run THEIR business as they legally see fit is the same as denying someone their rights in any other form. Why not ask the store manager if they will allow it? You never know who else is pro 2A and avoid forcing someone to tolerate your rights over their right. That's my opinion and you can take it or not, but to cheerfully ignore someone in their stance is disrespectful.

I'll follow the sign if the law requires me to. I really don't care about being disrespectful at the cost of my loved ones. There going to protect them for me. It's disrespectful to me to take away my ability to protect my children.

 

[Marslog]

If it isn't a 30.06 sign , I don't pay it any attention.

 

[Just4Fun23]

No I agree it's not cool that they post a sign telling me they wish I set aside my rights and yes a criminal will ignore the sign and do as they please for a lack of value in regard to other people and their rights and wishes. That is why I had ask the store manager or the owner of a business. Help change minds and educate those against the 2A and our right to carry. Pissing them off blatantly ignoring their stance only solidifies the opposition. For me personally my employer, here in anti2A CA, has a steadfast rule against except for me. I have an allowance because I approached the situation with respect and reason. I hate that our rights are dictated to us but in this world the unjust seems to think they are above the rest. I am just pro reasoning and educating those with a misunderstanding of my intentions. You have your reasons and ways to reach your objective I have mine. I respect your choices as I hope you would mine.

 

[jg1967]

I'll follow the sign if the law requires me to. I really don't care about being disrespectful at the cost of my loved ones. There going to protect them for me. It's disrespectful to me to take away my ability to protect my children.

The signs don't work as we all know and no, they are not about property rights at all. They are just a way some lawmakers allow and encourage businesses to make CCW impractical since they can not ouright ban it. Just MY 2 cents.

Personally I follow State laws and don't carry where prohibited but I have to ask how that can NOT be considered a very very clear infringement? Exactly the sort of infringement the second talks about. Infringement was a word choosen very carefully to make sure they were not referring to outright bans but crafty attempts to encroach on the basic right to carrry. They knew sooner or later somebody would do exactly what our lawmakers have been doing.

 

[UDoggie]

I agree, it is disrespectful, but I don't care. So is demanding that I give up my right in order to business with someone.

So you are saying that on my property, you have the right to be armed regardless of my posted, written conditions of entry?

You can enter given my conditions, or choose not to enter. If you don't like the conditions, don't enter.

I do have the right to put conditions on your ability to do business with me. You might not like them, and you might choose not to do business with me because of it, but you have no "right" to do business with me.

Otherwise, in many states, it's criminal trespass, and you could be arrested. (I live in a state where the signs have legal standing.)

UD

 

[Just4Fun23]

I am not sure who thought the signs would be about property rights as opposed to the rights of a business owner, who legally has the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason, letting people know before they enter what is permitted at this location (think of no shoe no shirts no service signs). We don't know why they decided to prohibit weapons. I agree any limitations put on us is an infringement, but I can see places being weapons free as a reasonable request for the greater good. It's just that there are some people that feel they are above the rest and they can do whatever they want, whether or not their intentions are good or not. They will justify it to fit their wants. This isn't a safe world never has been never will be....it's how nature works. Lawmakers only kid themselves thinking people will conform and evil won't take advantage of the laws to get their way. The clueless will always try to stop the bad by punishing the good.


It's my thoughts and views. No matter if anyone else feels I am right or wrong. I am not a biblethumper preaching gospel or any religious views nor am I someone that will submit to a government intent to enslave me as a subject without rights. I will not force someone to sacrifice their rights to feel safe for my rights to be safe without doing my best to find agreeable terms.

 

[gunshrink]

My take is you don't want my gun you don't want my money - Their stuff if ok but not earth shattering so I just stay away from these places and spend my money otherwise. We are getting a Cosco in our town and again bad gun policy so they simply won't get my money. The only exceptions are important places that I have no choice like my medical provider and the health club across the street from my office that is the only way I would get to workout. Not that I am just some gun nut but I figure that if they are this off track on carry what else are they clueless about - and that does scare me.

nuff said

 

[sdprof]

These discussions most always seem to get into the "property rights" of the business owner. Yes, the businesses we're discussing are private property, as opposed to the public properties that the federal and state governments impose restrictions on (mostly infringing for no good reason.)

But, my take on this is that a business, by opening its doors to the public, is not the same as the private property where I live. If I didn't invite you, or you're not delivering a product I ordered, you have no reason to be on my door step. The stores, restaurants, and all have said, loudly and publicly, "Come on in, we want your money." In that vein, so long as you are not doing anything illegal, there should be no restrictions on your entrance to the business.

SD law seems to recognize this, in its affirmative defense against trespassing charges.

22-35-7. Affirmative defenses to unlawful occupancy. It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under § 22-35-5 or 22-35-6 that:
(1) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the person complied with all lawful conditions imposed concerning access to or the privilege of remaining on the premises; or

 

[The_Outlaw]

Any private business has the right to post a gunbuster sign if they choose to do so, and I have the right take my hard earned $$'s someplace else. That's why I refuse to even shop at Ikea.....screw them.

 

[jg1967]

These discussions most always seem to get into the "property rights" of the business owner. Yes, the businesses we're discussing are private property, as opposed to the public properties that the federal and state governments impose restrictions on (mostly infringing for no good reason.)

But, my take on this is that a business, by opening its doors to the public, is not the same as the private property where I live. If I didn't invite you, or you're not delivering a product I ordered, you have no reason to be on my door step. The stores, restaurants, and all have said, loudly and publicly, "Come on in, we want your money." In that vein, so long as you are not doing anything illegal, there should be no restrictions on your entrance to the business.

SD law seems to recognize this, in its affirmative defense against trespassing charges.

Some States give businesses the legal option of denying CCW and some don't. So obviously not everybody agrees that they should have this dubious pseudo safety right. I am really getting tired of this "Why can I post a sign? Because I can!" answers. We're gun people here and still some pound around endlessly on a right that doesn't make them any safer at all, doesn't work and makes legal CCW rather impractical. All the anti crowd needs to do is allow businesses to inlcude their parking lots, allow insurance companies to raise rates for businesses that do not post and schwupp all places will be posted and you can't go anywhere anymore carrying a gun. Goodbye CCW.

Besides what is this fascination with what I have hanging on my belt? What does it hurt anybody if I don't use it? Why are we endlessly fiddling with who can carry what and where instead of simply punishing the people that use their guns to hurt people? We can't prevent anybody from going into a place armed and shooting everybody inside even if we plaster the entire doors with gunbuster signs - but we certainly could punish that person.

 

[Firefighterchen]

The 2a in the constitution limits the government, not the people. So the business in no way is infringing your Right, since you don't have that Right on their property.

If they have a sign posted, they have said, "if you don't have a gun, come on in, spend your money." They didn't say, "everybody is welcome."

Disrespecting someone's property rights while complaining about your rights being disrespected is just plain hypocritical. On top of that, spending money there is funding an anti gun establishment. Sounds like a lose lose situation.

 

[CapGun]

I am pro carry, but gleefully ignoring a businesses request to run THEIR business as they legally see fit is the same as denying someone their rights in any other form. Why not ask the store manager if they will allow it? You never know who else is pro 2A and avoid forcing someone to tolerate your rights over their right. That's my opinion and you can take it or not, but to cheerfully ignore someone in their stance is disrespectful.

DON'T ASK DON'T TELL! If no law is being broken "no foul no harm" When that store puts a sign right next to the "Victim Sign" stating that they are completely responsible for your safety even from criminal activity then maybe you have a point. Nah! Then I will have to wait for store security to then respond and then call the police. That work for you?

 

[jg1967]

The 2a in the constitution limits the government, not the people. So the business in no way is infringing your Right, since you don't have that Right on their property.

If they have a sign posted, they have said, "if you don't have a gun, come on in, spend your money." They didn't say, "everybody is welcome."

Disrespecting someone's property rights while complaining about your rights being disrespected is just plain hypocritical. On top of that, spending money there is funding an anti gun establishment. Sounds like a lose lose situation.

Not so sure about the purpose of the second, I don't really see where it says that, actually? Seems to me like it limits, period.

I can't quite see how exactly carrying a gun is an issue per se, shouldn't that be using a gun instead? Why that focus on an object rather than the action?

 

[Just4Fun23]

DON'T ASK DON'T TELL! If no law is being broken "no foul no harm" When that store puts a sign right next to the "Victim Sign" stating that they are completely responsible for your safety even from criminal activity then maybe you have a point. Nah! Then I will have to wait for store security to then respond and then call the police. That work for you?

How does don't ask don't tell fly with your GF/wife, or would you not do that to her out of respect?

Again you are doing what YOU want and forcing someone to go along. I am not saying run and tell the world look at me I have a gun, but try educating the antigun people why you choose to carry and want to carry there. If the the antigun people realize that, possibly some of their best friends or best customers, responsible people are carrying they will see the light. If you just do it without care to their wishes it could just push them to be more antigun and then even ban you from ever returning to that store, effectively taking your options away. Yes, yes you weren't going to spend your money there anyway...

I would rather see a sign say "no weapons permitted" than "we will assume anyone with a weapon has ontent to do harm and break the law so we will shoot first and after your dead wonder intent" because they got tired of criminals robbing them they finally ran out got a gun have no training and just assume anyone pro gun is a criminal. My thoughts may be way out in the north 40, but my approach has so far worked for me in most (not all) instances. So it's my preferred method that I obviously advocate to others.

 

[I DOUBT IT]

I sincerely appreciate all the input and the various interesting viewpoints being expressed. Nevertheless, I make my own choices for my own reasons and I won't bother to bore all you nice folks with the details.

 

[Nightmare45]

Texas requires the posting of a 30-06 sign very specific in spanish and english, no sign not my problem, the day they post the specific sign I will cease shopping with them. Again please post you state of residence so when a response is given you can get a better answer.