Looks as if Panera Bread has caved to MDA

[niceshootintex]

I left out all the useless drivel in your post about how you think you are correct and you think I am wrong and only left the important part where you think it is ok to just decide which rights are valid and which rights are not based upon your own selfish desire to not be inconvenienced. Because that really is what this discussion, and every other discussion on this topic you and I have had, is about.

And it is that attitude of "Hooray for my rights and to hell with the rights of others when those rights prevent me from getting my way." that is the biggest problem in our country today.

And you use the mental masturbatory gymnastics of sanctimoniously equating sneaking your gun in where you are not allowed to with the right to self defense never understanding that the private property owner isn't saying you are not allowed to defend yourself. He is saying you are not allowed to be on/in his property in the first place. You still have the right to defend yourself ... just take your right to self defense, your gun, your money, and your person somewhere else because you have no right, nor do you have permission, to be on/in the property in the first place. And if you get caught.. sneaking.. your gun in that property owner will move you and your right to self defense on down the road to somewhere else using the trespass laws to enforce it.

And it IS sneaking your gun in when you know the property owner's rules/policies deny permission to enter to those who carry guns but you make sure that no one can see you are .. sneaking .. your gun in because, as you are so fond of saying, "concealed means concealed". After all, if you weren't afraid of being caught you wouldn't worry about "concealed means concealed" but would man up and either open carry where legal or flat out tell that property owner he can't stop you from carrying. But then you know exactly what would happen if you did that so you.... sneak... your gun in.

Oh....and the private property owner of a business open to the public has just as much power to deny entry to a person carrying a gun as does a private property residence owner. Check the trespass laws of your state. Also check the protected classes of individuals laws in your state and you will discover that gun carriers are not one of those protected classes.

One more time... neither you, I, or anyone has the right to be on/in the private property of an establishment that is open to the public. All you, me, or anyone, has is an invitation to enter that property contingent upon agreeing to abide by any and all rules/policies of the property owner. Get caught breaking those rules/policies and your invitation is revoked resulting in being kicked out. But then you know that will happen and that is why you ... sneak... your gun in.

Just because you personally don't like a right doesn't make it any less of a right. Listen, learn it, remember it.

I really don't understand your points at all. They just elude me. The only point I feel strongly enough about to comment on is your use of the word "sneak". Concealing is not sneaking, nor skulking, tip toeing, or treading lightly. It's just concealing. It's my right and no one, except my adherence to guidance on Federal properties, schools, and courts, is gun free zoning me out of that right. They have a right to a sign, they have a right to request my leaving as they would any customer, and my respect for their sign is about as strong as their respect for my 2A rights. Nada, niente, non existent. Like most areas of my life, they'll barely know I was even there.

The Place To Be

 

[corneileous]

I really don't understand your points at all. They just elude me. The only point I feel strongly enough about to comment on is your use of the word "sneak". Concealing is not sneaking, nor skulking, tip toeing, or treading lightly. It's just concealing. It's my right and no one, except my adherence to guidance on Federal properties, schools, and courts, is gun free zoning me out of that right. They have a right to a sign, they have a right to request my leaving as they would any customer, and my respect for their sign is about as strong as their respect for my 2A rights. Nada, niente, non existent. Like most areas of my life, they'll barely know I was even there.

The Place To Be

Good luck. This guy treats it like it's a mortal sin, we're taking Ten Commandments wrong, to the property owner to carry past that sign and will defend that right tooth and nail but yet he gets very angry when you remind him that this very right he argues for is what creates these "slaughter zones" in the first place.

 

[corneileous]

Well, the idea is to embarrass the person asking you if you carry a gun by revealing that you have a (non-existing) medical condition and carry a medical device for it. He/she won't ask further questions and will leave you alone.

I'd be all about embarrassing the crap out of that nosy, pannywaist owner but in order to embarrass him, they'd have to embarrass themselves first.

 

[corneileous]

I really don't understand your points at all. They just elude me. The only point I feel strongly enough about to comment on is your use of the word "sneak". Concealing is not sneaking, nor skulking, tip toeing, or treading lightly. It's just concealing.

Couldn't agree more. Yet he thinks we think of it as a game of not getting caught and that because it's forbidden is why we feel the need to.......... sneak............... our gun........ in.

It's my right and no one, except my adherence to guidance on Federal properties, schools, and courts, is gun free zoning me out of that right.

Ditto.

They have a right to a sign, they have a right to request my leaving as they would any customer, and my respect for their sign is about as strong as their respect for my 2A rights. Nada, niente, non existent.

Not according to him....lol.

That's exactly how I feel tho. How can they expect me to respect their rights when they could give a crap less about mine? But still, it's the whole principle of the matter that makes me wanna not unstrap before I go in there because they think all the legal gun owners and carriers are the problem. Just like not too long ago when that Cheesecake Factory restaurant kicked out several cops for carrying their service pistols of all people.

Like most areas of my life, they'll barely know I was even there.

The Place To Be

But still man, you're supposed to police yourself!!....

 

[niceshootintex]

Does anyone have any experience with being asked if they were carrying in a "no guns requested" zone? I avoid them because I won't spend my money there but if the wife wants me to hold her hand while we're antiquing or something, I just walk on in. I have never been bothered once in all my years of carrying. I don't tell my wife where to spend money and she does faithfully carry. I think it's more of a political statement than it is a rule imposition. Depends on the level of anti gunner idiocy in each case I suspect. Would they query a particularly loquacious gang member(s)? Naahhh.

The Place To Be

 

[Bikenut]

-snip-

But no, I don't recognize it because I think it's a right that doesn't deserve to exist. Because it's dangerous. -snip-

I quoted this because it is the heart of the matter. You don't recognize the right of the property owner to control his property by granting or denying permission to enter because YOU don't like it and think it is a right that doesn't deserve to exist. And to justify that you use the excuse that it is dangerous.

Well, whether you like it or not, that is exactly the same attitude AND excuse the anti gunners use to justify their desire to get rid of the right to bear arms.

And then there is this gem you posted:

Oh....and the private property owner of a business open to the public has just as much power to deny entry to a person carrying a gun as does a private property residence owner.

Duh, that's the problem that desperately needs to be outlawed.

*Edited* so that you wouldn't be able to use my words against me since you like doing that but, yes, of course they can. Problem is - which apparently keeps flying right over your head is that people aren't just walking right in of the guy's residence like they do at his store. Get it now??

I don't have to use your words against you. You do that just fine all by yourself since your own words show that you are willing to outlaw someone elses right just because you don't like it. Exactly the same attitude of an anti gunner willing to outlaw the right to bear arms.

And the thing that apparently keeps flying over your head is that just because the door is open doesn't mean everyone has permission to enter the store any more than if the door to your house is open means anyone has permission to enter. It is that "permission to enter" part that obviously is beyond your comprehension.

*Edited* to add:
I find it interesting that because I quoted your own words expressing your desire to outlaw a right those words, again your own words, will remain on the internet for all to see.

Originally posted by corneileous:
Just like last time and the time before that, that was only just me hoping you'd finally leave it alone for a change since we all know how vigilant you are about the right to create gun free zones and how hard you work to strike down all those that disagree.

You can stop responding any time you wish but your hoping I would leave it alone is going to be a very forlorn hope indeed since I will always defend rights. Even the rights you don't like and especially the rights I don't like ... because when it comes to rights all rights are important... not just the one's that happen to be popular.

Oh and you can spare us all the self-righteousness...

Self righteousness? Perhaps it would be helpful to go back and read your own posts for examples of self righteousness.

Oh, and why do you keep using the word "sneaking"?

Because "sneak" or "sneaking" is the appropriate word to describe carrying a gun in a concealed manner into a place where carrying the gun is not allowed.

sneak Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

sneakverb [ always + adv/prep ] us ​ /snik/ past tense and past participle sneaked or snuck /snʌk/
​

to go or do something secretly, or take someone or something somewhere secretly:

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/conceal

conceal in American
(kənˈsil ; kənsēlˈ)
verb transitive
1.
to put out of sight; hide
2.
to keep from another's knowledge; keep secret

You're wrong. That is your opinion and you have that right to it. Doesn't mean you're right, tho. Just means that it burns your backside that I disagree with you and you'll almost stop at nothing to argue your point and change my mind.

Incorrect. What is really happening here is your backside is being burned with your own words that show you are willing to throw the private property right to deny entry to those who carry a gun under the bus just because you personally don't like that right. And what really chaps your ass is I keep pointing out that attitude is the exact same attitude the anti gunners have when it comes to their desire to throw the right to bear arms under the bus just because they personally don't like it.

And I keep pointing out all your pontifications about "concealed means concealed" and your right to self defense are nothing more than mental masturbatory gymnastics in order to justify your desire to get rid of a right you don't like.

I. Am. Only. Talking. About. One. Specific. So-called. Right.

Yes and so are the anti gunners only talking about one specific... what they consider to be a... so called right too. I will say it right out. In my not so humble opinion you and the anti gunners have the same attitude of picking and choosing which rights are valid and which rights are not according to your own personal selfish desires.

 

[Bikenut]

I really don't understand your points at all. They just elude me. The only point I feel strongly enough about to comment on is your use of the word "sneak". Concealing is not sneaking, nor skulking, tip toeing, or treading lightly. It's just concealing. It's my right and no one, except my adherence to guidance on Federal properties, schools, and courts, is gun free zoning me out of that right. They have a right to a sign, they have a right to request my leaving as they would any customer, and my respect for their sign is about as strong as their respect for my 2A rights. Nada, niente, non existent. Like most areas of my life, they'll barely know I was even there.

The Place To Be

Please see post #46 for the definition of "sneak" and "conceal".

You have the right to bear arms but you do not have any right... none what so ever.... to be on/in the private property of another whether bearing arms or not. In the case of private property that is open to the public you still do not have any right to be there. What you have with "open to the public" is an invitation by the property owner for individuals who are members of the public being given the property owner's permission to enter contingent upon each person agreeing to the rules/policies the owner sets for those who accept that invitation. Do not follow those rules/policies and the permission to enter is revoked. But neither you, I, or anyone has any right to enter someone elses private property whether that private property be a private residence, a warehouse, or a business that is open to the public.

 

[corneileous]

Originally Posted by corneileous

-snip-

But no, I don't recognize it because I think it's a right that doesn't deserve to exist. Because it's dangerous. -snip-

I quoted this because it is the heart of the matter. You don't recognize the right of the property owner to control his property by granting or denying permission to enter because YOU don't like it. And to justify that you use the excuse that it is dangerous.

*Shaking my head at you in so much awe*

Lemmie try this approach: like it'll do any good because you are so freaking hardheaded but why are you trying so diligently to make it sound as though the only reason I carry past his silly little sign in the first place is only because he forbids it?? Why are you implying that? I've stated why I do this, so many times but you just continually and consistently ignore it and dismiss it.

Another thing - are you really trying to convince us all that you don't think gun free zones aren't dangerous??? lol.

Well, whether you like it or not, that is exactly the same attitude AND excuse the anti gunners use to justify their desire to get rid of the right to bear arms.

So be it. So freaking what. Just like as Niceshootin' said, my respect for their anti-gun agenda is about as strong as my respect for their hatred towards the gun itself and the law abiding, legal gun owners who carry to protect themselves from the same people that you would think - at least I think, anyways, these people put these signs up for to begin with. But I'm starting to wonder about if they put them up for just people like you and me. I'm really starting to think they could care less about the real criminals that carry past their all mighty sign to do harm to others.

And then there is this gem you posted:

Again just right completely over your head. Sad. It's almost like you're doing it with purpose...[emoji848]

I don't have to use your words against you. You do that just fine all by yourself since your own words show that you are willing to outlaw someone elses right just because you don't like it.

I can't help your ignorance. I really can't. Just because I don't like this right is not... I repeat, is not the reason I think it doesn't deserve to recognized as a right. It's dangerous. Look up just how dangerous gun free zones are. It has nothing to do with solely being disliked.

Exactly the same attitude of an anti gunner willing to outlaw the right to bear arms.

No, it is not! My attitude towards the slimy right to make these monstrosities such as gun free zones is not the same ****ing attitude that the anti-gun liberals have towards the banishment and outlawing of guns and mine and your 2nd Amendment rights.

I've tried a different approach and told you this once before in another thread that it's not so much the gun free zone per say, but if they really hate all guns that much and don't want them, the ones for good use AND the ones being used for evil doings, entering their property, they need to make sure ALL GUNS STAY OUT! Don't rely on just a silly sign in hopes that criminals will be like this below...

But of course, as usual, you dismissed it and was so quick to wad it up and toss it right square in the wastebasket like it was the silliest thing you had ever heard.

You can stop responding any time you wish but your hoping I would leave it alone is going to be a very forlorn hope indeed since I will always defend rights. Even the rights you don't like... and especially the rights I don't like... because when it comes to rights all rights are important... not just the one's that happen to be popular.

You've sure proven that right, ain'tcha?...lol. Sad.

No really, feel free to keep smearing these walls with your ignorance.

Self righteousness? Perhaps it would be helpful to go back and read your own posts for examples of self righteousness.

Excuse me? I'm really only talking about me. I could careless about what other people do.

The self righteousness buddy, was on you for how you were trying to be all big and bad, and high and mighty full of your self looking for gratitude on your interest in avoiding gun hating establishments. Lol. Keep I up, you'll get that merit badge some day...[emoji41][emoji106]

I'm not all surprised that you didn't pick up on it, though. You're too infatuated with this, "desperately trying to be right" nonsense that you overlook so many things and then you have the audacity to try and make me look bad...lol. That's the funny part. Oh well, inside joke that you'll never see I guess.

Because "sneak" or "sneaking" is the appropriate word to describe carrying a gun in a concealed manner into a place where carrying the gun is not allowed in order to avoid being caught doing so.

sneak Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

sneakverb [ always + adv/prep ] us ​ /snik/ past tense and past participle sneaked or snuck /snʌk/
​

to go or do something secretly, or take someone or something somewhere secretly:

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/conceal

conceal in American
(kənˈsil ; kənsēlˈ)
verb transitive
1.
to put out of sight; hide
2.
to keep from another's knowledge; keep secret

Whatever, bud... at least you're good for humor and a damn good laugh!...

Originally Posted by corneileous

You're wrong. That is your opinion and you have that right to it. Doesn't mean you're right, tho. Just means that it burns your backside that I disagree with you and you'll almost stop at nothing to argue your point and change my mind.

Incorrect. What is really happening here is your backside is being burned with your own words that show you are willing to throw the private property right to deny entry to those who carry a gun under the bus just because you personally don't like that right. And what really chaps your ass is I keep pointing out that attitude is the exact same attitude the anti gunners have when it comes to their desire to throw the right to bear arms under the bus just because they personally don't like it.

First off, my backside's not being burnt at all. If I really was agitated about these gun free zones like you are, I'd be avoiding them too; but since I don't cower down and allow myself to be bullied, I carry anyways..[emoji4]

But I've already explained earlier in this post about my stance on why I don't like the right to make slaughter zones and to debunk your crazy claim about how can I expect the brain dead libs to respect my 2nd Amendment rights when I don't respect their empty hatred towards guns and their law-abiding owners so ill digress there.

And I keep pointing out all your pontifications about "concealed means concealed" and your right to self defense are nothing more than mental masturbatory gymnastics in order to justify your desire to get rid of a right you don't like.

Whatever. Concealed means concealed. Don't like it? Tough terds. You're just jealous because apparently it's more important to you to make a political statement by open carrying is probably what prevents you from carrying past these ignorant signs when I can.

You're right, that was a little below the belt, consider it a payback for that comment about questioning my manhood because I don't just strap that Ruger LC9S loud and proud with its custom, hand-made kydex paddle holster with the skulls on it and tell that store owner to go pound sand.

I personally consider it the height of hypocrisy to pontificate about how you have the right to bear arms while dismissing the private property rights of others.

Pffft... lol. Whatever. You won't listen to my explanation so screw it.

Yes and so are the anti gunners only talking about one specific... what they consider to be a... so called right too. I will say it right out. In my not so humble opinion you and the anti gunners have the same attitude of picking and choosing which rights are valid and which rights are not according to your own personal selfish desires.

Sigh....

But you know what, at the end of each day, you do what you wanna do and I'll do what I wanna do. You worry about you and I'll worry about me. All this is, is just your preverted infatuation with laying guilt trips on people and pushing your beliefs on people. Why are you so concerned and nosy about what everybody else does? Why do constantly strive to make an absolute ass out of yourself by arguing this subject to oblivion? Standing up for rights is one thing, and commendable but damn, you have no idea how much you sound like one of them protestin' democrats that has nothing better to do 'cept whine and cry over gay rights and Muslim rights. Do you wanna be related to that?

I highly doubt this will be my last post to you because you're the type of person that just can't be wrong.

Until next time...

 

[Bikenut]

And then there is this gem you posted:

Originally Posted by corneileous View Post

Oh....and the private property owner of a business open to the public has just as much power to deny entry to a person carrying a gun as does a private property residence owner.

Duh, that's the problem that desperately needs to be outlawed.

*Edited* so that you wouldn't be able to use my words against me since you like doing that but, yes, of course they can. Problem is - which apparently keeps flying right over your head is that people aren't just walking right in of the guy's residence like they do at his store. Get it now??

I don't have to use your words against you. You do that just fine all by yourself since your own words show that you are willing to outlaw someone elses right just because you don't like it. Exactly the same attitude of an anti gunner willing to outlaw the right to bear arms.

And the thing that apparently keeps flying over your head is that just because the door is open doesn't mean everyone has permission to enter the store any more than if the door to your house is open means anyone has permission to enter. It is that "permission to enter" part that obviously is beyond your comprehension.

*Edited* to add:
I find it interesting that because I quoted your own words expressing your desire to outlaw a right those words, again your own words, will remain on the internet for all to see.

Nothing you can say will erase your own words saying you want someone elses rights outlawed.

And then there is another gem posted by you:

Originally posted by corneileous:

Well, whether you like it or not, that is exactly the same attitude AND excuse the anti gunners use to justify their desire to get rid of the right to bear arms.

So be it. So freaking what. Just like as Niceshootin' said, my respect for their anti-gun agenda is about as strong as my respect for their hatred towards the gun itself and the law abiding, legal gun owners who carry to protect themselves from the same people that you would think - at least I think, anyways, these people put these signs up for to begin with. But I'm starting to wonder about if they put them up for just people like you and me. I'm really starting to think they could care less about the real criminals that carry past their all mighty sign to do harm to others.

So be it? So freaking what? Really? You just don't understand that the attitude of "Hooray for the rights I like and to hell with the ones I don't like." IS the problem in this country. And excuses like your respect for them is as strong as their respect for you is just an attempt to justify not respecting them.

Face it. Your own words have outed you as being just as much anti rights as anti gunners are. The only difference is which right. And your own words quoted above show you just don't care.

Here is an interesting quote:

Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. J. C. Watts
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jcwatts106082.html

And it is the attitude that disrespecting the rights of others is ok as long as you don't get caught (screw their rights I'll just ... sneak.. my gun in because concealed means concealed so I won't get caught) that is wrong with our country.

 

[niceshootintex]

Please see post #46 for the definition of "sneak" and "conceal".

You have the right to bear arms but you do not have any right... none what so ever.... to be on/in the private property of another whether bearing arms or not. In the case of private property that is open to the public you still do not have any right to be there. What you have with "open to the public" is an invitation by the property owner for individuals who are members of the public being given the property owner's permission to enter contingent upon each person agreeing to the rules/policies the owner sets for those who accept that invitation. Do not follow those rules/policies and the permission to enter is revoked. But neither you, I, or anyone has any right to enter someone elses private property whether that private property be a private residence, a warehouse, or a business that is open to the public.

Semantics. I've seen your posts. That's beneath you. Sneak does not carry the same connotation in this case. It's not called sneak carry. It's concealed carry and it does not allude to the act of sneaking something.

There are states now pushing back on private business gun free zones with legislation that makes them liable for injuries caused for infringing on the rights of a citizen not carrying were an incident to occur and/or for not providing adequate security in those cases where they announce a business to be gun free. Bad guys don't follow signs for misdemeanor crimes. Florida, Missouri, Tennessee to name a few.


Legal gun ownership (as currently defined) makes for a polite society, pure and simple. I would have only one law in place to test the will of attention seeking business owners and anti gunners. If you affix a no gun zone placard to your business then you must post the same placards to your home or residence. No two sets of rules. 2A advocates want it all and the anti gunners should eat the whole enchilada too. I'm not unstrapping because a private business owner doesn't believe in rights handed down to all of us by the forefathers. We have the right to bear arms. I pretty much avoid thesed places at all costs for most part so the point is moot.

The Place To Be

 

[Bikenut]

-snip-
I highly doubt this will be my last post to you because you're the type of person that just can't be wrong.

Until next time...

Right back atcha.

 

[corneileous]

Nothing you can say will erase your own words saying you want someone elses rights outlawed.

And then there is another gem posted by you:

So be it? So freaking what? Really? You just don't understand that the attitude of "Hooray for the rights I like and to hell with the ones I don't like." IS the problem in this country. And excuses like your respect for them is as strong as their respect for you is just an attempt to justify not respecting them.

Face it. Your own words have outed you as being just as much anti rights as anti gunners are. The only difference is which right. And your own words quoted above show you just don't care.

Here is an interesting quote:

Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. J. C. Watts
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jcwatts106082.html

And it is the attitude that disrespecting the rights of others is ok as long as you don't get caught (screw their rights I'll just ... sneak.. my gun in because concealed means concealed so I won't get caught) that is wrong with our country.

Whatever man. Like I said, you do what you wanna do and I'll do what I wanna do.

 

[corneileous]

Right back atcha.

Since you won't let this go, how 'bout you grow up? Go find a new cause.

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
Please see post #46 for the definition of "sneak" and "conceal".

You have the right to bear arms but you do not have any right... none what so ever.... to be on/in the private property of another whether bearing arms or not. In the case of private property that is open to the public you still do not have any right to be there. What you have with "open to the public" is an invitation by the property owner for individuals who are members of the public being given the property owner's permission to enter contingent upon each person agreeing to the rules/policies the owner sets for those who accept that invitation. Do not follow those rules/policies and the permission to enter is revoked. But neither you, I, or anyone has any right to enter someone elses private property whether that private property be a private residence, a warehouse, or a business that is open to the public.

Semantics. I've seen your posts. That's beneath you. Sneak does not carry the same connotation in this case. It's not called sneak carry. It's concealed carry and it does not allude to the act of sneaking something.

There are states now pushing back on private business gun free zones with legislation that makes them liable for injuries caused for infringing on the rights of a citizen not carrying were an incident to occur and/or for not providing adequate security in those cases where they announce a business to be gun free. Bad guys don't follow signs for misdemeanor crimes. Florida, Missouri, Tennessee to name a few.


Legal gun ownership (as currently defined) makes for a polite society, pure and simple. I would have only one law in place to test the will of attention seeking business owners and anti gunners. If you affix a no gun zone placard to your business then you must post the same placards to your home or residence. No two sets of rules. 2A advocates want it all and the anti gunners should eat the whole enchilada too. I'm not unstrapping because a private business owner doesn't believe in rights handed down to all of us by the forefathers. We have the right to bear arms. I pretty much avoid thesed places at all costs for most part so the point is moot.

The Place To Be

Our forefathers didn't hand down any rights. We are born with them. The Bill of Rights is not a list of the rights the government grants but is a list recognizing some of the rights we are born with AND it is a list of rights "we the people" told the government it has no authority to control. The distinction between the government granting and "we the people" telling the government to keep it's hands off is a very important understanding of what the Bill of Rights really is.

Respectfully I offer the following link as a place to begin research on what rights really are:
Tenth Amendment Center | You don’t have ‘Constitutional Rights’

Now about semantics........

sneak Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

sneakverb [ always + adv/prep ] us ​ /snik/ past tense and past participle sneaked or snuck /snʌk/
​

to go or do something secretly, or take someone or something somewhere secretly:
Bold added by me for emphasis....

Are you or are you not carrying your gun into a place where it is not allowed in a secretive (concealed) manner so that no one knows it is there? Yes or no. If yes then you are, by definition posted above, sneaking it in. Doesn't matter if you intend to be a sneak the point remains taking it somewhere secretly is the definition of "sneak".

And now you want the government to add laws that infringe upon the property owner's right to control who uses his property by denying entry to those folks he doesn't want on/in his property? Are you really Ok with adding more laws to infringe upon someone elses rights just because you agree with those laws/infringements? If so then I guess adding more laws that infringe upon the right to bear arms is also Ok because anti gunners agree with those laws/infringements.

Either rights stand as they are without infringements or all rights are eventually lost because some segment of the population thinks it is Ok to restrict/infringe upon them. Actually that is how we got where we are now because many folks thought some restrictive gun laws made sense and bingo... we get gun control that we don't like but others do like. But the important point is that if we want the rights we like respected then we need to respect and protect all rights... and most importantly especially the ones we don't like!.. or eventually everyone loses all rights.

 

[Bikenut]

Since you won't let this go, how 'bout you grow up? Go find a new cause.

Right back atcha.

 

[corneileous]

Since you won't let this go, how 'bout you grow up? Go find a new cause.

Right back atcha.

You're the one who keeps dragging this up and you have the audacity to tell ME to grow up? You're unreal, buddy.

 

[niceshootintex]

Our forefathers didn't hand down any rights. We are born with them. The Bill of Rights is not a list of the rights the government grants but is a list recognizing some of the rights we are born with AND it is a list of rights "we the people" told the government it has no authority to control. The distinction between the government granting and "we the people" telling the government to keep it's hands off is a very important understanding of what the Bill of Rights really is.

Respectfully I offer the following link as a place to begin research on what rights really are:
Tenth Amendment Center | You don’t have ‘Constitutional Rights’

Now about semantics........

sneak Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

sneakverb [ always + adv/prep ] us ​ /snik/ past tense and past participle sneaked or snuck /snʌk/
​

to go or do something secretly, or take someone or something somewhere secretly:
Bold added by me for emphasis....

Are you or are you not carrying your gun into a place where it is not allowed in a secretive (concealed) manner so that no one knows it is there? Yes or no. If yes then you are, by definition posted above, sneaking it in. Doesn't matter if you intend to be a sneak the point remains taking it somewhere secretly is the definition of "sneak".

And now you want the government to add laws that infringe upon the property owner's right to control who uses his property by denying entry to those folks he doesn't want on/in his property? Are you really Ok with adding more laws to infringe upon someone elses rights just because you agree with those laws/infringements? If so then I guess adding more laws that infringe upon the right to bear arms is also Ok because anti gunners agree with those laws/infringements.

Either rights stand as they are without infringements or all rights are eventually lost because some segment of the population thinks it is Ok to restrict/infringe upon them. Actually that is how we got where we are now because many folks thought some restrictive gun laws made sense and bingo... we get gun control that we don't like but others do like. But the important point is that if we want the rights we like respected then we need to respect and protect all rights... and most importantly especially the ones we don't like!.. or eventually everyone loses all rights.

Your sneak discussion is entertaining. I don't sneak at all when I carry. Sorry you do. It must suck to be perfectly legal in the eyes of the state and act like you're stealing cookies from your mommy.

Our declaration of independence acknowledged our unalienable rights as humans. Our Constitution expounded on that and granted us rights which we are supposed to have as citizens of THIS country.

You said we are all born free. Not true. Take a trip, leave your county or state, and travel the world. Most men are not born free and shall never benefit from it or fight for it. Many people are born into slavery and subjugation. Most don't even know they are oppressed, don't have rights, and are just happy to be alive.

I have read your posts and you do not strike me as an anti gunner. Quite the opposite in fact. Let's not confuse my state issued and legal permit to carry a weapon in a concealed manner and the private owners signage. I avoid them if I can but if I miss the sign and conceal correctly it's a non incident. If asked to leave, then I'll leave. Has never happened in over 30 years btw. No harm no foul. Like I said. Feel so strongly? Put it on your home and see how that works out. Now, that's what I call commitment to a cause.

The Place To Be

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
Our forefathers didn't hand down any rights. We are born with them. The Bill of Rights is not a list of the rights the government grants but is a list recognizing some of the rights we are born with AND it is a list of rights "we the people" told the government it has no authority to control. The distinction between the government granting and "we the people" telling the government to keep it's hands off is a very important understanding of what the Bill of Rights really is.

Respectfully I offer the following link as a place to begin research on what rights really are:

Tenth Amendment Center | You don’t have ‘Constitutional Rights’

Now about semantics........

sneak Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

sneakverb [ always + adv/prep ] us ​ /snik/ past tense and past participle sneaked or snuck /snʌk/
​

to go or do something secretly, or take someone or something somewhere secretly:
Bold added by me for emphasis....

Are you or are you not carrying your gun into a place where it is not allowed in a secretive (concealed) manner so that no one knows it is there? Yes or no. If yes then you are, by definition posted above, sneaking it in. Doesn't matter if you intend to be a sneak the point remains taking it somewhere secretly is the definition of "sneak".

And now you want the government to add laws that infringe upon the property owner's right to control who uses his property by denying entry to those folks he doesn't want on/in his property? Are you really Ok with adding more laws to infringe upon someone elses rights just because you agree with those laws/infringements? If so then I guess adding more laws that infringe upon the right to bear arms is also Ok because anti gunners agree with those laws/infringements.

Either rights stand as they are without infringements or all rights are eventually lost because some segment of the population thinks it is Ok to restrict/infringe upon them. Actually that is how we got where we are now because many folks thought some restrictive gun laws made sense and bingo... we get gun control that we don't like but others do like. But the important point is that if we want the rights we like respected then we need to respect and protect all rights... and most importantly especially the ones we don't like!.. or eventually everyone loses all rights.

Your sneak discussion is entertaining. I don't sneak at all when I carry. Sorry you do. It must suck to be perfectly legal in the eyes of the state and act like you're stealing cookies from your mommy.

Our declaration of independence acknowledged our unalienable rights as humans. Our Constitution expounded on that and granted us rights which we are supposed to have as citizens of THIS country.

You said we are all born free. Not true. Take a trip, leave your county or state, and travel the world. Most men are not born free and shall never benefit from it or fight for it. Many people are born into slavery and subjugation. Most don't even know they are oppressed, don't have rights, and are just happy to be alive.

I have read your posts and you do not strike me as an anti gunner. Quite the opposite in fact. Let's not confuse my state issued and legal permit to carry a weapon in a concealed manner and the private owners signage. I avoid them if I can but if I miss the sign and conceal correctly it's a non incident. If asked to leave, then I'll leave. Has never happened in over 30 years btw. No harm no foul. Like I said. Feel so strongly? Put it on your home and see how that works out. Now, that's what I call commitment to a cause.

The Place To Be

I think you might misunderstand. I don't ... sneak... my gun anywhere. I open carry right out there in plain sight without any apologies to anyone about it. It is amazing how many private property business owners have changed their gun policies, and kept that change, and/or decided to support open carry as a result of my approaching them in a calm, polite, and professional manner with my gun right there in plain sight on my hip.

As for commitment to a cause.... I defend the right to bear arms in many ways including the aforementioned open carry. I also give of my time and money fighting illegal local ordinances banning guns from government owned buildings and property. And I open carry while attending meetings to boot. And you know what? I don't think doing that is anything special but is what everyone who understands that our rights are under attack should do.

Also, if you want a chuckle, I am open carrying right now as I type and defend private property rights with the same commitment as I have for the right to bear arms on this very forum. The funny thing is I do not agree with the banning of guns on/in private property but I will defend the property owner's right to do so.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights didn't grant us anything. It merely acknowledges that our rights exist and (supposedly) curtails the government from controlling or restricting those rights. Please follow the link I provided in my post that you quoted for a more clear understanding of what role the government, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, play in regards to rights.

I never said we were free. Please provide a quote where I said that?

And, at least in Michigan, it isn't necessary to be asked to leave to be arrested for trespass if sneaking in a gun against the property owner's rules/policies as long as those policies/rules are conspicuously posted. The posting was your notice. That is the legal opinion of an attorney posted on a different gun forum and I believe him. Granted most shopkeepers will ask someone to leave before getting to the arresting part but they don't have to.

 

[Bikenut]

You're the one who keeps dragging this up and you have the audacity to tell ME to grow up? You're unreal, buddy.

In my estimation your position of "Hooray for my right to bear arms and to hell with the private property rights of others because it is inconvenient for me to shop elsewhere." is a bit immature.

And the fact that all you have to offer throughout your postings in this matter being ridicule and outrage is a glaring indication that your argument has no value.

Have a nice day.

 

[niceshootintex]

I think you might misunderstand. I don't ... sneak... my gun anywhere. I open carry right out there in plain sight without any apologies to anyone about it. It is amazing how many private property business owners have changed their gun policies, and kept that change, and/or decided to support open carry as a result of my approaching them in a calm, polite, and professional manner with my gun right there in plain sight on my hip.

As for commitment to a cause.... I defend the right to bear arms in many ways including the aforementioned open carry. I also give of my time and money fighting illegal local ordinances banning guns from government owned buildings and property. And I open carry while attending meetings to boot. And you know what? I don't think doing that is anything special but is what everyone who understands that our rights are under attack should do.

Also, if you want a chuckle, I am open carrying right now as I type and defend private property rights with the same commitment as I have for the right to bear arms on this very forum. The funny thing is I do not agree with the banning of guns on/in private property but I will defend the property owner's right to do so.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights didn't grant us anything. It merely acknowledges that our rights exist and (supposedly) curtails the government from controlling or restricting those rights. Please follow the link I provided in my post that you quoted for a more clear understanding of what role the government, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, play in regards to rights.

I never said we were free. Please provide a quote where I said that?

And, at least in Michigan, it isn't necessary to be asked to leave to be arrested for trespass if sneaking in a gun against the property owner's rules/policies as long as those policies/rules are conspicuously posted. The posting was your notice. That is the legal opinion of an attorney posted on a different gun forum and I believe him. Granted most shopkeepers will ask someone to leave before getting to the arresting part but they don't have to.

Going nowhere so thanks. Appreciate the dialogue nut.

The Place To Be