Online MSNBC Poll on Restaurant Carry

[KimberPB]

It's a cost vs. benefit thing. The cost of strict driving controls or draconian enforcement far outweighs the benefits when it directly affects literally everyone in the country to some extent.

The cost of limiting the right of a very tiny fraction of the population to bring a firearm into a bar is insignificant to the benfit of saving even one life.

Lastly before I head home for the day. Last year, before the huge permit application spike this year, we had over 600,000 active permit holders in Florida. So we are not exactly a "very tiny fraction of the population"

You all have a great weekend!!

 

[ClearSightTactical]

Oh and welcome to the site ClearSightTactical!

Thanks, lol i've been around since the start of 2008 just never registered or posted (too much insight to be wasted by my garble)

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

But it does give use the right to keep and bear arms.

Actually that's still being debated, Supreme Court case coming up this term. Should be interesting with Sotmayor on there now.

So you are basically saying that its ok to allow rights to be taken because only a smaller portion of society is affected.

Instead of even addressing these anymore, I'm going to start citing the fallacious arguments:

Fallacy Of The General Rule:
assuming that something true in general is true in every possible case. For example, "All chairs have four legs." Except that rocking chairs don't have any legs, and what is a one-legged "shooting stick" if it isn't a chair?

Similarly, there are times when certain laws should be broken. For example, ambulances are allowed to break speed laws.​

It should not matter if it's 1 million people or just 1 person. It's a God given right and should not be removed, stretched, distorted, bent, twisted, restricted, ect.

Cliche Thinking:
using as evidence a well-known wise saying, as if that is proven, or as if it has no exceptions.​

 

[NDS]

Another thread in a gun-rights forum where many of you don't believe in rights! You don't like people being allowed to carry someplace you don't think they should be, so you're willing to deny them their rights. You even missed a very basic point in your discussion of DUI and driving.

Driving isn't mentioned in the Bill of Rights -- but the right to "Keep and Bear Arms" is.

That's okay though, go right ahead and deny a person's right to Constitutionally protected behavior because you don't like it.

Gotta go with the evidence, I believe. How long as the law been in effect in Nevada? Do we have enough of a timeline to draw conclusions?

I'm not sure about the date for lawful CCW in Nevada as it predates my moving here from AZ, but I know open carry in bars in Nevada has always been at the discretion of the owner. I have been in bars in rural Nevada and seen armed patrons drinking. Guess what --- no gunfire resulted. As I said, people who carry guns tend to very law-abiding. A simple fact the posters in this thread don't care about.

Remember, the "blood in the streets" argument was used by the antis when concealed carry really started making its debut in the 80s. It never happened, either.

I was addressing the 'antis' in this thread--those who would limit Constitutional rights due to their own prejudice against bar patrons. I stand by them being wrong when they start their 'violence will inevitably ensue' arguments.

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

over 600,000 active permit holders in Florida. So we are not exactly a "very tiny fraction of the population!!

Out of 18,328,340, puts that at roughly 3.5% of the poulation. Care to define "tiny?" :sarcastic:
% is probably less in most other states, but I'm growing weary of researching your fallacies.

Ambiguous Assertion:
a statement is made, but it is sufficiently unclear that it leaves some sort of leeway.​

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

You don't like people being allowed to carry someplace you don't think they should be, so you're willing to deny them their rights..

Nope. Just don't think their guns should be there. They can come without their guns.

 

[NDS]

Nope. Just don't think their guns should be there. They can come without their guns.

And there you have it! If you don't like their rights, you think it's okay to deny them.
When it comes to what should be a right protected by the Constitution and its Amendments your opinion should be of no importance.

If you don't like carrying where liquor is served don't do so. You still don't have the right to force others to be unarmed victims.

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

..you think it's okay to deny them.

Yes, it's OK to deny the rright to carry a firearm in a drinking establishment. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it, thank you very much.

... right protected by the Constitution and its Amendments your opinion should be of no importance.

Sorry, but as we all know, opinions are like azzholes, everybody has one so one guy's opinion is just as valid as the next.

...If you don't like carrying where liquor is served don't do so. You still don't have the right to force others to be unarmed victims.

I don't and I won't. Nobody's forcing anyone go unarmed into a bar. Like you were suggesting, if you ain't got the stones to go in unarmed, maybe you might consider not going in at all. leasantry:

 

[NDS]

Yes, it's OK to deny the rright to carry a firearm in a drinking establishment. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it, thank you very much.

Unfortunately, there are many people like you that only believe in those rights they agree with. I would like to be protected from you.

Sorry, but as we all know, opinions are like azzholes, everybody has one so one guy's opinion is just as valid as the next.

No. My opinion is correct, yours is wrong. I say so, and as I said before, my opinion is right while yours is wrong.

I don't and I won't. Nobody's forcing anyone go unarmed into a bar. Like you were suggesting, if you ain't got the stones to go in unarmed, maybe you might consider not going in at all. leasantry:

If the only brave people in society go unarmed then I suggest you go unarmed everywhere, Oh Brave One. I'll continue to follow my own habits, which include going everywhere I legally can, armed. I guess I'm just a cowardly scaredy-cat who needs my CCW to keep me from hiding under my bed.

:girl_wink:

 

[KimberPB]

Out of 18,328,340, puts that at roughly 3.5% of the poulation. Care to define "tiny?" :sarcastic:
% is probably less in most other states, but I'm growing weary of researching your fallacies.

Ambiguous Assertion:
a statement is made, but it is sufficiently unclear that it leaves some sort of leeway.​

If you’re going to research my fallacies why don't you research them completely. Like maybe take into the fact that 6 to 7 million of those are under the age of 21 and can not legally own a handgun or apply for a permit. Or maybe look at how many people or not eligible due to metal defect or criminal background. Then maybe you'll see that the amount of people that can carry and chose to is a little larger then your 3%.

Once again I'm not saying bar carry is or is not ok I'm just saying we should not jump to quick to deny peoples right because of a personal feeling.

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

Or what about the number of those 600k that are out of state?

You make a specious argument, I'll point it out. Sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

I'm not even going to reply to the previous poster who thinks he's better than me. Not lowering to that level. I'm done with this. Maybe even this site altogether. I still cannot believe the level of ignorance and blind racist hatred I've seen here. Too bad.

 

[NDS]

Or what about the number of those 600k that are out of state?

You make a specious argument, I'll point it out. Sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

I'm not even going to reply to the previous poster who thinks he's better than me. Not lowering to that level. I'm done with this. Maybe even this site altogether. I still cannot believe the level of ignorance and blind racist hatred I've seen here. Too bad.

That post is pathetic and small. In the US, the historical supporters of gun control have been racists. Most gun control after the Civil War was aimed primarily at keeping 'free blacks' from being able to arm themselves.

You had blatantly posted in favor of limiting the rights of others based upon your own prejudice, and now you're calling the others here 'racist' as though that will magically make you correct. When you report back to DU, let them know you're a hero.

Door...
Ass...
Out...

Just in case you don't understand my position.

 

[Glockster20]

And there it is!!! I knew the race card would once again be drawn here. Anyone who disagrees with BHO's policies or doesn't like him because of his narcissitic and pompus arrogance must be a racist! I guess this makes us too narrow minded and ignorant. C&L you have come to the wrong place to try and promote "political correctness" and thinking "outside" the box. The COTUS and the Bible are our boxes and there is no need to stray from them. Most of us here feel this way. This "new age" thinking of "political correctness" is mainly what is wrong with our country today!

 

[ClearSightTactical]

I do find it suprising that a 2A Advocate would be against bar carry. Not everyone goes to bars to get drunk! Some go to sports bars to hang out with their friends and watch the game on a big screen, play pool, socialize with other people. I find going to a bar no different than going to any other social event.

The only place guns shouldn't be allowed? Hmmm, I'm stumped..

 

[usmc guy]

Many years ago I worked for Sheriff that would not allow his Deputies to drink in any Establishments in the county where they worked as he believed their would always be problems. So you know how that worked, we all drank in the county but never got drunk or caused any problems. So their are always LE having a drink after work somewhere without any problems by and large. Of course you hear about the 1 or 2 cases where they guys got out of hand, but their agency will deal with them. I don't see any problem with having a glass of wine with dinner and being armed.