It is now time to open Texas 100%

[03Lightningrocks]

On the other hand, I went shopping in San Antonio today. Most of the big stores still had signs requiring masks, on some the signs claimed it was a local mandate (which is probably the same sign they have had up and just not changed). I was very pleasantly surprised when I went to one store, a local hobby shop I have been frequenting lately. They had a sign on the door saying that masks were optional. At the cash register was a sign that said that if you are afraid of an unmasked environment, please let them know and the employees will mask up, but masks are still optional for other customers. If this is not acceptable, they do have a sidewalk pickup option for your purchases.

That seemed an entirely reasonable policy to me.

Didn't I see something in the news about the mayor of San Antonio trying to implement a mask required ordinance? I may get inspired and try to look it up. Well that was quick. He did. https://covid19.sanantonio.gov/About-CO ... ons-Orders

The order I read said he was requiring masks where he could (like in travel centers) but that individual businesses must adopt their own policy. He strongly recommended they consider mask requirements but did not require it.

Reading between the lines, I think he might try political pressure to get businesses to require masks, but he is careful not to cross the line. He doesn't have the guts that Adler did on Austin to tell Paxton "so sue me".

The leftist liberals are doing everything they can to maintain control over "we the people".

[Liberty]

The lady was clearly wrong but they [bank employees] could have handled this much better and faster than waiting for the police... so if the fear was ACTUALLY health and safety- they would have been much better off giving her, her money and letting her walk away and close her account out. Instead, they allowed her to stay inside "endangering the lives of everyone" for 15 minutes- vs. just giving her the money in 2 minutes and being rid of her... of course that doesn't give anyone the satisfaction of being a SJW and seeing and old lady arrested by police.

This was at a Bank of America. You don't close out an account with them in 2 minutes. I hate to say it, but anyone who still has an account with them is likely masochistic and probably enjoys being abused

[flechero]

The lady was clearly wrong but they [bank employees] could have handled this much better and faster than waiting for the police... so if the fear was ACTUALLY health and safety- they would have been much better off giving her, her money and letting her walk away and close her account out. Instead, they allowed her to stay inside "endangering the lives of everyone" for 15 minutes- vs. just giving her the money in 2 minutes and being rid of her... of course that doesn't give anyone the satisfaction of being a SJW and seeing and old lady arrested by police.

This was at a Bank of America. You don't close out an account with them in 2 minutes. I hate to say it, but anyone who still has an account with them is likely masochistic and probably enjoys being abused

You sure can close one in 2-3 minutes at BoA... if they know going in not to try for retention. Ask me how I know.

[srothstein]

This was at a Bank of America. You don't close out an account with them in 2 minutes. I hate to say it, but anyone who still has an account with them is likely masochistic and probably enjoys being abused

Or they just won't put up with BoA's stupidity long enough to close an account with an insignificant amount of money in it. Back when my daughter enlisted, BoA had the military banking program which was a good deal. When we were setting up my daughter's account, they pointed out that it included all veteran's so I moved my accounts there (I was unhappy with the bank I was at). Anyway, I opened trust accounts for my younger children too. BoA lost the military contract and changed their program so I again moved my accounts. Got to the trust account for one daughter and they would not let me close it because she had turned 18. I could still withdraw the account down to the minimum to keep a savings account ($25) but they said she had to be present to close it. She was at college in Vermont, so she went to the bank there to close it. They would not let her because I wasn't present. They wanted both of us there at the same time and location and never agreed to accept written authorization to close it. We never did get to the bank during their hours together.

I decided it would be easier to simply wait until it went dormant and claim it from the unclaimed funds the state gets.

[oohrah]

Private property rules overrule individual rights. But you always have the right to vote with your feet.

[RoyGBiv]

Private property rules overrule individual rights.

I don't agree. Not in terms of a business that is open to the public.

Why is it ok to burden a business that is open to the public with things like employment rules, ADA compliance, restrictions on operating hours (liquor stores), and myriad other requirements but cave when it comes to requiring businesses open to the public to also honor the Second Ammendment, which predates all of the other government restrictions on their supposed "private property rights"?

I would propose that any business open to the general public should be required to honor the gun rights of their patrons.
I certainly believe that you have every right to deny me entry into your home or PRIVATE (as in, not a business premises open to the public) property.

Saying that it's ok to demand ADA compliance but not 2A is poppycock.
I look forward to the opportunity to express this in Austin this session, if appropriate.

[srothstein]

I don't agree. Not in terms of a business that is open t the public.

Why is it ok to burden a business that is open to the public with things like employment rules, ADA compliance, restrictions on operating hours (liquor stores), and myriad other requirements but cave when it comes to requiring businesses open to the public to also honor the Second Ammendment, which predates all of the other government restrictions on their supposed "private property rights"?

I would propose that any business open to the general public should be required to honor the gun rights of their patrons.

Saying that it's ok to demand ADA compliance but not 2A is poppycock.
I look forward to the opportunity to express this in Austin this session, if appropriate.

I disagree with you and have a better proposal to fix the problem. Let's stop requiring businesses to obey most governmental rules like the ADA, employment pay and benefits, operating hours, etc. The flaw in your logic, as I see it, is the basic assumption that it is okay to require businesses to do these things to begin with. The only restrictions I accept on a business as okay are those that would directly harm an unsuspecting person, such as food purity laws.

I have a right to freedom of association. If i do not want to associate with people who are handicapped or of a specific religion or race or national origin, why should I have to give up my right to choose who I associate with simply because I run a business? If I am right, I will make money. If I am wrong, I will lose money and go out of business. Problem solved.

[RoyGBiv]

I don't agree. Not in terms of a business that is open t the public.

Why is it ok to burden a business that is open to the public with things like employment rules, ADA compliance, restrictions on operating hours (liquor stores), and myriad other requirements but cave when it comes to requiring businesses open to the public to also honor the Second Ammendment, which predates all of the other government restrictions on their supposed "private property rights"?

I would propose that any business open to the general public should be required to honor the gun rights of their patrons.

Saying that it's ok to demand ADA compliance but not 2A is poppycock.
I look forward to the opportunity to express this in Austin this session, if appropriate.

I disagree with you and have a better proposal to fix the problem. Let's stop requiring businesses to obey most governmental rules like the ADA, employment pay and benefits, operating hours, etc. The flaw in your logic, as I see it, is the basic assumption that it is okay to require businesses to do these things to begin with. The only restrictions I accept on a business as okay are those that would directly harm an unsuspecting person, such as food purity laws.

I have a right to freedom of association. If i do not want to associate with people who are handicapped or of a specific religion or race or national origin, why should I have to give up my right to choose who I associate with simply because I run a business? If I am right, I will make money. If I am wrong, I will lose money and go out of business. Problem solved.

I could get on board with that. But the notion that "Private Property" choice applies to 2A but not ADA is total manure.

[03Lightningrocks]

BOA lady strikes again. This time at an Office Depot. You have to admire her tenacity.

Police say Wright was arrested on outstanding warrants from Galveston after she refused to wear a mask in a Texas City Office Depot.

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/crime ... 5a90083035

[GeekwithaGun]

I don't agree. Not in terms of a business that is open t the public.

Why is it ok to burden a business that is open to the public with things like employment rules, ADA compliance, restrictions on operating hours (liquor stores), and myriad other requirements but cave when it comes to requiring businesses open to the public to also honor the Second Ammendment, which predates all of the other government restrictions on their supposed "private property rights"?

I would propose that any business open to the general public should be required to honor the gun rights of their patrons.

Saying that it's ok to demand ADA compliance but not 2A is poppycock.
I look forward to the opportunity to express this in Austin this session, if appropriate.

I disagree with you and have a better proposal to fix the problem. Let's stop requiring businesses to obey most governmental rules like the ADA, employment pay and benefits, operating hours, etc. The flaw in your logic, as I see it, is the basic assumption that it is okay to require businesses to do these things to begin with. The only restrictions I accept on a business as okay are those that would directly harm an unsuspecting person, such as food purity laws.

I have a right to freedom of association. If i do not want to associate with people who are handicapped or of a specific religion or race or national origin, why should I have to give up my right to choose who I associate with simply because I run a business? If I am right, I will make money. If I am wrong, I will lose money and go out of business. Problem solved.

I could get on board with that. But the notion that "Private Property" choice applies to 2A but not ADA is total manure.

I spend time in another state, in fact most of 2020 I was in Michigan and a little time in Ohio where my extended family are. In Michigan, the businesses cannot post signs preventing concealed carry, they have places off limits by statute just like here and every other state that allows concealed carry. Is that infringing on the businesses private property rights or is it not infringing on the 2nd amendment rights of the individual? It seems to me that any state government that gives a business or other entity the ability of infringing on the individual's rights (any of the numerated rights in the US constitution - the law of the land) is wrong.

back on actual topic - open 100% if you want to wear a mask, your choice, I choose not to.
that is all.