You might be right. What are the alternatives?Scott in Houston wrote:If it passes, there will be a 30.07 clause much like the current 30.06 allowing businesses to post.
The reason this all scares me is because many businesses do not post 30.06 because they are generally clueless that people are actually carrying in their business.
They are not posted as a result of their just living in denial and/or not thinking about it.
But…
So many would tell you verbally, if you were dumb enough to ask, whether carrying was ok on in their business. They would almost all say "no". And if it was made readily apparent that many patrons carried concealed, they would post 30.06.
Well, 30.07 brings attention to this. As soon as a business sees an open carry and then decides to post 30.07, the odds are, they'll research and post both. Therefore, I would be willing to bet that we see more "gun free" (aka death) zones arise.
Where am I wrong? I know there have to many who disagree, so please let me know. I'd love to not feel this way.
Deny folks the right to open carry (I have no desire to open carry, but I have little doubt that it really is a right)?
Make it so 30.06 covers both (which wouldn't alleviate the problem, folks would still be carrying openly as much as 30.07)?
My preference is go with allowing open carry, go with 30.07, and let the chips fall where they may. When Joe's Grill sees that Mamma's Cafe has more customers though their menus are similar, he may figure out that the two big 30.06 and 30.07 signs are running off paying customers, and somehow Mamma's hasn't had any gunfights.