TexasCHLforum.com

lawrnk wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

lawrnk wrote:
Well, those who support the 2nd amendment should choose not to work for those who do not.

And what makes you think a person posting a 30.06 does not supprt the 2nd? How do you know HE does not have a CHL and that HE does not carry on his property?

You don't. Again, the 2nd has nothing to do with private property.

You support the 1st? Then don't shop anywhere, cause no shop owner does. No shop owner will let you enter their business and have freedom of speech.

I think it is rather obvious. Sometimes I think you enjoy having the "alternative" opinion, but you will be hard pressed to find many CHL's who believe that any company who posts a 30.06 is a supporter of the 2nd.

Liberty wrote:

HankB wrote:
I've been to Covert on 183 in Austin . . . the signs I've seen are not valid signs, and may actually have been posted to placate soccer mommies. FWIW, a couple of years ago I was at the parts counter, and a couple of guys who were on break about 20 feet back of the counter were taking target practice with either pellet or airsoft guns, so I'd say Covert's hoplophobia - if it exists at all - doesn't run very deep.

If Coverts decided to placate soccer Mom's they did so at the risk of offending CHLers. I know a few soccer Moms, but I never met one that looks for no gun signs. Typically they are pretty oblivious to the world around them. I've met a few CHLers and all of them look for the no gun signs. I find it hard to believe that many antis really look for those signs even though there are many that love to post those signs and show the world how they really believe. I wouldn't do business with anyone who had a "No Blonds Allowed" either, its not because I'm blond, just that I can find someone friendlier to do business with.

lawrnk wrote:
Well, those who support the 2nd amendment should choose not to work for those who do not.

drinks wrote:TX, you really do not understand what the people are trying to say, we really do not want to spend our money with people who do not support the US Constitution, you may wish to redefine your political position, and you may not, as you chose.

Liberty wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

Liberty wrote: But when someone posts a no guns sign whether the sign is legally binding or not. They are saying to the CHler and the rest of the world they don't want us pistol packers in their store.

ONLY WHILE YOU ARE PACKING. Please stop trying to make it seem as though SINCE you have a CHL they don't want your business.

If they really wanted CHLers business they would not ask them to disarm. I can't believe that they could be naive enough to not understand how this could be offensive to many CHLers. That some CHLers would rather gpo somewhere else than disarm ourselves.

If they don't want anyone in their store while packing, its obvious that they don't want pistol packers in their store. .

Liberty wrote: But when someone posts a no guns sign whether the sign is legally binding or not. They are saying to the CHler and the rest of the world they don't want us pistol packers in their store.

DoubleJ wrote:What's funny to me is that everyone has such a HUGE problem with only certain signs. well, what about the 51% signs. what's the difference there, huh? Why should that be any difference? It's already against the law to carry while intoxicated, so who cares if you're armed inside an establishment that serves The Booze?
why aren't ya'll up in arms (haha, pun) about those eeeeeeeeeevil 51% signs???

Liberty wrote:

txinvestigator wrote: No it doesn't. It means they prefer you leave your gun in the car.

And many CHLers would rather not disarm themselves. Its a simple equation , there are other dealers. They could remove the signs if they want CHLers business. Posting those signs is public statement that the bussiness of those who prefer to carry 24/7 isn't as important to them as some other concerns they may have.

carlson1 wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

Liberty wrote:

flintknapper wrote: You are correct.


The "Covert's" are an old "Austin" family and are fine folks. If anyone wants to know where they stand on the 2nd Amendment they can call Rox, Duke or Danay, they'll be happy to tell you.

They can say anything they want, but the signs speak louder than anything they could say.

It does not speak AT ALL regarding their stance on the second.

OK, I would like to know what you think they mean by that sign say then? Are they saying they are all for you exercising your right to carry?

Liberty wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:I really do not understand what the big deal is about private businesses having a gun buster or no gun sign.

They mean nothing to a CHL in Texas and you can walk right in.

Concealed is concealed, right?

I doubt very seriously if it is an insurance requirement. if it was, most businesses would be posting, and most would be 30.06 compliant, because insurance companies are run by lawyers, and lawyers tend to read laws.

Too me it isn't about whether we could legally carry inside or not. Being legal and being welcome are two different things. When they post that sign they indicate that that they don't want us in their place of business.

Liberty wrote:

flintknapper wrote: You are correct.


The "Covert's" are an old "Austin" family and are fine folks. If anyone wants to know where they stand on the 2nd Amendment they can call Rox, Duke or Danay, they'll be happy to tell you.

They can say anything they want, but the signs speak louder than anything they could say.

Liberty wrote:

txinvestigator wrote: That sounds like cutting off your nose to spite your face. I think its silly.

I think people need to stand for something. Its good when we put our money where our mouth is. Those who would like to disarm us are my enemy.

Longtooths wrote:

txinvestigator wrote:

Kalrog wrote:I am car hunting right now and and I stopped by the Covert Ford dealer in north Austin on 183 to test drive an Escape. Went in and noticed that they had a completely non-compliant "no guns" sign (it wasn't even close, but it did make reference to 30.05). Well, I didn't let it stop me from test driving but I am going to let it stop me from purchasing there. And I will let the internet sales manager (CJ - the person I spoke to) know why. I doubt it will make a difference, but at this point the big 3 in Detroit can't afford to lose ANY sales. Did you hear about GM's loss this morning?

That sounds like cutting off your nose to spite your face. I think its silly.

You think it is silly that he chooses to not spend his money with people that do not believe in the 2nd amendment? not like he can not take his business to another dealership..

Kalrog wrote:I am car hunting right now and and I stopped by the Covert Ford dealer in north Austin on 183 to test drive an Escape. Went in and noticed that they had a completely non-compliant "no guns" sign (it wasn't even close, but it did make reference to 30.05). Well, I didn't let it stop me from test driving but I am going to let it stop me from purchasing there. And I will let the internet sales manager (CJ - the person I spoke to) know why. I doubt it will make a difference, but at this point the big 3 in Detroit can't afford to lose ANY sales. Did you hear about GM's loss this morning?