TexasCHLforum.com

RoyGBiv wrote:

Lynyrd wrote:I'm a strong believer in property rights, but the debate here brings up some interesting points. Once you open your property to the public (to operate a business) you enter a completely different realm of what you can restrict.

Exactly.

Lynyrd wrote:Should business have to accept us they way they have to accept people who fall under ADA?

Does that business expect to enjoy the benefits of the US Constitution? So do I.

Lynyrd wrote:Perception is everything.

I don't mean to pick on you... I agree with you and realize that you are being mostly rhetorical with your post.. The only bit I'd disagree with is the above... Perception is important, but, if the legislature can impose restrictions and/or conditions on private property (in this case, business) rights based on concepts that are not explicitly expressed in the Constitution, only implied (equal protection), then shouldn't an enumerated right have at least as much standing, regardless of whether it's "popular"?

Should I be able to stop you from carrying a gun into my house? Certainly. My house is private property.
Should I be able to stop you from carrying a gun into my place of business? No! Not if my business is open to the public and subject to the myriad other impositions placed on public businesses by the government.

The notion of "property rights" trumping 2A in a public setting is a terrible hypocrisy. IMO, YMMV.

I should have been more verbose.

With the "perception" comment, I was referring the the fact that some people would be offended by having to let us in, while not be offended at having to accommodate other groups. Those people "perceive" us differently. And my point was, their perception of us is false. If we could change that perception, they would be much more receptive to our presence.

I'm a strong believer in property rights, but the debate here brings up some interesting points. Once you open your property to the public (to operate a business) you enter a completely different realm of what you can restrict.

I'm certainly not well versed in quoting statutes that apply, but the idea of "equal protection under the law" comes to mind while reading the debate going on in this thread. We have made a choice to carry a firearm for our protection. Most of us have also made a choice about our religious beliefs. Are those two things treated differently under the law? Probably.

I am really surprised that liberal leaning Colorado requires the presence of metal detectors and paid security as the only places that a person may not enter wearing a concealed weapon. But I like the idea. I am old enough to remember what it was like here in Texas before the first CHL permits were issued. We have made gains since then, but the political climate in Colorado must have been something very different from here when they passed their current law regarding CHL permits.

I work behind 30.06/30.07 signs. I get to carry at work because we have a policy where ownership may grant permission to employees to carry on the property. The public, however, may not carry. I know my owner would be offended if he found out that he no longer had the option of putting up those signs. Was he offended when he had to build ramps and designate handicapped parking? Not so much. He didn't like the expense, but I don't think he was offended by it any more than complying with OSHA regulations. Should business have to accept us they way they have to accept people who fall under ADA? Maybe so. But far too many are so uneducated about permit holders that their personal perception of us as a group is far distorted from the truth. Perception is everything.

Possibly the best thing that could happen to strengthen our cause would be an ad campaign that educates the public on crime statistics regarding LTC holders, and statistics about how many times LTC holders have intervened to protect themselves and others. Of course, I hate statistics. Actually, I hate the presentation of statistics and how they are most often twisted and skewed to support an argument. Statistics themselves don't lie, but people using them often intentionally mislead. There is also the reality that no organization exists in Texas with the desire and the available funds to embark on such an ad campaign. But it's a nice thought.