First, I want to clarify that my opinion differs from jimlongley and Aggiedad in that I don't think the status of a non-compliant sign should be mentioned to a business. But I firmly support the polite communication of lost dollars based upon a posted no-gun policy regardless of whether it is legal or not. I think that only good things can come from this with no real chance of non-compliant signs becoming compliant.
I have just one set of questions for Embalmo and Oldgringo and any others firmly opposed to any communication. This is intended to understand your point of view and frame of mind better. It is not meant to offend in any way.
Embalmo, you stated:
How far does that go? Lets say there was a restaurant near The Great Outdoors (that recently removed its gun buster signs due to Aggiedad's efforts) that was similar to it in food, atmosphere, and price. But, this restaurant, TOGO (The Other Great Outdoors), did not remove it's gun buster signs after Aggiedad communicated with them.Embalmo wrote:... and strips the choice of those of us who realize that non-compliant signs (legally and realistically) are CHL welcome mats
If your choice was between these two establishments, would you view them as equal? Lets say you had to drive 5 miles past TOGO to get to The Great Outdoors, would you drive the extra distance? Do you truly see it as a welcome mat equal in weight to a door with no anti-gun postings?
We have gone around the bush in other threads, so I am not really trying to solve anything here. I am really just trying to understand your positions more. And with this question group, I will bow out.
Thank you,
t
