For those concerned about property rights:

[chuckybrown]

I see posts here siding with property (owner) rights. Often times, we're encouraged to respect the rights of property owners posting 30.06/30.07. I get that. Perspective, right? I mean, we're the cream of the crop law abiders, aren't we? The example for all..!!!

But for some perspective:

Property owners....every day.....must adhere to ADA guidelines. IBC codes. Life safety laws. Environmental regulations. Flood plain certificates (FEMA by the way). Etc.

Why are we...as LTC'rs....so willing to wave the "we believe in property rights flags" that may / may not put our self defense rights in a subordinate position compared to these other rules and laws?

Would for one second a physically challenged person politely wait for an AG opinion and subsequent court ruling on accessible spaces?

There may be no right answer here tonight, but why are our rights less important / urgent????....particularly in these turbulent times??

Why, for example, should we.....as citizens of our constitution, be willing to be told our rights to self defense are prohibited by a property/business owner, but they must respect parking space density counts and restroom counts??

Tell me? Is it political correctness run amok??

Curious.

[anygunanywhere]

Skewed priorities and corrupt moral values.

[Jago668]

For me it is because I don't think that (for the most part) a property owner should have to follow all that. So for me it is standing up for someone else's right the way I'd want people to stand up for mine. I don't want the government to trample on someone else's rights so I don't push for the government to have more power to do that. It sucks considering that libtards don't return the favor (which is part of what makes them libtards).

[chuck j]

No . It is common sense respect .

[stingeragent]

Im with the OP on this one. All rights should be equally taken care of in a timely manner. There should be no priority. Something involving the freedom of speech should get resolved in the same amount of time as the right to bear arms or anything else.

[Oldgringo]

Help me understand this, if you please.

Why would any rational adult want to go where they, their gun, their wife, their family, their pets, etc. are not welcome? Mrs. Oldgringo and I enjoy (most of the time ) each others' company and our privacy. If we don't feel welcome somewhere; be it a business, church or a home setting, we leave.

Life is to short to be begging for acceptance, it is not our loss but that of others....and a good day to you.

[Richbirdhunter]

I see posts here siding with property (owner) rights. Often times, we're encouraged to respect the rights of property owners posting 30.06/30.07. I get that. Perspective, right? I mean, we're the cream of the crop law abiders, aren't we? The example for all..!!!

But for some perspective:

Property owners....every day.....must adhere to ADA guidelines. IBC codes. Life safety laws. Environmental regulations. Flood plain certificates (FEMA by the way). Etc.

Why are we...as LTC'rs....so willing to wave the "we believe in property rights flags" that may / may not put our self defense rights in a subordinate position compared to these other rules and laws?

Would for one second a physically challenged person politely wait for an AG opinion and subsequent court ruling on accessible spaces?

There may be no right answer here tonight, but why are our rights less important / urgent????....particularly in these turbulent times??

Why, for example, should we.....as citizens of our constitution, be willing to be told our rights to self defense are prohibited by a property/business owner, but they must respect parking space density counts and restroom counts??

Tell me? Is it political correctness run amok??

Curious.

I agree with this post, I do most of my shopping at places that I have like minded ideals with.
The places that I'm not welcomed at I might call at the end of the day and very politely let them know I spent X amount of money at this other store because of their policy of allowing LTC folks in their store.

I also very politely ask them what is their plan to keep me safe in their gun free zone. It generally doesn't get me anywhere but it's a slow process and it gives them something to think about especially of they get more phone calls like that.

[anygunanywhere]

Sometimes you have to go where your firearms are not welcome. Most hospitals are posted. The attitude that you can just go somewhere else where your firearm is welcome is absurd and in no way relates to reality.

[Richbirdhunter]

Sometimes you have to go where your firearms are not welcome. Most hospitals are posted. The attitude that you can just go somewhere else where your firearm is welcome is absurd and in no way relates to reality.

Sometimes is not all the time, and we make choices all the time about where to shop. Allowing me to carry lawfully is apart of that decision making process.

[Glockster]

Sometimes you have to go where your firearms are not welcome. Most hospitals are posted. The attitude that you can just go somewhere else where your firearm is welcome is absurd and in no way relates to reality.

I've posted what the OP has a few times here now, and still believe that a constitutional right outweighs one not explicitly granted within the Constituion. My carrying a gun in no way diminishes the value of the property, doesn't take or seize it, and so on. Denying me my natural right may mean my life is lost, and it is definitely at risk even without the loss of life. If you open your business to the public (and that is the property that I'm referring to), then I don't believe that you have any more of a constitutional right to be protected against someone bringing a lawfully allowed item onto your property than anything else not specified or implied with the Constitution. And yet my natural right is so important that there is an amendment just to ensure that it is protected as a right.

[anygunanywhere]

Sometimes you have to go where your firearms are not welcome. Most hospitals are posted. The attitude that you can just go somewhere else where your firearm is welcome is absurd and in no way relates to reality.

Sometimes is not all the time, and we make choices all the time about where to shop. Allowing me to carry lawfully is apart of that decision making process.

Sometimes is not all the time.

When one is confronted by a criminal and is unarmed due to statutory limits (30.06 posted hospitals or other places) one's fate can be forever, not just sometime. When we must go somewhere unarmed because of our life circumstances we are not making a choice. We are being FORCED to go unarmed. How exactly is that a choice?

[Glockster]

Sometimes you have to go where your firearms are not welcome. Most hospitals are posted. The attitude that you can just go somewhere else where your firearm is welcome is absurd and in no way relates to reality.

Sometimes is not all the time, and we make choices all the time about where to shop. Allowing me to carry lawfully is apart of that decision making process.

Sometimes is not all the time.

When one is confronted by a criminal and is unarmed due to statutory limits (30.06 posted hospitals or other places) one's fate can be forever, not just sometime. When we must go somewhere unarmed because of our life circumstances we are not making a choice. We are being FORCED to go unarmed. How exactly is that a choice?

Infringing upon or limiting my right sometime doesn't mean that they haven't been infringed upon. Aside from that, I don't believe that any property owner made any decision that was based upon there being other alternative places available, so no big deal to prohibit in my business.

[chuck j]

Well looks like this is just ANOTHER repeat thread . Stripping away an individuals rights concerning their property has serious consequences . I'll not open that door and would defend that persons rights .

[Glockster]

Well looks like this is just ANOTHER repeat thread . Stripping away an individuals rights concerning their property has serious consequences . I'll not open that door and would defend that persons rights .

As does stripping away any right, doesn't it? Again, how exactly does someone simply carrying strip a property owner of their rights? And I'm referring to a business that is open to the public? I hear what you have said thrown about a lot, but please help me to understand what specifically you feel is stripped away from someone carrying? Meaning, how exactly is your property diminished in any way?

[chuck j]

If you you don't already understand it's not likely you ever will . I own a small business and will not only allow open carry but will encourage it BUT if the neighboring business prohibits it I will honor their request either by disarming or simply not doing business there . I might not understand their reason or reasoning , that is THEIR right to control their property , not mine and I respect it . Freedom to control my own life means something to me and it requires no effort to provide that freedom to another . You might read my first post in this thread .