TexasCHLforum.com

Moms Demand Action article regarding 30.06 signage. Make sure you've taken your blood pressure medicine before reading…

http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/ar ... 232690.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hard to not agree to a point. A business owner shouldn't have to play the guessing game if he wants to ban guns from his business. The way the current system is set up, even people in this forum post about signs and whether they are valid. If we are going to have these types of signs, knowing if they are valid or not should be simple.

Well, this is just wonderful. I will tell you I believe this is a result of the attention that has been brought by the stunts and other 'in your face' 2A actions. When you stir the pot the anit's go looking for the smell. Once they start digging then they twist the purpose of well meaning sites and try to protray them as a subversive tactic planning site.

Keith B wrote:Well, this is just wonderful. I will tell you I believe this is a result of the attention that has been brought by the stunts and other 'in your face' 2A actions. When you stir the pot the anit's go looking for the smell. Once they start digging then they twist the purpose of well meaning sites and try to protray them as a subversive tactic planning site.

texanjoker wrote:Hard to not agree to a point. A business owner shouldn't have to play the guessing game if he wants to ban guns from his business. The way the current system is set up, even people in this forum post about signs and whether they are valid. If we are going to have these types of signs, knowing if they are valid or not should be simple.

Hogwash! 30.06 spells out exactly what is required. There is no guessing game.

Just to open a business, the owner has to do lots of research to make sure he meets all legal requirements for a host of things such as fire codes, handicap access, etc. Why on earth should his desire to prevent law abiding citizens access to his business be any different?

The only guessing game comes about when the owner tries to cheat the system. Either he does not do his "due diligence" or he tries to cheat the clearly worded 30.06 statute because he doesn't want that "bug ugly sign" on the front of his business, so he does something like printing it out on a laser printer. That leaves, typically new, forum members looking for assurance the sign is or is not valid. Remember, CHL holders are a pretty law-abiding bunch.

one of the incident she cited did not happen in 2012 but in January of 2011, to me if your going cite an incident at least get it correct, otherwise it just makes you look a bigger fool.

However, wise business owners understand that allowing guns on their property is hazardous for business.

I stopped reading at this quote.

This is a anti2A propaganda hit piece. You can say all you want about any recent events stirring up the pot, but these leftist progressive journalists are heck bent on total confiscation, not justifying a business owner's ability to ban firearms from their business.

Total confiscation. The business aspect is just a lame attempt to cloud their ultimate goal.

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:

However, wise business owners understand that allowing guns on their property is hazardous for business.

I stopped reading at this quote.

This is a anti2A propaganda hit piece. You can say all you want about any recent events stirring up the pot, but these leftist progressive journalists are heck bent on total confiscation, not justifying a business owner's ability to ban firearms from their business.

Total confiscation. The business aspect is just a lame attempt to cloud their ultimate goal.

Anygunanywhere

The "noble" support of business owners' right in this article is nothing more than a means to an end. That end is abolishment of the right to keep and bear arms.

These types of articles need to be challenged. A business knows nothing about their customers that are not CHL. At least with a CHL they know some of their customers are good law abiding people. That article is so far left I had to make a right turn just so I could go straight .

This is not a news article. It's an opinion piece written by a Moms Demand Action rep. And yes, thank you again to the open carry crowd for bringing the spotlight upon us all.

And for what it's worth, I've never heard of a business being held liable for being the site of a shooting - posted or not. The 30.06 provision is just one of a thousand regulations that a business must comply with when they decided to open. Nothing more, nothing less.

I see it from a different point of view, and answered as such:

"The article headline should have read: "Texas Provides a Path for Business Owners to Discriminate Against Law Abiding Citizens"

Concealed Handgun licensees in Texas have:

No Felony Convictions - Lifetime!
No Class A or B Misdemeanor Convictions in the last Five Years!
No Delinquent Conduct in the last Ten Years!
Have Passed Both State and Federal Fingerprint and Background Checks!
Are not delinquent in child support, student loans, or State or Local Taxes!

HOW MUCH DO YOU KNOW ABOUT YOUR OTHER CUSTOMERS?

You post the sign, and we will happily respect your wishes by spending our money elsewhere.

In study after study crime has been shown to go DOWN in states and communities where CHL is allowed, and this extends even to the smallest subsets of society, in short, Texas business customers are safer due to concealed carry than Chicago customers.

And despite all of the handwringing moaning and groaning that Chasse does about the "a simple sign is hindering Texas businesses' ability to avoid costly incidents of injury, death, property damage and loss of reputation" it is still merely, as she said, a "simple sign" and she could only come up with ONE anecdotal (Texas, it is what we are talking about here, right? Florida has no such law) incident to make her case. One single incident out of thousands and thousands over years and years worth of CHL holders peacefully shopping in businesses that recognize that CHL holders are not criminals who would disobey the signs in the first place but are law abiding citizens who are no danger to the business or its customers.

But thank you for providing this excellent example of the shrill alarmist tactics of the gun banners of the world, it provided a few fleeting moments of humor."

And I don't see where the "open carry crowd" has really contributed to her rant in any way. Open carry as allowed in TX is already stopped by gun busters signs, and most of her rant was about the signs that have onerously been forced upon the businesses of TX , which are only for CHLs. Yes, the OCC has been a little more (OK a lot more) visible than CHL, but after all, concealed is concealed, but other than using it as an excuse for her opinion piece, she failed to present any valid argument against it.

TexasCajun wrote:This is not a news article. It's an opinion piece written by a Moms Demand Action rep. And yes, thank you again to the open carry crowd for bringing the spotlight upon us all.

And for what it's worth, I've never heard of a business being held liable for being the site of a shooting - posted or not. The 30.06 provision is just one of a thousand regulations that a business must comply with when they decided to open. Nothing more, nothing less.

Why shy from supporting OC and 2ndA in general. It is fight and the liberals they do not care about CC or OC, or 2nA they are fighting till death to make US like Japan, disarmed!
Fight for your rights, fight for your 2nA.
N.B.: Defiant OC demos may not be the best to fight for 2ndA right, but is an exercise of said right.

I'm going to plagiarize this with your permission?

Concealed Handgun licensees in Texas have:

No Felony Convictions - Lifetime!
No Class A or B Misdemeanor Convictions in the last Five Years!
No Delinquent Conduct in the last Ten Years!
Have Passed Both State and Federal Fingerprint and Background Checks!
Are not delinquent in child support, student loans, or State or Local Taxes!

HOW MUCH DO YOU KNOW ABOUT YOUR OTHER CUSTOMERS?

You post the sign, and we will happily respect your wishes by spending our money elsewhere.

Beiruty wrote:

TexasCajun wrote:This is not a news article. It's an opinion piece written by a Moms Demand Action rep. And yes, thank you again to the open carry crowd for bringing the spotlight upon us all.

And for what it's worth, I've never heard of a business being held liable for being the site of a shooting - posted or not. The 30.06 provision is just one of a thousand regulations that a business must comply with when they decided to open. Nothing more, nothing less.

Why shy from supporting OC and 2ndA in general. It is fight and the liberals they do not care about CC or OC, or 2nA they are fighting till death to make US like Japan, disarmed!
Fight for your rights, fight for your 2nA.
N.B.: Defiant OC demos may not be the best to fight for 2ndA right, but is an exercise of said right.

The tactics that the oc crowd uses are detrimental to all of us. While they persist in such insanity, I will do whatever I can to distance myself and encourage others to do the same. Anyone is free to PM me to discuss this further. I mentioned oc because the author brought it up and I suspect was a key prompt to the article in the first place. Too many threads are pulled down the oc black hole. I don't want this one to do the same.