TexasCHLforum.com

I wonder what the chances are of getting legislation through that would require businesses etc. that forbid guns on the premises to provide supervised lock boxes?

I went into a business that had “No weapons of any kind anywhere on the premises” signs everywhere.

I had no place to park except on that companies property so I carried it on in and there was no problem.

When I find the 30.06 signs at the entrance to a business, I hate to take it back and lock it up in the car with who knows who watching.

Also if businesses have to provide lock boxes there would probably be a lot fewer 30.06 signs.

my opinion on the legislation is that IF introduced it would be quickly shot down, which business would want to spend the money to make a secure area for a few shoppers, plus, if lockers were installed in a public place, would you feel comfortable unarming in such a place... as i said thats just my opinion

Not a chance in heck for many reasons.

Eeeekkk! Not sure I want to leave a $500 important piece of equipment in another persons possession. Especially something that has lethal potential. Nah....I'll either leave or put it in my car safe.

RetNavy wrote:my opinion on the legislation is that IF introduced it would be quickly shot down, which business would want to spend the money to make a secure area for a few shoppers, plus, if lockers were installed in a public place, would you feel comfortable unarming in such a place... as i said thats just my opinion

which business would want to spend the money to make a secure area for a few shoppers

Exactly. That is why I believe you would see a lot fewer 30.06 signs. If some very sturdy lockers were mounted in the wall at the entrance under CCTV where you can lock it up and keep the key I would have no problem disarming there.

I am disabled and walking very far hurts. I hate to make three trips to get into a store when one should be sufficient and I should be able under the law to protect myself and my wife.

VoiceofReason wrote:

RetNavy wrote:my opinion on the legislation is that IF introduced it would be quickly shot down, which business would want to spend the money to make a secure area for a few shoppers, plus, if lockers were installed in a public place, would you feel comfortable unarming in such a place... as i said thats just my opinion

which business would want to spend the money to make a secure area for a few shoppers

Exactly. That is why I believe you would see a lot fewer 30.06 signs. If some very sturdy lockers were mounted in the wall at the entrance under CCTV where you can lock it up and keep the key I would have no problem disarming there.

I am disabled and walking very far hurts. I hate to make three trips to get into a store when one should be sufficient and I should be able under the law to protect myself and my wife.

Method to your madness!

Excellent!

Think about it. If these bidnesses must provide lock boxes then they must slow be held liable for making sure the weapons stay safe. Make them liable. We have discussed the possibility of making these antis liable when they disarm us. Make it hurt.

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:

RetNavy wrote:my opinion on the legislation is that IF introduced it would be quickly shot down, which business would want to spend the money to make a secure area for a few shoppers, plus, if lockers were installed in a public place, would you feel comfortable unarming in such a place... as i said thats just my opinion

which business would want to spend the money to make a secure area for a few shoppers

Exactly. That is why I believe you would see a lot fewer 30.06 signs. If some very sturdy lockers were mounted in the wall at the entrance under CCTV where you can lock it up and keep the key I would have no problem disarming there.

I am disabled and walking very far hurts. I hate to make three trips to get into a store when one should be sufficient and I should be able under the law to protect myself and my wife.

Method to your madness!

Excellent!

Think about it. If these bidnesses must provide lock boxes then they must slow be held liable for making sure the weapons stay safe. Make them liable. We have discussed the possibility of making these antis liable when they disarm us. Make it hurt.

Anygunanywhere

Just wouldn't pass. It would place an undue burden on the business, basically a way to punish business owners who exercise their rights to control their own private property, to meet the desires of a truly small group of people. The effort to do so would use up way to much political capital on what is most likely unobtainable anyway.

I wonder how well a "drop your gun off" lockbox business located across the street/next door to a county courthouse would do?

I prefer my own"COM" lockbox, cabled in my pickukp when I know I'll have to lock up my gun before I go in for say something like jury duty.

EEllis wrote:Not a chance in heck for many reasons.

It would take a different breed of legislator to pass something like this:

If an operator of a public establishment or a sponsor of a public event requests that a person carrying a deadly weapon remove the weapon, the operator or sponsor shall provide temporary and secure storage. The storage shall be readily accessible on entry into the establishment or event and allow for the immediate retrieval of the weapon on exit from the establishment or event