Texas CHL NOT ALLOWED

[Moby]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/3812623 ... ult&query=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I hope you'll consider joining my FB page and use your spending power to persuade business owners that law abiding citizens that are background checked are not the problem in this state.

The page is meant to be a place to report any and all businesses that post No GUN signs of those that put up 30.06 signs without cause.
Such as a hospital. We are not looking for those. But other businesses that do not believe in our carry rights.
If you don't stand up for your rights....you don't believe in them very strongly.

[RPB]

I don't have a Facebook

I do add to the list at http://texas3006.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; when I run across valid enforceable 30.06 signs. I ignore generic non-enforceable signs

[RoyGBiv]

I don't have a Facebook

I do add to the list at http://texas3006.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; when I run across valid enforceable 30.06 signs. I ignore generic non-enforceable signs

This.

Facebook

[AEA]

me too

[rubio]

I do add to the list at http://texas3006.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; when I run across valid enforceable 30.06 signs. I ignore generic non-enforceable signs

Thanks. That's a great website.

[tacticool]

+1 for Russell and Texas3006.com

[C-dub]

I'm confused by what you mean "without cause."

[Oldgringo]

At the risk of being accused of splitting hairs or otherwise 'majoring in minors'; AFAIK, a Texas CHL is allowed everywhere. It's the gun that causes some to have pause and/or become apoplectic.

[Kythas]

I'm confused by what you mean "without cause."

Me, too.

As someone who leans more libertarian, I have no problem with a business posting a 30.06 sign. Just as I would not wish them to impose their beliefs upon me and force me to do that which I don't wish to do, I would not want to impose my beliefs upon them and force them to do that which they don't wish to do.

Some people are anti-gun, for whatever reason. The reason for their stance is their business, not mine. I am willing to educate those who are amenable to being educated, but many are not.

Some anti-gun people own businesses. They should be able to allow, and disallow, things within their own business at their discretion without government telling them they must (or must not) allow a certain activity. If a business chooses to post a 30.06 sign, I will choose to do business elsewhere. That's how free enterprise and a free market work.

Smoking is another example. I don't smoke. I hate the smell of cigarette smoke; it makes it difficult for me to breathe. However, I don't like that government can force a business to not allow smoking, as smoking is a perfectly legal act. If a business wants to allow smoking, they should be able to do so without the threat of government action against them. I would choose to frequent a business where the owner has chosen to not allow smoking.

In either case, the free market would decide which business model is more profitable. If, for example, I owned a business and allowed smoking and my competitor down the street did not allow smoking, and I saw that he had more business than I did, then I would probably make the decision to ban smoking in my business, too. That would make the most business sense.

Nobody is forcing them to put up the sign. Neither should anyone force them to remove the sign. That is their right as the business owner. My right as a CHL holder is to take my business where I am welcome.

[MoJo]

At the risk of being accused of splitting hairs or otherwise 'majoring in minors'; AFAIK, a Texas CHL is allowed everywhere. It's the gun that causes some to have pause and/or become apoplectic.

[WildBill]

At the risk of being accused of splitting hairs or otherwise 'majoring in minors'; AFAIK, a Texas CHL is allowed everywhere. It's the gun that causes some to have pause and/or become apoplectic.

I have even carried and displayed my CHL on Federal Property!

[tornado]

At the risk of being accused of splitting hairs or otherwise 'majoring in minors'; AFAIK, a Texas CHL is allowed everywhere. It's the gun that causes some to have pause and/or become apoplectic.

I have even carried and displayed my CHL on Federal Property!

DPS sticks it to the feds by sending CHLs through post offices!

[jimlongley]

"This page is a place to add all businesses in Texas that prohibit your right as a licensed citizen to carry a firearm.
We ask that you consider spending your dollars elsewhere."

While I consider the sentiment, No Guns = No Money, admirable, I have issues with the language. As a CHL you are not exercising a right, you are merely using a privilege, and the license is for handguns only, not all firearms. There is every possibility, although I have not heard of it happening, that you could carry a long gun openly pasta 30.06 sign with total impunity - that what those little gun busters signs are for.

Inflammatory rhetoric doesn't fix anything.

[Salty1]

Although I strongly believe in ones right to carry I also strongly believe in ones property rights. I personally look at the 30.06 site ocassionally although I rarely have a need to check for prohibited locations. If a person decides to post their business my alternative is very simple, I do not spend my money there. I do not really care about their reasons I just move along. Like others I am not a Facebook fan, my wife almost lives on it and I know others that do the same, I have better things to do with my time, if something is so important that what texting or a phone is for. If I had my way we would go back to secretarys and file cabinets, life was much simpler then and not nearly as stressful and rushed....

[Katygunnut]

[quote="Salty1"]Although I strongly believe in ones right to carry I also strongly believe in ones property rights. I personally look at the 30.06 site ocassionally although I rarely have a need to check for prohibited locations. If a person decides to post their business my alternative is very simple, I do not spend my money there. I do not really care about their reasons I just move along. quote]

I generally agree, that people should be allowed to exclude whoever they want from their homes or a private club, but I draw a line when a business presents itself as being open to the general public. The RKBA is a fundamental individual right that is guaranteed in the US Constitution, much like freedom of religion, etc.

I lean Libertarian, but I also believe that a business which is open to the public should not be allowed to exclude people because they practice a specific religion, or happen to be a certain sex, or a certain race, or anything else. I also believe that such a business should not be able to exclude an individual because they are exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

If a business wants to discriminate against any or all of the above, let them organize as a private club and sell memberships only to Hispanic women who are Jewish and don't carry weapons, or whatever group they want to include / exclude. As long as the business is open to the general public, they should be open for everyone.

In other words, yes I do take exception when a business owner claims that they are open to the general public, but then decides to discriminate against a specific group of people, including those who legally carry firearms, and I will do everything I can to hurt that business in the hope that they fail and the owner(s) end up begging on the streets. Just my personal opinion. I react to these businesses in the same I would to a business that posted a sign saying "No Catholics allowed". To me it is the same thing, even if our current laws make a distinction.