Should Gun Owners Use Tactics of the Left?

[Grillmark55]

Seems like this could set a precedent for (more like against) private business owners which I totally disagree with:

http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles ... baker.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I go to a business that posts 30.06 signage, I generally think that is THEIR business and they have every right to do what they believe. I am not the type to protest or throw a hissy-fit or get into somebody's face over what I believe is a business owners right to not allow LEGAL gun owners to carry in their place of business. Usually I will turn around and find a business that does not post 30.06 and take care of business there.

If the business that posts 30.06 has a product or service that I really want and cannot get elsewhere, I will simply disarm myself, take care of my business, and leave. Depending on the business, I leave a copy of a card that I carry stating that I have passed all kinds of background checks that most people in their store probably have not, that I may not be back, and that I will let other gun owners know that they apparently do not support the right of American citizens to carry a firearm.

So here is what I am wondering: If there is a business that has a product or service that is unique and does not allow concealed carry (many movie theaters comes to mind), rather than disarm, should gun owners use the tactics of radical lefties and start filing law suits? I am basing that on this statement from the above story:
“Religious freedom is a fundamental right in America and it’s something that we champion at the ACLU,” said Mark Silverstein, the legal director of the group in Colorado, which filed the complaint last year on behalf of Mullins and Craig. “We are all entitled to our religious beliefs and we fight for that. But someone’s personal religious beliefs don’t justify breaking the law by discriminating against others in the public sphere.”
We gun owners and concealed carry license holders are, after all, simply exercising OUR fundamental and Constitutional right (though I seriously doubt that the ACLU would champion that cause as vigorously).
Like I stated, I am generally one who believes that a business owner has every right to his own beliefs, but at the same time I am getting JUST A LITTLE TIRED OF BEING PUSHED AROUND FOR MY BELIEFS - political, religious, and otherwise.

[jimlongley]

I can't think of any business that is unique enough that upon seeing their 30.06 sign I would not card them and leave.

OTOH, if my religion included the bearing of arms for personal protection, I might have a basis for a suit, but only if the ACLU would take the suit, and they wouldn't.

[JALLEN]

As I understand it, the 30.06 sign business arises from the conflict of two ideals near and dear to Texans' hearts, possessing and carrying firearms and private property owners rights to control their property as they see fit, according to their own unique values.

Private property rights, and respect therefor, have long been protected as a primary concern in Texas, part of its charm, actually. When I was at UT, the Board of Regents abandoned the policy of requiring students under 21 and women to live in UT approved housing, rather than insist the private property owners accept minorities. That was ~45 years ago, and touched off a building boom in Austin the likes of which had never been seen before, although perhaps since exceeded by the look of it. No more living in squalid basements of ancient houses whose owner undertook to prevent student tenants from having beer!

So, CHLs are near universally issued, unlike some places, like CA for example, but private property owners are able to prohibit carrying guns in their establishments.

I do not intend to worry about it. If I encounter a 30.06 sign, I won't patronize that business. I'm not into marching around carrying signs, publicly ranting and raving over something like this.

Very few of our "rights" are absolute, fire in a crowded theater and all that, so some accommodations at the crossroads have to be tolerated.

If you want to ban something, why not ban movies? The entertainment industry is responsible for most of the cultural decline in this country and most of our worries. TV is trashy and movies are worse.

[Grillmark55]

JALLEN - I am in TOTAL agreement with you. I think that a business owners rights are HIS RIGHTS. This total bull of a radical minority group and the ACLU forcing a business owner to compromise his RIGHTS goes against everything that America used to stand for.

I seriously doubt that I would actually push the issue; #1 I have neither the funds nor do think the backing that would let it go as far as it did in Colorado. A hypocritical organization like the ACLU would never back such a move, though I have been thinking of copying that article and sending it to them asking if they would support another part of the Second Amendment as vigorously as they have the gay marriage issue. I think that it would be interesting to see how they would wiggle out of that!

My whole point is that for my entire life (I'm 58) I have gone by the rules, done what is right (most of the time - indiscretions of youth notwithstanding), paid my taxes, worked since I was 15 years old, supported and loved this country and Texas. I feel like I am now getting kicked in the rear end for it and see too many lazy people using the system to get a free ride at my expense and I am getting damn tired of it. I guess I feel like the newscaster Howard Beale in the movie Network; "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this any more!"

[The Annoyed Man]

Very few of our "rights" are absolute, fire in a crowded theater and all that, so some accommodations at the crossroads have to be tolerated.

JALLEN, I think that illustration gets abused some times. The "shout fire in a theater" thing is like the "discharge of firearm within city limits" thing. Of course, it is perfectly legal to discharge a firearm within city limits to protect your own or someone else's life. You just can't do it irresponsibly, and without a good reason. Similarly, it is perfectly legal to shout "FIRE!" in a theater, if there is indeed a fire, and people need to get out RIGHT NOW. But you can't shout it in a theater where there is no fire, just to get a rise out of the patrons. The question isn't whether or not you can shout fire (or shoot a gun) if there is a need, the question is whether or not you can do so when there is no need.

To the OP, I understand your frustration, but no. Wrestling with a pig just gets you dirty and annoys the pig. And if a movie theater posts 30.06, they are not offering a unique product not available anywhere else. There are LOTS of movie theaters, some of which are showing the movie you want to see, and a few of those are posted. The rest are not. Go to one that isn't.

Personally, I always carry a giveaway card in my wallet. We've all seen one.... qualifications to become a CHL on one side, "can you say that about all your customers" on the other side....or words to that effect. If I am really inconvenienced by that sign, I'll hand the story owner the card if I can do so without entering, and I'm on my way to give my money to someone who wants my business. I have only violated that standard a handful of times in the last 5 years by disarming and entering anyway, and it was A) simply because either the item truly wasn't available somewhere else, or B) I really didn't have the time to go elsewhere and I needed it NOW, or C) it was a hospital and I had no other choice. But I have walked away from a lot of places that are posted. Life is too short to dance with ugly trolls.

[JALLEN]

Very few of our "rights" are absolute, fire in a crowded theater and all that, so some accommodations at the crossroads have to be tolerated.

JALLEN, I think that illustration gets abused some times. The "shout fire in a theater" thing is like the "discharge of firearm within city limits" thing. Of course, it is perfectly legal to discharge a firearm within city limits to protect your own or someone else's life. You just can't do it irresponsibly, and without a good reason. Similarly, it is perfectly legal to shout "FIRE!" in a theater, if there is indeed a fire, and people need to get out RIGHT NOW. But you can't shout it in a theater where there is no fire, just to get a rise out of the patrons. The question isn't whether or not you can shout fire (or shoot a gun) if there is a need, the question is whether or not you can do so when there is no need.

......

The illustration is often used because it is so familiar and easy to understand. The downside is that it is often misunderstood, and often misused. Holmes' point was that free speech has limits, irresponsibility being one of the limits. It is interesting to note that it is not a point of law, mere dictum, in a case that was overruled decades ago. It was not the holding in a case, or of that case, merely illustrative of a point. Holmes subsequently sharpened his view of free speech, in dissent in Abrams:

"The ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas -- that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out."

Back to the main point with the 30.06 signs, when important social values clash, often a practical compromise is achieved, albeit after sometimes long and bitter struggles. A prime example is Miranda, balancing Constitutional rights against the need for effective law enforcement. Purists on both sides are unhappy, which may indicate an effective balance.

[Tecumseh]

Gun owners are not a protected class so you can't do anything. And actually Civil Rights are now the realm of the left but it started amongst the right wing.

[Purplehood]

Keep in mind (and I am not a lawyer so I could be totally wrong here), that you have to be charged first before you can challenge a law.

[bagman45]

So here's where the "take my business elsewhere" approach breaks down; I'm in Plano, and the Plano Sports Authority (actually a "non-profit" organization) is pretty much the only place you can economically have your kids participate in organized basketball, volleyball, flag football, etc, etc. sports teams. They have a valid 30.06 posted outside their facilities, even though there is quite a history of assaults and vehicle break-ins in their facility parking lots. There are also A LOT of aggressive, confrontational parents in the facilities, pretty much ALL of the time - you've all seen the crazy sports parent; well, they are here in spades..... This is actually one of the only places I frequent where I feel like I actually SHOULD be carrying my lawfully concealed handgun, but can't. Before you say; "well, your choice, take your kids somewhere else", understand that they play on teams with their friends, and likely would give up the sports if they couldn't play with them. Happy to hear any thoughts here, but the Libs seem to not give dang about what we think, and keep pushing until they get their way; I think we should be doing the same thing. After all, it's clear (while unfortunate), that nobody in our current society CARES what anyone else thinks, so the "moral high ground" is a useless place to stand. REALLY painful for me to say that, but it's where we are as a nation, and think it's time for US to start playing hardball like everyone else. We are becoming the "meek"...... Again, happy to hear other perspectives.

[bjthompson]

If you carried the thought process of using the tactics of the left you may be reduced to throwing poo at the store owners you disagreed with, (circa special session 2 of the Texas legislature). I for one will never throw poo at someone I disagree with

[JALLEN]

So here's where the "take my business elsewhere" approach breaks down; I'm in Plano, and the Plano Sports Authority (actually a "non-profit" organization) is pretty much the only place you can economically have your kids participate in organized basketball, volleyball, flag football, etc, etc. sports teams. They have a valid 30.06 posted outside their facilities, even though there is quite a history of assaults and vehicle break-ins in their facility parking lots. There are also A LOT of aggressive, confrontational parents in the facilities, pretty much ALL of the time - you've all seen the crazy sports parent; well, they are here in spades..... This is actually one of the only places I frequent where I feel like I actually SHOULD be carrying my lawfully concealed handgun, but can't. Before you say; "well, your choice, take your kids somewhere else", understand that they play on teams with their friends, and likely would give up the sports if they couldn't play with them. Happy to hear any thoughts here, but the Libs seem to not give dang about what we think, and keep pushing until they get their way; I think we should be doing the same thing. After all, it's clear (while unfortunate), that nobody in our current society CARES what anyone else thinks, so the "moral high ground" is a useless place to stand. REALLY painful for me to say that, but it's where we are as a nation, and think it's time for US to start playing hardball like everyone else. We are becoming the "meek"...... Again, happy to hear other perspectives.

If it is a non-profit it must be governed by a board of directors. How are those directors chosen? Membership? Participation? Good ol' boy network? Must not be the good ol' boy network, or the good ol' boys would haul down those signs. Anyway there must be some way to get a number of like minded folk in positions of power and set things right. It's hard to imagine that Plano is so controlled by the weenies that nothing can be done.

[ScooterSissy]

So here's where the "take my business elsewhere" approach breaks down; I'm in Plano, and the Plano Sports Authority (actually a "non-profit" organization) is pretty much the only place you can economically have your kids participate in organized basketball, volleyball, flag football, etc, etc. sports teams. They have a valid 30.06 posted outside their facilities, even though there is quite a history of assaults and vehicle break-ins in their facility parking lots. There are also A LOT of aggressive, confrontational parents in the facilities, pretty much ALL of the time - you've all seen the crazy sports parent; well, they are here in spades..... This is actually one of the only places I frequent where I feel like I actually SHOULD be carrying my lawfully concealed handgun, but can't. Before you say; "well, your choice, take your kids somewhere else", understand that they play on teams with their friends, and likely would give up the sports if they couldn't play with them. Happy to hear any thoughts here, but the Libs seem to not give dang about what we think, and keep pushing until they get their way; I think we should be doing the same thing. After all, it's clear (while unfortunate), that nobody in our current society CARES what anyone else thinks, so the "moral high ground" is a useless place to stand. REALLY painful for me to say that, but it's where we are as a nation, and think it's time for US to start playing hardball like everyone else. We are becoming the "meek"...... Again, happy to hear other perspectives.

It might possibly be pushing things if you do this (they may retaliate), but I would let the group leaders know your dissatisfaction with their posting. I'd let them know that your strong preference is to carry armed at all times. That you will comply with their requirement to disarm at the sporting events, since you want your kids to participate; but since they obviously have a real problem with participants being armed, you will absent yourself from any additional volunteer work, fund-raisers, etc. Be sure to let them know you hate doing so, but will have to to comply with their restrictions.

[cb1000rider]

You've got to look at it from their side too. It's their property. They've got a situation where there is a lot of confrontation and volatility. Would you like to have that group armed on the premises?

(Pretend that you know nothing about the law-abidingness of CHL holders)

You bring up a valid point.. There are businesses that you can't just walk away from by choice. And the reality is that most of them will never know we made that choice unless they were informed.

[polekitty]

I would like to see what some of you have written on your cards. I've never seen or heard of them. Would someone mind posting one or more please?

[Grillmark55]

I would like to see what some of you have written on your cards. I've never seen or heard of them. Would someone mind posting one or more please?

Mine reads:
As a Texas Concealed Handgun License holder, by law I:
* Have no felony convictions
* Have no Class A or B Misdemeanors
* Have not been diagnosed with a psychological illness
* Am not delinquent in child support, student loans, or state or Federal Income taxes
* Am not chemically or alcohol dependent
* Passed both State and Federal fingerprint and background checks

CAN YOUR OTHER CUSTOMERS SAY THAT?
(Still want to turn my business away?)