Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ] 
Author
Message
Post subject: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:52 pm
Folks,

Has the Ohio Legislation have anything laws in the works like Missouri. Missouri has introduced a bill to hold Businesses that post “No Guns” signs liable. There, legislation is being considered to hold businesses who prohibit firearms liabie for injuries to people who could have defended themselves.

I’ve always believed that if a business is a “ criminal protection zone “, then they should be required to hire qualified armed security guards or be at risk for lawsuits from BG’s shooting the place up.

Thanks,
CB
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:54 pm
Posts: 7
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 1:56 pm
Hang on, you want to make businesses liable when you *choose* to disarm and *knowingly* enter a "criminal protection zone"?

So much for personal responsibility - not to mention property rights, freedom, liberty, etc.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 683
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 5:29 pm
Businesses have property rights? Can I post a sign in my business that says no women permitted on these premises without being sued?

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 470
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:29 pm
Liberty wrote:
Businesses have property rights?


Business owners do - or at least should, don't they?

Liberty wrote:
Can I post a sign in my business that says no women permitted on these premises


You should be able to, in my opinion.

Liberty wrote:
without being sued?


Not in this day and age, no - but, here you are talking about denying a protected class of person entry. A different proposition than what is being discussed in the bill (though, I disagree with the concept of "protected class" and forcing the government's will on property owners based on that concept.)

Following the premise in the bill being discussed, should I then be able to sue the business owner who does *not* post "no guns" signage if a person with a concealed handgun license harms me while in their establishment? Goose, gander, sauce, etc.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 683
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:26 pm
Those exercising the 2nd Amendment are a protected class. Does the Constitution say the right to be a woman (or Irish or Italian) shall not be infringed?

I don't know what the proposed Missouri legislation says, but I do not think anyone has the right to use the force of law to disarm me unless they can guarantee my safety.

I think a better approach is to just delete the laws that specifically infringing upon possessing and carrying firearms anywhere. If you are in someone's business and the owner sees your gun and does not like it, he/she can ask you to leave. There are other laws that deal with that. Likewise, he/she can ask you to leave if being Irish offends the property owner.

Prohibiting the property owner from asking the Irishman to leave while having a law that creates criminal penalties specifically for those exercising the 2nd Amendment if a property owner does not like it, not only violates the 2nd Amendment, it violates the equal protection clause.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 470
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 11:07 pm
You may believe a person exercising the 2nd Amendment is a protected class, but the law disagrees with you. Good luck with that.

And, as I have said on (far too) many occasions, *you* make the *choice* to disarm and enter a posted business. You are not forced to do so by anyone or any law. Any consequences are the result of the criminal's and your own choices.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 683
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2017 11:24 pm
It is not the law that disagrees with me; it is activists judges who have created protected classes that are not in the Constitution while violating the God given right to self-defense that is specifically enumerated in the Constitution. The people who enacted the 2nd Amendment agreed with my position.

Is it really one's choice when a business owner is the only place you can purchase needed medicine and can use the force of law (i.e., use government to use violence against anyone who wants to defend themselves) to prevent you from purchasing medicine unless you give up your right to defend yourself?

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 470
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2017 6:51 am
The founders may have agreed with you to a point, but I suspect when it comes to property rights many would not agree that you have the right to enter someone else's property without meeting their conditions. Regardless, activist judges or not, the law as it stands today still disagrees with you. And, there are far more pressing issues regarding 2A infringements that should be addressed before asking the government to infringe on the property rights of business owners.

I hardly think there are no other options - I cannot think of a single time when faced with a posted business that I did not have another option. In your example, find another pharmacy, like Walmart, or get it filled online, etc.

What we *should* be discussing is the case where we do *not* have another choice and it is *clearly* our right to enter while armed: Government facilities that are not secured. *That* is what we should be fighting for, not this.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 683
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2017 11:28 am
Your suspicions about the founders are wrong. They were very clear in their writings about what they believed. There is nothing there to even remotely suggest that they wanted businesses to have the government use violence to disarm patrons to their businesses. That is the reason why they put "shall not be infringed" in the second amendment. They have to be rolling in their graves when our government forces, with the threat of violence and imprisonment, businesses to make wedding cakes for homosexuals, pay for abortions, pay union dues that end up in the democrat/communist party campaign accounts, while imprisoning anyone who asserts their own right to self-defense while doing business with someone who does not want them to defend themselves.

And regarding choice, have you ever been to the people's republic of cleveland heights? Not everyone owns a car and/or is able to go somewhere else to purchase life's necessities.

The other problem with criminalization of those who ignore no-guns signs is that it furthers the fallacy that it somehow makes those businesses safer when the opposite is true.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 470
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2017 12:26 pm
I don't have a problem with a business owner being able to choose who he/she wants to do business with, but that concept is just not reality in our society. They are forced to do business with everyone and accept anything that patrons want to stick in their faces, while at the same time, they are given this incredible authority to wield the power government to deprive anyone who comes on their property of the right to defend themselves and to have the government use violence to imprison anyone who dares to disobey their irrational signage. The hypocrisy is deafening.

Under their reasoning, I should be able to post a sign on my property that says no seat belts and have the government send thugs with guns to anyone's home who uses a seat belt on my property and take their stuff, beat them up and lock them up in a prison cell because, after all, everyone knows that wearing seat belts only invites automobile crashes, and more people are injured and killed by auto crashes than by guns. And the same should go for anyone who brings a fire extinguisher on my property, if an arsonist sees that, well….

My problem is with the laws that specifically target the 2nd Amendment. It should not be a criminal offense to disobey a no guns sign while it is not an offense to disobey no seat belt or no fire extinguisher sign and while it is civil death for a business to post a sign detailing who it wants to do business with or prohibiting any objectionable behavior, unless of course, that behavior happens to be related to exercising the 2nd Amendment.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 470
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 4:44 pm
I’ve been posting here for 15 years or as soon as the site was available, but due to circumstances beyond my control, my post count is small, so I’m not some newbie and don’t appreciate being talked down to. Now I remember why I stopped sending $$ to support this site.

I believe in personal responsibility, but if ya can’t carry because of some sign, then the business should be liable for any injury resulting from a BG’s action. Your comprehension level needs to improve. JustaShooter read the Missouri law. I don’t support CPZ business’s and your response and/or snowflake lack of response to the question was disappointing. We’re in this together, but like all other social media, it’s gotten clickish.

Geeze, I ask a simple yes or no question and get everything else. Just like a bunch of Libs. Read and understand before ya shoot your mouth off. At 62, I don’t suffer fools, no matter how many posts or titles they have after their name. I’m assuming from the lack of staying on point the answer to my question is no.

I’ll definitely be giving Gun owners of Ohio group another look after this type of response. Years ago, I would’ve gotten an answer w/o the lecture on personal responsibility, freedom, property rights yabba, yabba, yabba.
CB
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:54 pm
Posts: 7
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:15 pm
Well, I guess he told me. Since I'm a snowflake I better go find me a safe place where people don't disagree with me or challenge my perceptions. Oh, wait...

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 683
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: New Missouri Law Introduced
Post Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2017 1:56 pm
Florida has introduced similar legislation.

"Don't pick a fight with an old man, if he is too old to fight, he will just shoot you. ~ John Steinbeck
Top
Offline
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:12 am
Posts: 152
Location: SE Ohio
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Search for:
Jump to: