Posted on 10/05/2019 5:24:01 AM PDT by marktwain
A correspondent I have known since his childhood spends a large part of his time overseas as a missionary.
Coming back to Wisconsin, he was surprised to find a “No Firearms Allowed” sign at a Denny's. I believe this is a local policy, decided by each local manager of the franchise. My correspondent gave me permission to edit the account of his reaction. His overseas experience has made him appreciate the freedoms Americans take for granted. His account:
Returning to America after having been gone half a year, lends itself to re-entry culture shock. I recently returned to the USA. I am extremely politically active as well as up to speed on currant issues. I was still shocked by the the anti freedom advances the leftists have made in rural America.
Driving north into Wisconsin on the Interstate, I decided to pull into a Denny's for one of their breakfast specials. I was shocked to see a “No Firearms” sign!
I was traveling with my father, who said: ” Well, I guess we better find another place to eat, one that loves freedom”.
I replied “Yes, but I won't just walk away in silent defeat”.
We went in; a friendly waitress asked if only the two of us would be dinning. ” No”, I replied, “neither of us would be staying.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
“She replied, ‘I’m sorry you feel this way’.”
LOL! That’s the exact same response I got from a customer service rep for a pharma company when I called to complain that there is not even one white person in their TV ad. I told them I expect diversity, and am offended by their obvious racism. “I’m sorry you feel that way.”
They send the clear message that you cannot defend or take care of yourself - only the state can do that.
I didn’t realize Denny’s was still in business. I thought they’d gone the way of Sambo’s.
Actually a lot of Sambo’s (Little Black, originally) became Denny’s, at least in the South.
A private company disallowing weapons is not a 2nd Amendment issue. Just like a business owner telling you that you cannot wear a MAGA hat is not a 1st Amendment issue.
You have no rights to enter private property. You especially have no right to enter private property against the owners wishes or enter in a manner contrary to their conditions for entry.
I comply with the signs out of my profound respect for private property rights. If I decide to keep you off of my property until you disarm you can either disarm or stay out your choice. But what won’t happen is that you enter armed against my wishes.
Thank you for the reference!
Here’s link to the research & data:
Smith Carolina is NOT an open carry state, (for handguns that is, rifles and shotguns it is OK,) and you will be charged and you will pay for your harmless mistake. CCW in SC is fine with permit and there is no problem with printing. You could cover a S&W model 29 with eight inch barrel using only a t-shirt with the words “Go ahead make my day!” emblazoned upon it.
The law is usually used to enhance other charges like drug offenses and traffic offenses. The patrolman will not get in trouble if he lets you go. Prosecutors will not get in trouble if they drop a deadly weapon charge against you, but I would not count on it.
There is an open carry movement in SC but right now they are all absorbed in getting constitutional carry passed. This year it was ruined when a proponent made some kind of vague “death threat” against the libs on social media. Maybe next year.
https://www.charlestonlaw.net/handgun-carry-laws-south-carolina/disapproval
http://rkmerting.com/open-carry-in-south-carolina/
Even when it was more “gun friendly”, it was dependent on each canton’s desires/laws/regulations.
Isn't that similar to our 10th Amendment?
Maybe it wasn’t SC. It was somewhere down south.
“Pass laws that require any business with more than 10 employees (or whatever the Obamacare threshold is) must provide “adequate” armed security to protect their patrons and employees.”
Not trying to start an argument, but there was a post yesterday that said the problem with this is that you are not compelled to be disarmed because you are not compelled to enter the business.
Thanks I understand!
Ok, and what happens when all the stores, all the pharmacies, all the restaurants in your area are posted no guns, hm? “Not compelled” only in a technical sense at that point.
Also, businesses could choose to not have this level of security as well as choosing to not allow legal carry. The law does not compel them to do so, but it does assign penalties should they choose this path and something happens. More to the point, it means that both the companies and the insurers would not be able to get out of giant lawsuits and enormous payouts. Insurance companies would then start recommending/demanding the insured either have an ‘adequate’ level of protection for both patrons and workers, or to allow patrons and workers to defend themselves, the latter being far cheaper.
Try that idea at an airport when entering the secured area and see what happens.
Depends on the state. In some states they just call the cops and have you arrested.
Got a news flash for you here too - after the El Paso Walmart incident, there has been a sudden uptick in the normal loss prevention anti-shoplifting panels flanking the doors being replaced with walk through security arches that contain magnetometers and anti-shoplift sensors.
Like I said, I wasn’t trying to start, and frankly I’m not interested in getting into, an argument. You’re right on all points. You win.
Here in Washington state those signs can legally be ignored. HOWEVER, if they do see that you have a gun they can ask you to leave, and if you don’t the cops might get called and you can be charged with trespassing.
Schools, court rooms and bars it is illegal to carry a gun. Sporting stadiums are treated the same as a business - although the big ones have metal detectors at the gates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.