Gun owners claim right to take their rifles to work

Telegraph ^ | 11/12/04 | Alec Russell in Valliant and Scott Heiser in Washington

[hoosierham]

So shopping malls should be able to prevent you from having __________ in your vehicle because they own the parking lot ?

And since the big corporations and their underpaid,understaffed,under-equpted and unarmed security are afraid of ___________ the right to keep and use ________ will be effectively destroyed.

I thought situations such as this was why certain things were RECOGNIZED,not granted, as rights.

Must have been some other land , some other time.

Knowing that the bad guys whom you, in general,cannot identify soley from appearance, will carry ________ despite laws to the contrary, and that certained licensed persons whom you ,in general, cannot identify from appearance, it is reasonable to assume that ANY person you meet may be carrying ________,and to govern your own actions accordingly.

This would recommend being polite and respectful to all ,neither offering nor accepting insult, and basically minding your own business.

[jonestown]

jonestown:
Your specious 'no wit - sorry' bit is evidence in itself that you're playing the 'one up' game called the dozens.

---

I think we call that "projection."
Have you been seeing anyone for that? sitetest

---

Ya bro, - my momma's an expert on the old pro-jection ---- And, - who's "we", dude? You got a mouse?

[sitetest]

Dear jonestown,

"who's 'we', dude?"

Those of us who practiced, or once practiced psychotherapy (past tense for me).

Is your mother a psychotherapist, too? ;-)


sitetest

[jonestown]

Basically "minding your own business" seems to be a lost art in the legal/corporate/political circles that approve of banning guns in parking lots.

[sitetest]

Dear hoosierham,

"This would recommend being polite and respectful to all ,neither offering nor accepting insult, and basically minding your own business."

My own personal motivation for trying to be polite, respectful, etc., is that it is the right thing to do.

Oh, and I work very hard to mind my own business.

I wish others would mind theirs, not thinking they have a right to tell a businessman his.

;-)


sitetest

[jonestown]

Thanks. - Identifying your former profession explains more than you know.

[sitetest]

Dear jonestown,

"Thanks. - Identifying your former profession explains more than you know."

I figured you'd say that. Sorta hoping you wouldn't disappoint.

;-)


sitetest

[THEUPMAN]

Tell me if I have the right to do so. If yes, then there's nothing more to be said. It's my right. If not, then show me the legal or moral basis for you argument. Tell me why I couldn't do so. What are the rational bases for either argument?

Make the case.

Let me try ....
The right to keep and bear arms is not a right that is granted by some man, government, or institution ... but rather a right granted at birth by the creator. The same as a right to be black or the right to pursue happiness ... Lets look at the civil rights movement of the 60s ... the same underlying concept is at work here. Should we be allowed to discriminate against those who exercise the right to protect themselves? If we can extend" civil" rights to private property then surly we can extend the God given right to self-protection to private property.

[jonestown]

I try to please. It's my duty to help unfortunates.

[Modok]

Now it's much clearer why you are a liberal gun grabber.

[jonestown]

San Francisco supervisors propose sweeping gun ban
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1302332/posts

"Under the language of the measure, police officers, security guards, members of the military, and anyone else "actually employed and engaged in protecting and preserving property or life within the scope of his or her employment" could have a firearm."


Hmmmm, whatdayathink, sitetest? Sound go to you?

[jonestown]

San Francisco supervisors propose sweeping gun ban
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1302332/posts

"Under the language of the measure, police officers, security guards, members of the military, and anyone else "actually employed and engaged in protecting and preserving property or life within the scope of his or her employment" could have a firearm."


Hmmmm, whatdayathink, sitetest? Sound good to you?

[sitetest]

Dear jonestown,

I need all the help I can get.

I'll let you know if you're actually ever helpful.

;-)


sitetest

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

I can carry anything I want to in my vehicle, and as long as it does not violate state or federal laws, there isn't a dang thing any private company can say about it.

[Modok]

I will also let you know if you are ever acutally right on anything Ms Maryland.

[sitetest]

Dear Modok,

If you're going to insult someone's cognitive functions, it helps to get the spelling and grammar right in your own post.

Try the button to the left of "Preview."

;-)


sitetest

[jonestown]

I can carry anything I want to in my vehicle, and as long as it does not violate state or federal laws, there isn't a dang thing any private company can say about it.
794 O.C. - Old Cracker

---

That isn't the issue here.

The company gun grabbers want government support for their supposed 'right' to fire you, --- for even smelling a gun in your vehicle.

[Modok]

Your superior gun grabbing attitude shows through nicely.

[Luis Gonzalez]

This isn't about "those inclined to rob,rape,and murder", this is about the ability of a property owner to set the conditions and rules of access to his private property.

These people used the force of government to impose their will on the rightful owner of a parcel of land.

That's wrong, and it's going to bite everyone in the ass.

[Luis Gonzalez]

That's not such a "great find" jonesy, it may seem so to someone, such as yourself, who hasn't a clue in the world about how law works ("why use case law?).

"Henry Perritt Jr., one of this country's foremost scholars on labor and employment law, advocates a comprehensive test for analyzing wrongful discharge claims involving violations of public policy."

"Public policy" has nothing to do with the private policies established by a property owner when exercising his property rights on his land.

Those would be far from "public policies" as they pertain to his property, and does not dictate or even seek to alter public policy.