Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Jeff Head
Jeff wrote:

I've known and conversed with each of you many times over the years. I'd say we all agree on about 95+% of issues, and are very well and friendly disposed towards one another...including our views of the unalienable right to defend ones self and therefore to be bear arms.
However, if I let each of you know, straight up, before hand, that when coming to my house for dinner I didn't want you to bring a loaded gun into my house, I believe each of you would honor that request...or, you would politiely tell me that you weren't coming.

Jeff, no one here is claiming the right to bring a gun into an office, home or barn.

If I extended that to a get together, or work activity out in my barn...I believe each of you would still honor that request, or politely tell me you preferred not to come.

I would politely ignore your odd request and come ready to work with my tools & guns in my truck, and leave the guns locked in the parked truck.

I am not saying I would ask you that...but I know that if I did, you would honor my right to be, in essence, the King, of my own home and property.

Indeed you are king, but you are not entitled to insist that my vehicle be a 'gun free' zone.

Now, if you came armed anyway, if I had asked you not to bring firearms and saw you with one, why then I would politely ask you to either take the firearm somewhere off my property, or ask you to leave.

Obviously, there would never be occasion for you to see inside my locked truck.

On the other hand, if, in the unlikely event, someone accosted you and/or me while we were there, why then I would be glad you had it and we could use both your firearm and mine to defend ourselves. At that point, I would not make an issue of you having had it.

That's reasonable. -- At issue here are companies and individuals that are not being reasonable.

Without that happening, if you chose to bring it, then you would also have to be responsible for that act and my potentially asking you, as the property owner to either take it away, or leave.
Note...in none of this have I violated your right to bear arms. I have asked you as the owner of the property in question to not bring them...you are still free to choose either not to come, to come without them, or, as I have said, to bring them anyway and then be responsible for that decision.

Again, reasonable.. People are responsible when treated like adults.

I believe this covers the bases...the same principle must apply to someone's property, whether in their building or on the premises. Otherwise, property rights become meaningless.

Jeff, if all the corporations/companies in the USA were allowed to ban guns in parking lots, out RKBA's would become essentially meaningless for those who worked or did business with them.

Our founders fought against the government forcing them to house armed men on their property..the kings redcoats. To compel me, with the force of government, to accept onto my property armed individuals against my will (outside of a time of insurrection or war), is to, in essence, do the same thing as the King did with his redcoatsd IMHO, and I would be against it.

You are not being forced to have workingmen, customers, or guests park on your property. You are free to ban everything & anyone from your property.
-- But you may find it impossible to do business on that basis, because the rest of us have a right to keep arms in our vehicles.

That's my take and opinion on the matter.

And mine.

214 posted on 02/10/2006 5:22:06 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies ]


To: tpaine
As I said...people have choices...even in these conditions. If they chose to violate the owners desires, then they are also responsible for the copnsequencs should the owner find out.

I do not agree with such decisions...but it is their property and their decision to make.

I do not believe there is any danger of all business banning guns on their premises. To much good blood flowing in too many good veins for that to happen. But, the issue ois that they do have that right if they so desire, on their property.

The answer is not to use the force of law to MAKE them accept those who bear amrs onto their property In principle, if we do that, we are in fact on a slope similar the King of England. The answer is to use our own choice of not going there or doing business there to exert a market pressure on them while allowing them their own freedom of choice as regards their own property.

Anyhow, my friend, those are my own thoughts.

218 posted on 02/10/2006 5:31:15 PM PST by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson