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

To: dayglored; y'all
If I open it to the public (like a business) I will accept that I have to let -all- the public in. But I do not accept that I also have to let them carry any possession they please into my shop as well. Boom boxes? Broadswords? Wearing only a thong?

Openly carrying or wearing inappropriate items is unacceptable. Carrying properly concealed arms is not only constitutionally acceptable, it is an uninfringeable right.

Banning those things in my shop is within my rights, and personally I think that guns fall more into that category than into personal characteristics like skin color.

Why do you ~want~ the 'right' to ban concealed arms? Why do you think guns fall into such an objectionable "category"?

I personally don't want that, nor do I find guns objectionable (see earlier comments).

I see your earlier comments highlighted just above. They are contradictory.

I'm just thinking about a neighbor who might have religious, personal, or other objections to my carrying my gun onto his property. I don't have a problem respecting that.

We are all obligated to support & defend our right to carry arms. - You should have a problem respecting those who refuse to abide by our Constitution. Can you agree?

That's all -- I'm saying that my RKBA doesn't necessarily trump his personal property rights -- on HIS property.

How is your carry of a concealed weapon "trumping" his property rights? Why are armed citizens seen as threats to 'property'?

I invite guns on my property, whether for sport, personal protection, whatever as long as it's legal activity.

Then why do you agree that your peers can infringe on your right to carry arms concealed?

96 posted on 05/01/2007 8:27:40 AM PDT by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies ]


To: tpaine
> I see your earlier comments highlighted just above. They are contradictory.

Sorry, I used a first-person shop-owner "persona" in a few of my statements, causing a confusion for which I hereby apologize. In most places I have been speaking as myself (dayglored), but in a few I assumed the persona of a business owner for the sake of sentence construction (easier in first-person); I should have stayed in third-person.

I (dayglored) support concealed carry without limitation, though I personally would respect the wishes of a neighbor who differed, when I was on his property.

> You should have a problem respecting those who refuse to abide by our Constitution. Can you agree?

The Constitution guarantees my right to keep and bear arms. It does not force my neighbor to put up with whatever I feel like doing on his property, even if what I'm doing is protected when I'm on my property or in public. For example, I can spray-paint "Hippies stink!" on my house if I want to. But I can't spray-paint it on my neighbor's house, even though the First Amendment guarantees my right to freedom of speech.

So, in my view, my RKBA is not infringed by my neighbor's wishes, since it's my choice to go on his property or stay off.

111 posted on 05/01/2007 1:14:27 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | 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