[timm22]

However, if I am ‘invited’ onto your property verbally by you or implicitly by way of a business, then you can be assured I will be able to appropriately defend myself since your invitation is more than likely open to nameless others in the community at large. That is an assumption I will defend just as my life. If I have no reason to be there in the first place, then as jesse jackson would put it, “The question is moot.”

Suppose a condition of my invitation is the requirement that any invitee be unarmed. I give ample notice of this condition well before anyone steps foot on the property. Would that situation qualify as one where you (or any other armed person) would have no reason to be on my property?

...By the way, would you do MS-13 a big favor and put up a “Gun-Free-Zone” sign in your front yard?

Why would I want to do that? I have no problem with people carrying weapons on my property. In fact, I generally feel safer when they do. I am familiar with Lott's work and I've quoted it to gun control advocates in other debates.

I don't think a person *should* ban weapons on their property. It's a dumb thing to do. This is just one of those areas where I believe a person has the right to do something stupid, if that's what they want.

If the property owner wants to subject himself to an increased risk, and any of his visitors also agree to accept that increased risk, who are we to tell them they have to do things differently?

[evangmlw]

Please not that customers do not come onto the property. This is a call center with tight security. Only employees and invited guests are allowed on the property. One rather odd thing here. Although firearms are not allowed on the property, it appears that security guards are armed. They either carry 9mm pistols or tasers that appear to be pistols in a holster.