I've done no such thing, speaking of ad hominem attacks.
Which begs the further question...why would you carry on a property where you know the owner's thoughts and expressed opinion, but callously disregarded them? That's also something more commonly associated with the left than the right.?
I never said I would so it's a straw-man argument. Further, not wanting people exercising their 2nd amendment rights on your property seems far more "liberal" than conservative, but it is your property to do with what you wish.
But you, as the property owner, can clearly restrict and preclude the exercise of that right on your property.
You cannot restrict their rights while on your property. You can ask them not to exercise said rights, and they can willingly agree, or you can ask them to leave. While they are leaving they can also hand out propaganda and there isn't much you can do about it. Charging someone with criminal trespass is very difficult especially if they leave willingly. The important lesson here is to not invite Obomotons to your party.
What you continue to ignore is that you can set explicit conditions for accessing your property. It's not complicated; movie theaters do it everyday. Your welcome to come in and watch a movie...you just have to pay for a ticket first. Different clubs and restaurants have dress codes: no tie, no jacket, no entrance. When a property owner says, or posts, "No Firearms Permitted on the Premises," they are setting a condition for permission to the property. Persons not complying with that condition are trespassing by virtue of the fact that they are entering the property without permission.
Again - I'll refer you to the Q&A compiled by the gun rights attorney from your state:
Q:"Can I carry my loaded and concealed firearm (assuming I have a license to do so) in a New Hampshire business (public place) such as Costco that has a NO FIREARMS sign posted?"
A:"NO, private property rights prevail."
Attorney Dean does state that the means of notice are not statutorily defined, and there is some degree of ambiguity as to what constitutes due notice, but her answer to the question is a direct, unequivocal, 'NO'.
It really doesn't get more simple than that. Note also that the bold is Attorney Dean's, not mine. Parse all you want. Either Attorney Dean is wrong or you are. You can't both be right, despite your protests to the contrary. Now you get with her, and when you're ready to tell me which of you two is right, and which of you two is wrong, let me know.