Oh dear I misspelled a name. Whatever will I do?
While Ad hominem attacks are practically de rigueur for liberals, it doesn't make them appear to be clever, and doesn't add anything to the conversation. Such behavior is beneath you. I outlined my association with her quite clearly, such as it is, and I didn't say it was a close one. I was simply amused by it.
And whereas you wrote previously, "Private property rights do not supersede other rights," the very first words Ms. Dean addresses the matter with, are, "NO, private property rights prevail."
Which is it?
It isn't an either/or proposition. Private property rights do not supersede other right, as the example PeNNy gave clearly shows. Private property right prevail in that they can ask you to leave, but they can't not force you to disarm, nor is it illegal for you to go there armed.
As an example let's say someone went into a post office while carrying a concealed firearm. According to federal law, by simply by stepping into that property, the person a felon. This is a clear case of Federal law superseding constitutional rights. On the other hand no matter how you post your property, or how a business owner posts their property (in NH), all you and the business owners can do is ask someone to leave and they are obligated to leave.
I was completely unaware of such signs in NH and I've never seen one. If I did see such a sign I would not step a foot inside that business as I wouldn't want to support their desire for an unarmed populace with my money. However if I needed to go in there for some reason, the absolute worst thing that could happen to me is being asked to leave.
Hmmm. Elitist, presumptuous notions of telling a property owner what he can/can't/must/mustn't permit on his property are also the typically the domain of liberals but that hasn't stopped you from indulging in the same.
It isn't an either/or proposition. Private property rights do not supersede other right, as the example PeNNy gave clearly shows. Private property right prevail in that they can ask you to leave, but they can't not force you to disarm, nor is it illegal for you to go there armed."
I never said a property owner can "force," you to disarm. They can make disarming yourself a condition for remaining on (or in fact, entering) the property. Since you wish to be technical, a property owner who openly declares and posts, "no weapons allowed," has made that a known condition for permission to access the property. A person ignoring that and packing onto the property is there without the implicit or explicit permission of the owner and is therefore trespassing the moment they step foot on the property.
Now, you seem to be making a big deal about the carrier needing to be asked or told to leave. Of course...because the property owner doesn't know they're trespassing (i.e. on the grounds without consent) until they become aware that the carrier is in violation of the conditions the property owner set. If you're on vacation and somebody comes onto your property without your permission or knowledge, that doesn't make it "not trespassing," simply because you were unaware they had come onto it without permission. 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.
Go back to my earlier example of the people on your lawn. Suppose you had a big family gathering and knew there were some extended relatives who were big Obama supporters, but out of a sense of comity you invite them but explicitly state, "Campaigning for any political candidate is not permitted on my property during the reunion." Now, coming onto your property without permission is trespassing. You have set a condition upon which your permission is contingent. The second that those relatives pack up their Obama flyers to sneak in and hand out at the party, I would argue that they had done so with the intent to trespass, in short, to come on your property without complying with the conditions you had set. The second they set foot on your property (with the concealed flyers) they are trespassing, but you are entirely unaware of it because you are of the belief they are in compliance with your conditions. Now, when you see them start handing out the flyers and extolling the virtues of Obama, you realize they are in violation of the conditions you set for your permission, and ask them to leave because only then are you aware they are trespassing, or you give them the option of putting the flyers back in their car. You're not trampling their rights to political speech, you're enforcing your rights as a property owner.
Of course you, as the property owner can't (legally) Take their flyers by force, or detain them; one would have to be mildly retarded to believe otherwise. Obviously there is no law against campaigning for a candidate, which is a Constitutionally protected right. But you, as the property owner, can clearly restrict and preclude the exercise of that right on your property.