Posted on 10/01/2014 6:53:02 AM PDT by Third Person
I'm not so sure.
I don't think they really care if you're defenseless or not.
I know they want to appeal to the most potential voters, and most potential voters are women. Women don't really care if they're defenseless: they prefer to "feel" they aren't in danger in the first place.
Anything that fosters that "sense of security" is going to appeal to women, because women tend to treat their "feelings" like actual sensory input.
Target (interesting name) stores argue that guns interfere with a family-friendly shopping environment.
There are two ways to address this. First is to ask that carriers keep their weapons concealed. This should make everyone happy.
Second, they can offer to hold your gun while you are shopping, as is done at Cabela’s sports stores. I suspect that the main reason Cabela’s does this is related to prevent shoplifting, but it also would solve the problem for Target’s (if it is really a problem). But it would cost them manpower. Well, are they serious, or not?
I keep my wallet in my front left pocket. My .38 Airweight revolver is in my front right pocket in a pocket holster so it does not print. Each pocket has a similar bulge, and I always wear pleated pants to minimize this. I also have a small fake leather case clipped onto a beltloop on the right. This is for carrying my Bluetooth headset (so I won't lose it). It also covers the opening of my right pocket so that no one can sneak a peak at the handle. I don't wear jeans because the pockets are too tight to allow me to get a gun out quickly.
“Gun Free Zones” = Good Guy Gun Free Zones = Bad Guy Free Fire Zones
Stores have a right to ban guns. If they make that choice, I will exercise my right to shop online. Anything you can find in a store is cheaper online. The only reason for shopping in person for most things is for the intangibles. If those intangible include a store endangering customers by choosing to ban self defense, then I will not shop there.
Left unmentioned in this is any link between retail firearms sales and mall shootings, other than that they both involve guns. Are the Three Stooges trying to imply that murderers purchase guns off the shelf and start blowing people away? Has this ever happened, even once?
A guy named John Lott was on Coast to Coast last night. He has a website ‘Crime Prevention Research Center’ (link: http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/ ) and he said that the FBI study was “fudged” (my terminology - can’t remember exactly what he said). The years they used, what they included, etc. basically makes the study say what they want it to say - the incidences have NOT actually gone up. He also said his group checks Bloomberg’s gun statistics/research and said they are SO riddled with such stupid, obvious errors that his 12 year old could do a better job (not surprised by this at all!). It was an interesting conversation. He was also talking about the ‘dumbing down’ of our courts. The podcast is at the Coast to Coast website, I think. George Nouri gets into some weird stuff, but on guns, he’s got a concealed carry permit and is 2A all the way from what I’ve heard.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.