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

Skip to comments.

Trump, the business owner, joins struggle over when to carry gun
The Christian Science Monitor ^ | OCTOBER 31, 2015 | Patrik Jonsson

Posted on 10/31/2015 5:41:18 PM PDT by SteveinSATX

Donald Trumps assertion at Wednesdays Republican presidential debate that sickos take advantage of gun-free zones to kill people is complicated, it turns out, by the fact that many of his own hotel properties does not allow weapons, even if properly permitted.

Given that the remark happened on the fly during a debate and that Mr. Trump himself, by his own admission, only carries a firearm occasionally could explain the discrepancy between Trumps political beliefs and corporate policy at some of the properties that bear his name (as discovered by Reuters sleuthing.)

Yet Trumps primer on how Second Amendment rights and safety concerns underscores a difficult and evolving paradox for many US business owners: Retail outlets are wrestling first-hand with increasingly liberalized US gun laws, such as the permit-less constitutional carry law that became law this month in Maine.

(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: New York
KEYWORDS: 2016election; banglist; election2016; newyork; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 last
To: KrisKrinkle

What you just did was explain the value of Situational Ethics.

Everything seems to “depend on the situation” because “it’s not that simple”.

No thanks.


61 posted on 11/01/2015 2:10:08 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (Speak TRUZ to power / Tell the TRUZ / No more lies; we want the TRUZ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

“I think these questions go back to whether the right to defend oneself supersede property rights. The right of a property owner to control what happens on his property?”

Pretty much. In general I think of it as a conflict of rights (or a conflict of asserted rights which may or may not be really held) which in this discussion involves property rights.


62 posted on 11/01/2015 2:13:24 PM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

But the situation is important.

If you kill me because you don’t like my face it’s murder on your part.

If you kill me because I’m trying to kill you because I don’t like your face it’s not murder but justifiable homicide.

Either way I’m dead, but whether it’s murder or justifiable homicide depends on the situation in which I got dead.


63 posted on 11/01/2015 2:19:49 PM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 last

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.

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