It was my great honor! I really do love my job and the shooting sports so it's a win all around. Also, without y'alls support none of this would have gotten done!!!!!Thank you for all the work you do in helping to defend our gun rights. Very much appreciated by many.
My problem with that is the shop keeper or business owner being forced into allowing firearms carry is losing my constitutional rights to run my business as I see fit and the possibility of my liability insurance rates going up as a result.
An individuals constitutional rights terminate at my property line where my rights begin. If the individual cannot abide by my wishes, he is welcome to keep walking. I haven't lost anything. My business in on property controlled by federal regulations where firearms possession is controlled by federal code of regulations and executive orders.
My problem with that is the shop keeper or business owner being forced into allowing firearms carry is losing my constitutional rights to run my business as I see fit and the possibility of my liability insurance rates going up as a result.
An individuals constitutional rights terminate at my property line where my rights begin. If the individual cannot abide by my wishes, he is welcome to keep walking. I haven't lost anything. My business in on property controlled by federal regulations where firearms possession is controlled by federal code of regulations and executive orders.
Nothing prevents you or your employee from asking someone to leave for any reason at all. Nothing would prevent you from being able to apply for and order up the sign.
The bolded “does not apply” text already exists in 30.06/30.07 today (and has for years) as a defense to prosecution.
You are advocating legislative action to prevent a business from conducting business as they see fit.Setting aside the argument that private businesses can do what they want, I want to address the legislative absurdity behind those provisions. Channel your best Rod Sterling voice and put the Twilight Zone opening soundtrack on in the background and say these words: "Imagine a place where the government passes a law allowing private businesses to prohibit exercising a constitutional right.
My problem with that is the shop keeper or business owner being forced into allowing firearms carry is losing my constitutional rights to run my business as I see fit and the possibility of my liability insurance rates going up as a result.
An individuals constitutional rights terminate at my property line where my rights begin. If the individual cannot abide by my wishes, he is welcome to keep walking. I haven't lost anything. My business in on property controlled by federal regulations where firearms possession is controlled by federal code of regulations and executive orders.
Fair points well made, all! This is why I wanted to talk to the OP about it. I was a little confused about whether he was aligning the sign language or something more. There is absolutely a right for you to run your property as you see fit and we do need to honor that. Since we're all here, is there a middle ground between your rights as a property owner and my right to self defense? I'm not sure I see one but this is why I surround myself with people who are smarter than me! So I can learn and discern!!!!!
You are advocating legislative action to prevent a business from conducting business as they see fit.
I can agree with most of your post, but in 1991, concealed or open carry wasn't even legal with a pistol. That didn't pass until 1996 IIRC. So that was not a policy of Luby's but at the time current Texas laws.Middle ground is remove the force-of-law behind a "no guns sign" - the property owner / manager can still ask or tell people to leave for whatever reason, and if that person stays after being told to go, they're trespassing. NO reason to make it a separate offense with a higher criminal penalty if someone walks in while armed. Criminals will ignore the sign anyway - and you're just creating criminals from an otherwise law abiding person who decides their right to self protection trumps a property owner's right to say "no guns".
I realize it was before Texas had any legal handgun carry - but the shooting at Luby's is a big reason Texas became a legal-carry state. Giving force of law to no-guns signs creates the same dangers today as were present in that Killeen Luby's in 1991 - the people inside could not legally be armed or they'd be committing a crime themselves. The killer didn't give a damn about the laws, or signs, or anything but his own intent to harm others.
While I am not familiar with every aspect of Texas law - in many or most states - if you yourself are committing a crime, then your claim to self defense is rendered null and void in the event you must defend yourself. If that is the case here in Texas - then an otherwise law abiding person who chooses to protect their life by carrying a firearm with them, including into a place which prohibits firearms would face murder or attempted murder charges if they do wind up in a Luby's like situation.
I think everyone here would see that person as a hero if they, while armed, were to stop a mass shooting event - but the prosecuting DA could well say "no, they're no hero, they're a criminal just like the person they killed" and that person could well spend the rest of their life in prison, or being here in Texas, could wind up executed by the state for the audacity to go armed and defend themselves in a place with a stupid sign on the door prohibiting carry.
The right of self preservation should be the ultimate right - like it or not - we must be able to rank our "rights" in order of importance. For most people - we would put the safety of ourselves and our loved ones, or innocents above the rights of those that would seek to do us harm, or to otherwise impede upon our own right to self preservation. I'm sorry but your property rights are not more important than my life.
If you are opening business to the general public - and not as a private club where membership is necessary to participate and members joining agree to abide by a set of rules - then you shouldn't be able to exclude people from carrying a firearm. If they make an ass of themselves, trespass them. If they're waiving a gun around - trespass them.
There shouldn't be areas other than prisons and maybe secure areas of mental institutions where you shouldn't be allowed to be armed. We should be able to carry into the halls of the legislature, into court houses, into schools, into churches, bars, restaurants, city halls, county offices, airports, bus stations - any place where a member of the public is allowed. There are already mechanisms built into the law to prosecute people acting a fool.
I can agree with most of your post, but in 1991, concealed or open carry wasn't even legal with a pistol. That didn't pass until 1996 IIRC. So that was not a policy of Luby's but at the time current Texas laws.
Sorry, I was speed reading!I think you skimmed my post there friend - I stated that the Luby's shooting was one of the big things that lead to *legal* carry of a handgun in Texas.