Riddle me this: So if someone who owns property does not want you on their property while armed, and they are well within their rights to keep you out while armed since it is their private property, you essentially want the government granted power to disregard their rights while making your rights more important than theirs - am I getting that right?
When rights collide which should win?
For me, Constitutionally protected rights take precedence.
YMMV.