Our “Favorite” Gun-Free Zones

Not every business is as dedicated to the Second Amendment as BLACK RIFLE COFFEE COMPANY.

Now – I’m generally of the opinion that a business can do what it wants to, and if a business wants to be a gun-free zone, they are welcome to become one.

However, I also have a right to take my business elsewhere.

One of the interesting things I’ve noticed SINCE the midterms, is that the left is really starting to carry forward their “war on guns” without any pretense or permission.

Part of that war seems to be labeling places as GUN FREE ZONES – meaning they are forbidding even legal concealed carry. Personally, I’ve always LIKED the idea that there are PROBABLY a few CC license holders in most public places. It seemed like the only gun free zones were the “agreed-upon” ones – federal buildings, doctor’s offices, airports, schools, etc. Even those weren’t good ideas, IMO, but at least they were FEW.

WELLLLLLL…..

That’s all changing. I am now noticing that CHL holders are NOT welcome in:

  • Post Offices
  • Starbucks
  • AMC Theaters
  • Certain shopping centers
  • Fancy department stores

Some of this is REALLY SNEAKY, too. You have to read the SUPER-FINE PRINT in places people don’t normally look, to see that concealed carriers, and even off-duty police carrying arms, are not welcome. Other venues are more “in-your-face” now, with stickers at face level on the doors, which is appreciated, but not completely, given that they are treating licensed carriers and law enforcement in ways that they will NOT treat illegal alien CRIMINALS.

For a while I decided not to let this bother me. Based on what I see online, I figured there were probably a FEW people who might be carrying ANYWAY, and that they could protect me.

However, with the advent of really powerful scanners, I think we’re getting to the point that I can’t actually count on there being any “good guy civil disobedience” in these venues. GOOD PEOPLE will be taking great risks, if they wander into these “target galleries” armed – even off-duty police.

My feeling is that there is only one way. We have to PUNISH these places by withdrawing our business en masse.

SO – with that in mind – please OUT your “favorite” gun-free zones, so that we can start avoiding them and pulling back our dollars. Also, if you know ALTERNATIVE places that are NOT gun-free zones, please let us know who THOSE people are, so that we can switch allegiance.

Thanks!

W

162 thoughts on “Our “Favorite” Gun-Free Zones

    1. That would be great, but how do you organize and get enough people to agree and cooperate in order to make it happen?

      Seems like it would be easier (and more fun) to put on a demonstration for the business. Suppose it’s a restaurant that seats 100 people.

      Have as close to 100 gun owners meet there for lunch or dinner, at roughly the same time.

      AFTER everyone’s meals are served, and everyone finishes their meal.

      Then have a spokesman stand up and say loudly, “If you are lawfully armed, please stand up”, at which point everyone (all 100 or so people) stands up.

      Then the spokesman says loudly, so the manager and all the staff can hear clearly, “Do you want us all to leave?”

      The manager has two choices.

      1) he can demand everyone leave, in which case everyone has enjoyed a very nice free lunch or dinner, and marches out the door whistling the tune from ‘Bridge on the River Kwai’

      or

      2) the manager can take his ‘policy’ and stuff it, and everybody sits back down and has some dessert.

      Liked by 20 people

        1. Me too!

          It would be great fun, and I think that’s even one of Alinsky’s rules, to do things that your people enjoy doing.

          It sets up a win-win situation.

          Everybody gets to participate in a ‘conspiracy’ (which would be fun in and of itself), everybody gets to participate in civil disobedience of a sort (which would be both fun and a great lesson/experience for young and old), and you make an incredibly strong statement about:

          A) how many “regular” customers they are regularly LOSING due to their stupid policy

          and

          B) that their ‘muh principles’ have a REAL and QUANTIFIABLE COST, and drives the point home in a way that can’t be denied, because those meals were already served and eaten 🙂

          And the best part of all, is that multiple people record the whole event on their cell phones, and post to social media all over the world.

          The videos would absolutely go ‘viral’, and people all over the country would start doing the same kinds of things to fascists everywhere, over every encroachment of our RIGHTS and FREEDOMS.

          You could do variations that would work for almost any business.

          Even a car dealership that is “anti-gun”.

          Get a group of gun owners together and wait for the dealership to have one of their frequent ‘big sale events’.

          Probably toward the end of the month, so the salesmen are all scrambling for commissions to make bonus by month end.

          Everybody go at the same time, and check out cars, vans, trucks, whatever. After 45 minutes or so, the group spokesman very publicly and loudly points out the “No Guns Allowed” sign.

          Then everybody says “Oh, well, I guess I won’t be buying a car today… see ya… bye! Good luck making bonus!”

          The creativity required is minimal, it would be fun, it would be social and participatory in nature, it would start happening everywhere like flash-mobs, and it would get the attention of the businesses by hitting them right in the pocketbook.

          Liked by 16 people

          1. It’s also VERY empowering.

            Imagine the power of 100 people standing up with you, in the restaurant example.

            Not only does it remove any potential anxiety on the part of the participants, but to the contrary, you/we are emboldened, because ‘we’ have the numbers.

            And conversely, just imagine how intimidated the manager and the staff would be, facing a hundred patrons united in purpose and cause.

            And armed…

            LOL!

            Liked by 13 people

            1. You gotta record it — make sure someone has a good vantage point and does a good job — and then you have to put it on social media and make it go viral (until our social media overlords censor it).

              Liked by 8 people

      1. Great idea! A less polite variation would be for everyone to order, be sure the orders are under preparation in the kitchen, and make the announcement before the food comes out. Then the restaurant would be stuck with all that wasted food and no pay if they kicked the people out.

        Liked by 13 people

        1. Exactly.

          In the example I gave above (I may not have explained it clearly), wait until everyone FINISHES their meal.

          THEN have everyone stand up and acknowledge that they are armed.

          The restaurant has already served everyone, and everyone has already eaten.

          Does the manager want to tell everyone to GET OUT, and everyone therefore leaves without paying?

          Or is the manager going to be polite, and ask everyone to sit down and continue enjoying their meals, and never mind about that stupid policy?

          The choice is his.

          Either the manager throws everybody out and you get a free meal, or the manager caves on company policy, and everyone pays for their meal as normal.

          Either way, the point of the demonstration is crystal clear.

          The POWER is with the clientele, NOT with the business.

          The CUSTOMER is always RIGHT.

          Or their Leftist / Fascist ‘muh principles’ will cost them a lot of money, and eventually cause them to go out of business.

          Liked by 5 people

          1. In reality a restaurant that seats 100 couldn’t possibly process 100 people simultaneously, nor would we find it empty in the first place; it would be largely full of its regular customers.

            What would actually end up happening is: we’d cause the place to be “slammed.” Bunches of us would have to wait to be seated while others have been served. Ultimately, some people would be nearly done while others have just given their order, and a few would still be waiting on their beverages.

            But every one of those represents a sunk cost to the restaurant, so I think the tactic would still work.

            Liked by 4 people

      2. It is a GREAT idea which meets two seemingly permanent features of the asymmetric political warfare in our country: street theatre, and “the personal is political.”

        For leftists, everything is political. There is no aspect of life too trivial that it cannot be used to make a political point. Meanwhile, our side is concerned about de-politicizing, rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s, with Caesar being a necessary evil, and God being a necessary good. And we want to eat dinner in peace.

        We also are not into street theatre, which has always been an essential part of communist propaganda. To us, street theatre is childish and thoughtlessly disruptive. To them, it is a form of peer pressure, making something seem inevitable and acceptable, so much so that it can be “done” in public.

        (MY wife and I recently went someplace with a big lobby, and a young man with make-up and feminine type clothing/hair kept twirling around with that repulsive new transgender flag flying over his head. People just walked by silently, and management apparently was not going to do anything. Thus, the twirler “won” his street theatre. Another victory for nonsense and decadence).

        What Laura Loomer has done is funny and pointed, but this is just not our thing.

        Liked by 6 people

        1. I’m starting to see buff young men with no effort to even appear feminine acting out as girls in public – it’s just WEIRD AS HELL. The ones who wear dresses, jewelry, and make-up seem to be more dedicated, but the guys doing falsetto in bro-wear – I have to suppress the MEGA-CRINGE.

          Liked by 6 people

      3. You, sir, are the best example of a deplorable ever!

        My only suggestion for an alternative experience would be for every table/booth to stand a cartridge up on the tabletop as soon as seated. Sort of like an ‘elephant in the room’ test. If questioned, everybody could plead ignorance of how it got there.

        Hilarity should ensue.

        Liked by 6 people

    2. I have withdrawn ( I like that word Wolf) from several companies including the one drinking coffee 🙂
      We have lots of power if we use it efectiveley.

      Liked by 7 people

      1. So much of the presumed power of the business policy/preference resides in the compliance with a sticker on a door/wall! Huh. Wonder where we learned that behavior?

        Pursuant to the named coffee company who a very short time ago got much press and kudos with their “we welcome gun owners” campaign (the “I love…” T-shirt and bumper stickers are still very common in the company’s home territory (realistically stretching from BC to CA), patriots simply “don’t see” those signs or take the attitude that such “notices” don’t apply to them. Not giving it a second thought.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Yeah, I remember that. Talk about a 180!

          I think this may explain the “in-the-face” sign I just saw. They are back-tracking, it would appear, and want there to be no possibility that people didn’t see the sign.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. As an activist friend said nearly a decade ago, “Those signs are suggestions and don’t apply to me.” (Referencing, at the time, speed “suggestion” signs and parking limitation signs.)
            And then…Lawful vs legal. Best example, I think, is that Killing is unlawful but may be legal.

            Liked by 1 person

  1. I’m not sure how that all works with ‘gun free zones’ with businesses.

    The government has passed laws with regard to federal buildings… laws which should be challenged, because it makes no sense that a government OF, BY and FOR the PEOPLE — i.e., OUR government, “us” — should, would or even could violate our OWN Constitutional RIGHTS.

    The only way it could happen is, very clearly, “the” government is NOT “our” government, but a government “in opposition to” We the People.

    We certainly didn’t consent to have our rights violated.

    Not knowingly.

    And if the government did it deceptively, that is a FRAUD perpetrated on the very same PEOPLE who CREATED it and who AUTHORIZE and PAY for its continued EXISTENCE.

    But with regard to businesses, they don’t have any right to violate our rights. They can post a sign saying “No Firearms”, just like they can post a sign saying “No Blacks are Served Here” or “Gays aren’t Served Here”.

    They can post whatever sign they want, but how do they enforce it without violating your RIGHTS?

    Besides all that, how do they know if you are lawfully carrying a concealed weapon, if it’s concealed?

    If a psychopath starts shooting up the place, and you draw your concealed weapon to protect yourself, and do so successfully, violating ‘store policy’ (not the LAW, but ‘store policy’) is not going to be an issue. If anything, the cuck/traitor/cabal media will do everything possible to black out any acknowledgement that an armed citizen took down the bad guy.

    Liked by 15 people

    1. Great points!

      NOW – I believe that “they” are currently deploying devices in test venues – UNSEEN – that can actually (using a variety of EMF and AI technologies) tell exactly what you have in your pockets – down to POCKET KNIVES and possibly even the MAKE and MODEL of guns.

      Obviously they can’t ADMIT this. But I am very certain that these technologies are ALREADY DEPLOYED in a variety of places. There is NO OBVIOUS EXTERNAL INDICATION that they are deployed, and the “tells” that I use to find these are too precious to divulge.

      The other side is making VERY sneaky moves.

      Liked by 13 people

      1. I have wondered about this technology possibility. Is it Constitutional for them to use them? It seems like an unreasonable search to me. It’s none of their business what someone has in their pockets or purse. If they caught someone with a gun in a gun-free zone, I’m wondering if the gun owner would have recourse.

        Liked by 11 people

        1. I think we have to distinguish between a ‘Gun Free Zone’ that is ‘Gun Free’ by LAW, and a “Gun Free Zone” that is a matter of corporate POLICY, but has no force of LAW.

          Either one is UNCONSTITUTIONAL as far as I’m concerned, but it is only if you violate the codes/statutes/laws where you should be at risk of legal issues.

          If you violate Wal-Mart policy (for example), they can ask you to leave and probably would, but if you sued them, I don’t know how you wouldn’t win, because if you are lawfully carrying a concealed weapon, Wal-Mart’s corporate policy CANNOT override your RIGHTS.

          Imagine if Wal-Mart told black customers to leave?

          Or gay customers to leave?

          How can they LAWFULLY tell anyone who is exercising his or her 2nd Amendment Rights to leave?

          Liked by 14 people

          1. Your fallacy lies in the fact that you are presuming a non-existent right to be in a WalMart in the first place.

            And, incidentally, as far as I know, WalMart actually has no gun carry policy whatsoever, defaulting to whatever the law is in the area, though Costco does.

            Liked by 6 people

            1. “Your fallacy lies in the fact that you are presuming a non-existent right to be in a WalMart in the first place.”

              __________________

              Then that applies to black people and gay people too.

              I guess diners can bring back the “No Blacks Allowed” signs then?

              Liked by 4 people

              1. That is incorrect.

                There are laws (Equally Act of 2010, Americans with Disabilities Act, etc.) that prevent businesses from discriminating against various protected classes, including race, age, gender, veteran status and disability.

                There are no laws that prevent a business from restricting access to their property to gun carriers.

                Just as you have a right to bear arms, they (businesses) have a right determine access limitations to their property (within the law). They can choose to request you to leave (with police support if needed) for lots of reasons, e.g. wearing a MAGA hat, being too tall, bald, fat, loud, etc.

                Liked by 2 people

              2. “That is incorrect.”

                ________________

                I know it’s incorrect, which is what I am making a point of.

                .

                “There are laws (Equally Act of 2010, Americans with Disabilities Act, etc.) that prevent businesses from discriminating against various protected classes, including race, age, gender, veteran status and disability.”

                _______________

                Yes, I know.

                The entire concept of a ‘protected class’ is antithetical to the foundational documents of our nation; it is an affront to the entire concept of Equality and Equal Justice Under Law.

                It is straight out of George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’, where every animal was equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

                .

                “There are no laws that prevent a business from restricting access to their property to gun carriers.”

                _____________

                Yes, thank you again for helping to make my point. So called ‘civil rights’ (which are not ‘rights’ at all, but privileges invented and granted by government) prevent businesses from restricting access, but Americans exercising their ACTUAL God-given Constitutionally guaranteed rights ARE restricted.

                It is not possible to reconcile those two things, not with intellectual honesty.

                The Constitution is based on Common Law.

                What are ‘civil rights’ based on? Statutes, codes, legislation?

                Which is the superior form of Law?

                .

                “Just as you have a right to bear arms, they (businesses) have a right determine access limitations to their property (within the law)”.

                ______________

                My right to bear arms is specifically outlined out in the Constitution. Where is the right of a business to determine ‘access limitations’ spelled out in the Constitution?

                .

                “They can choose to request you to leave (with police support if needed) for lots of reasons, e.g. wearing a MAGA hat, being too tall, bald, fat, loud, etc.”

                ______________

                Then consistency of application of Law, and equality under Law, requires that they be allowed to request you leave for being black, or gay, too.

                Can they demand that you leave for exercising your 1st Amendment rights?

                For sake of argument, suppose you say ‘yes’.

                Then can they demand you leave for exercising your 1st Amendment rights IN YOUR HEAD, silently, without anyone hearing you?

                No?

                Then how can they demand you leave for exercising your 2nd Amendment rights, silently, without anyone seeing your weapon?

                Liked by 1 person

            2. “That law was wrong, IMHO…and can’t justify another wrong law.”

              __________________

              Agreed, but the fact that a bad law (never mind one of such damaging magnitude) exists AT ALL is affront to Justice.

              The Law has to be (MUST be) consistent and consistently applied, or there is no Law, at all.

              If it isn’t consistent, we don’t just keep going and pretend like we don’t notice, or that dual universes exist in the same space.

              You FIX it.

              REPEAL the bad law!

              Liked by 1 person

            3. “That law was wrong, IMHO…and can’t justify another wrong law.”

              _________________

              For example.

              You have two children, a boy (Johnny, age 8) and a girl (Sandy, age 6).

              One day, the kids get in trouble. Sandy claims Johnny did something, and so you punish Johnny, and to make it up to Sandy, to make her ‘whole’, you make Sandy your favorite child, and treat her accordingly.

              You put this punishment on Johnny, and you gave this reward to Sandy, and then you forgot about it.

              But Johnny didn’t forget about, he’s STILL bearing the burden of your punishment, all these decades later.

              Sandy didn’t forget about it either, she very much enjoys the special privilege of being your favorite child.

              And one day, 50 years later, you stumble across Sandy’s diary, in a box of her things in the attic. It’s open to a page that says “JOHNNY DIDN’T DO IT”.

              You’ve been punishing Johnny for FIFTY ^%$ing YEARS.

              And your favorite child, Sandy, was a liar.

              So what are you going to do?

              How are you ever going to make this up to Johnny?

              Johnny did nothing wrong, but he has been the black sheep of your family because Sandy lied, and now you know the truth of the matter.

              No matter what you do with regard to Sandy, are you just going to keep PUNISHING Johnny?!?

              Because Johnny has lived with this injustice hanging over his head, every day of his life, for FIFTY years.

              Maybe that doesn’t justify treating Sandy for the rest of her life they way you treated Johnny for the last 5 decades.

              But for the love of all that is decent and good, lighten UP on Johnny already.

              Give him clemency.

              Give him a pardon.

              He’s not even asking for anything, he just wants your BOOT off his THROAT.

              REPEAL the bad law.

              Don’t let that grave injustice continue another moment.

              That is the moral of the story.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. “I think that your hypothetical parents had really poor parenting skills.”

                ______________

                As so many do…

                And I don’t know a soul who’s not been battered
                I don’t have a friend who feels at ease
                I don’t know a dream that’s not been shattered
                Or driven to its knees…

                But it’s alright,
                It’s alright, for we live so well, so long
                Still, when I think of the road we’re traveling on
                I wonder what’s gone wrong,
                I can’t help it I wonder
                What’s gone wrong…
                — American Tune, Paul Simon, 1973

                Liked by 1 person

            4. “Oooh, slippery there.”

              _______________

              Not ‘slippery’, I am just challenging your position, to see if it can withstand scrutiny. That’s how I test things, it’s from the back-and-forth, seeing what ‘stands’, what can be defended, and what can’t.

              I examine a position and test it, prod it, poke it, looking for chinks in the armor. It’s a process. I want to see how a position is defended, and then see if it can be defeated, with basic logic.

              .

              “You don’t exercise your first amendement right by thinking, you exercise it by SPEAKING. You take an action. A right is a freedom of action in a social context.”

              ______________

              Understood, that’s not the point I was making.

              The point is that your rights are always with you. Your right to freedom of speech is always with you, as is your right to bear arms.

              If I understand your position correctly, the business owner can discriminate against you for speaking aloud, just as he could discriminate against you for waving your gun around (or just ‘open carry’).

              But logically, he cannot discriminate against you for what you are thinking, because he doesn’t know what you are thinking, and because what you are thinking doesn’t impact anyone else — adversely, or otherwise.

              In like manner, how can he discriminate against you for something you are carrying, if he doesn’t know what you are carrying, and because what you are carrying doesn’t impact anyone else — adversely, or otherwise?

              And if technology is invented which allows the business owner to ‘scan’ you, that would be a clear violation of privacy.

              The REASON these issues are important is because we are rapidly approaching a full-on Police State, and that destination is BY DESIGN, by the same People who are seeking to CONTROL everything.

              The false flag in Las Vegas was used as the justification to set up scanners at every casino and hotel. The false flag of 9/11 was used as the justification for the UN-Patriot Act. It’s a pattern of conduct by the government to systematically remove our RIGHTS and gain control over everything we do.

              So the corrupt government officials are doing it for the above reasons, and likewise, the corrupt government is DIVIDING Americans constantly, on every issue imaginable, to create perpetual CONFLICT, or CHAOS, from which the government’s chosen “ORDER” will ‘arise’.

              So goofball Leftist business owner thinks he’s the most do-goodest American in the world by being hyperactively against guns. Or, far more often, the corporate hierarchy of big business, which is entwined with government and working toward the same “CONTROL” ends, is forcing anti-gun policies on ALL of their ‘stores’ or businesses.

              When the have consolidated ALL businesses and driven out ALL ‘mom and pops’ competition, then they can make it so NOBODY can buy ANYTHING (at a brick and mortar store) without having government/corporate corrupt politics enforcing their anti-gun beliefs on EVERYONE.

              And you won’t HAVE a choice to take your business elsewhere, because EVERYWHERE will be anti-gun.

              THAT is what they are doing.

              So this CONFLICT over gun RIGHTS is not only coming, it is HERE. And it is only going to get WORSE. Far better to wage this battle NOW, than to wait until after the enemy already controls ALL of the battlefields.

              But like a broken record, we will WAIT until things are so bad that we HAVE to act, and do so from a position of weakness, when our odds of success are much in doubt.

              And that’s not smart.

              .

              “And you sure as heck won’t get to stay on a business owner’s property long if you start ranting about what a craptastic business it is, on his grounds, loudly.”

              ________________

              I wasn’t suggesting or implying any such thing. If I am lawfully carrying a concealed weapon, which no one can see and which no one is aware of, and going about my business, not bothering anyone, then who is being harmed?

              .

              “Or carrying signs saying “Business X is Unfair” or anything like that. Even if everything on the sign or in your rant is the truth, and all you’re doing is exercising your first amendment right…you’ll be told to leave.

              Yes, for a behavior which is a “God-given right.”

              _______________

              But I’m not talking about doing anything like, or doing anything which would draw any attention to myself at all. I’m talking about lawfully carrying a weapon, concealed on my body or, if I was a woman, possibly an off-body carry scenario, e.g., in a purse. No one knows it is there.

              .

              “Similarly, he can tell you to leave for exercising your 2A right. He’ll almost certainly tell you you can come back without the gun.”

              ______________

              How does he know I HAVE a gun?

              Or a pocket knife?

              Or a tazer (don’t taze me, bro!).

              Or pepper spray?

              The only way he is going to find out if I have a gun, is if I need to use it to save my life, his life, and the lives of everyone else on his property… and if that becomes necessary, either I succeed or I fail.

              If I fail, if I’m dead, I’m out of the equation anyway.

              If I succeed, and save his life, my life and everyone else’s life, then if he has a brain in his head, he ought to be grateful I was carrying a concealed weapon.

              If he doesn’t KNOW that I am lawfully carrying a concealed weapon, and if I don’t tell anyone or allow anyone to see it, then who is harmed and what, if anything, is ‘actionable’?

              It’s similar to asking if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound, if there is nobody there to hear it?

              .

              “A business owner, even under current stupid law, has every right to set down conditions of behavior and it makes NO DIFFERENCE if your behavior is covered under the BOR, much less if it’s one of the innumerable rights NOT specifically mentioned in the BOR (captured by the Ninth Amendment).

              Under current law he can do this. And that is *correct* law.”

              ______________

              If the weapon is concealed, how can he KNOW whether I am lawfully carrying a concealed weapon, without violating my privacy using some type of scanner?

              I keep asking that question for a reason, because it sounds like this whole hypothetical is based on some derivative of the ‘honor system’.

              The business owner CAN’T KNOW whether I am lawfully carrying a concealed weapon, unless he violates my right to privacy in order to find out.

              All he can do is post a sign saying what he wants (e.g., ‘No Guns Allowed’), and then count on what he considers “good people” to ‘honor’ his sign and his desire. Unfortunately, even if the ‘good people’ do that, the ‘bad people’ definitely won’t ‘honor’ his ‘policy’, which means everybody is a sitting duck if the ‘bad guy’ decides to do his government-instigated mass-casualty false flag routine.

              This is the problem.

              Lefty Storeowner virtue-signals to all his homeys by having an anti-gun policy in his store. Normie Nice Guy complies with Lefty Storeowner’s wishes, and then, very sadly, Lefty Storeowner and Normie Nice Guy are both slaughtered by some psychopath who wasn’t nice enough to observe Lefty Storeowner’s anti-gun policy.

              What is Lefty Storeowner doing to ensure that doesn’t happen, that we aren’t all killed by some criminal who could care less about his quaint ‘policy’?

              Answer: nothing.

              Lefty Storeowner may be perfectly fine with losing his life on behalf of his anti-gun ‘muh principles’ stance. But I don’t want him making that same poor decision for me.

              Yes, I CAN stay out of his store and take my business elsewhere… for NOW.

              But TPTB are doing everything possible to make it so I CANNOT take my business elsewhere, because eventually there won’t BE anywhere that doesn’t have an anti-gun policy.

              .

              “Even the incorrect civil rights law of today makes a distinction between that and something you cannot stop doing or being.”

              _________________

              That’s because the clever boys and girls who wrote it needed something to hang their hat on, and they settled on that. It’s classic “determine the political objective first, and then construe a law around it to justify it”.

              What I have been saying, consistently, is that we cannot “stop” our inherent God-given rights, they are, quite literally, unalienable.

              And that is a whole lot stronger Constitutional ground than using ‘skin color’ or ‘sexual perversion’ to justify a law, neither of which are found anywhere in the Constitution, at all.

              Yes, there are limitations on Rights, e.g., I am free to swing my fist right up to the point where I hit your nose, at which point I have committed battery (unless it was in self-defense).

              In like manner, I ought to be able to lawfully carry a concealed weapon, right up to the point where I reveal the weapon without justification (e.g., self-defense or defense of others).

              In other words, so long as I am swinging my fists in their without threatening or hitting anyone, who is harmed?

              Likewise, so long as a LAWFULLY CONCEALED WEAPON REMAINS CONCEALED, what harm is it doing, to anyone?

              Who can even know it’s there?

              .

              “He couldn’t tell a black to come back some day when he’s no longer black. But he can tell you to leave until you modify your behavior…or prohibit certain behavior up front.”

              ________________

              But the ‘object’ or ‘purpose’ of modifying a behavior is, clearly, because the behavior in question is causing a disturbance of some kind to the business, the patrons, or both.

              Carrying a lawfully concealed weapon is a ‘passive’ thing. It is CONCEALED. No one knows you have it. The very NATURE and PURPOSE of a lawfully carried and concealed weapon is to make sure it does NOT cause any objectionable ‘disturbance’, by keeping in CONCEALED.

              If it is CONCEALED, if nobody KNOWS you have it, then by definition, it cannot be causing any objectionable ‘disturbance’, unlike all of the examples you have proposed so far.

              This is fundamentally different in that regard.

              .

              “I may not like this application of property rights (in fact, I absolutely don’t) but that doesn’t nullify it. And I won’t invent specious justifications to try to give me an entitlement to violate someone else’s rights.”

              ______________

              I am not inventing specious justifications, I am testing the consistency of the logic of your reasoning and position, to see if it can be defended, to see if it can withstand scrutiny.

              There is no need to attribute a malicious or nefarious motive to my inquiry.

              .

              “The correct response to an asshole business owner is to take your business eleswhere.”

              ______________

              And what happens when you can no longer do that?

              Consider it now, because that time is coming.

              .

              “Doing anything else (like sneaking a gun onto his property so you can spend money there) simply rewards him for his anti-gun policy.”

              _____________

              I would not be ‘sneaking’ a gun onto the property, anymore than I am sneaking my underwear or my socks onto the property. He can’t see my underwear or my socks (hopefully) either. The store owner probably ASSUMES I have them on (socks and underwear), but I am keeping them concealed, and as a result, no one is disturbed or adversely affected by their presence on my body.

              I do understand your point, though rewarding him for his anti-gun policy would be ancillary (and unintended). The primary benefit (to myself) and whole purpose for lawfully carrying a concealed weapon is for my own lawful defense and/or the lawful defense of others.

              What do you do when ‘taking your business elsewhere’ is not a viable option?

              Because that is where all of this headed. By intent and by design, eventually there will be (practically speaking) NO PLACE you can go and carry a concealed weapon.

              Like

              1. I said:

                “You don’t exercise your first amendement right by thinking, you exercise it by SPEAKING. You take an action. A right is a freedom of action in a social context.”

                To which you said:

                Understood, that’s not the point I was making.

                Uh, no. You brought up thinking as if it were exercising your first amendment right. I brought it up to correct your bogus attempt to draw an analogy between merely thinking and actually bearing arms.

                Somewhat later….

                In like manner, how can he discriminate against you for something you are carrying, if he doesn’t know what you are carrying, and because what you are carrying doesn’t impact anyone else — adversely, or otherwise?

                Remember the context of this discussion. Wolf is positing that the shop owners might start scanning people a la the scanners in airport security. He WOULD, in that case, know.

                Furthermore, he could know anyway, if you are incompetent at concealing OR you inadvertently flashed.

                Someone got busted in Denver for an open carry violation, because somebody else’s toddler pulled his concealing jacket back in a restaurant as they were milling about waiting for a table. Totally not his fault (and total crap, but that’s beside the point).

                And if technology is invented which allows the business owner to ‘scan’ you, that would be a clear violation of privacy.

                Is there a recognized privacy right in the constitution? There’s one protecting you from the government, but is there one protecting you from other private citizens? And even if there is, it’s just barely possible this would past muster (under leftist courts) as necessary to ensure public safety. After all, it’s OK in airports.

                The REASON these issues are important is because we are rapidly approaching a full-on Police State, and that destination is BY DESIGN, by the same People who are seeking to CONTROL everything.

                Indeed. No disagreement there but we have to keep in mind the distinction between private parties and the government. And we have to watch out for conflating “public” ((mis)used to describe a business establishment, which is actually a private establishment with an open door policy) and “public” (the government).

                later down:

                I wasn’t suggesting or implying any such thing. If I am lawfully carrying a concealed weapon, which no one can see and which no one is aware of, and going about my business, not bothering anyone, then who is being harmed?

                In my opinion? No one.

                But my opinion doesn’t matter in LeftyShops. Neither does yours. LeftyShops’ owner believes you’re posing a hazard, and may even sincerely believe he’s at risk of a tort if he doesn’t restrain you. And it’s his property, so his opinion, however fricking baseless it might be, is what matters.

                As you’ll have noticed, I am describing a purer property rights regime than we actually have in the US, thanks to the civil rights laws. Your strategy seems to be to try to bend the civil rights laws around to try to force LeftyShops to accomodate gun bearing.

                Unfortunately, it’s not going to work, because they will simply point to the distinction between something someone is (Black, etc.)–an immutable thing–and something someone chooses to do (carry a gun)–which is a choice you make. You’re trying to say your rights follow you around…but they’ll simply laugh in your face, because you almost certainly voluntarily choose not to exercise some of your rights at many different times during the day. Carrying your rights around with you is not equivalent to always exercising them under all circumstances, and since you choose at times not to, you can certainly choose not to do so entering LeftyShops. You’ll still get laughed out of court trying to claim carrying is analogous to being black.

                I recognize the bigger issue here; they’re trying to do through social means what they cannot do through legal means: Make it infeasible to carry, by ensuring you can’t shop, even for groceries, with your gun.

                (And actually, I’ve been too charitable; for all too many people LAW stops them from carrying; e.g., people working on military bases, people going to post offices (you can’t even legally have a gun in your car at a post office parking lot), and so forth…the person might be forced to leave his gun at home because of ONE thing he’s doing out of a list of six things that day.)

                I don’t have an answer. But I am not, therefore, going to pick a *wrong* answer. And yours is wrong, verging on silly.

                Like

        2. I think these are excellent legal and ethical questions.

          For reasons I will get into, I think that some of the people behind this stuff are quite ready to behave in ILLEGAL and UNETHICAL ways. It is very much the LAWFARE model. So the idea that they might be behind Vegas? Not impossible.

          Allow me to explain.

          I have triggered some of these things. I won’t say how I do it. The first time, I wasn’t really experienced with them – I had only HEARD OF THEM. For other reasons, I was expecting some kinds of shenanigans. I did NOT expect what they actually did.

          During the time they attempted to GET ME TO initiate the human script that would lead to a search (see how that works? – they need COVER for the machines), they actually put up a REMOVABLE PROHIBITION SIGN in a place where I had specifically checked that there WAS NOT A SIGN. To repeat for clarity, I saw a SIGN UPON LEAVING that was NOT THERE when I entered. That was the kicker. That is when I knew that these people were dirty as hell.

          The TRICK that saved me was not falling for their behavioral scam during the time they put up their little entrapment sign. They desperately needed ME to give them probable cause to cover for the machine. I simply refused. I knew what they were doing – I was fully aware of it.

          They BEHAVED in certain ways that were clearly, to my thinking, DESIGNED BY LAWFARE TYPES. I don’t want to go into the exact details, because I need flexibility in dealing with these people in the future.

          But in my opinion they KNOW THEY ARE ON LEGAL THIN ICE, and probably on Constitutional open water.

          Sad state of affairs. As I have said before, no jury would have believed me if I told them that these guys had PUT UP THE PROHIBITION SIGN while I was inside. That is PURE ENTRAPMENT. But for certain reasons that I will not reveal now, they misinterpreted things in multiple ways that led them to believe it was not necessary to take the sign back down. BIG MISTAKE.

          I checked all the places there could have been a sign on the way in, and all the places there could have been a sign on the way out. They plopped it right in the most obvious spot of all. Trying to keep a straight, unshocked face, and not do a triple-take – THAT was rough. I decided not to take a picture and give away that I had busted them – I simply hoped that my description to a JURY – not needed for my own defense – would be sufficient to be believed.

          What do y’all think? Believable? 😉

          Liked by 10 people

          1. IMO all aspects of the system have been thoroughly gamed to make it seem like things just happen naturally, when in fact it is all legally constructed to hide the repression.

            IMO juries will NOT believe a mere citizen on a small but highly consequential act. Forget about judges who are mostly relieved and grateful for perjury which relieves them of a politically difficult decision.

            OT but somewhat related, the same thing can be seen in medical treatment where seemingly benign or innocuous “procedures” or “routine” paperwork actually has a legal construct intended to harm the patient if necessary, up to and including getting rid of undesirable old, white people.

            Does anyone know what they are signing when they sign the invisible HIPPA form (or a DNR, for that matter)? Of course not! That’s the whole point. The lawyers will tell you later if it ever becomes an issue, which 99.99% of the time it will not, because the legal construct is working as intended, to remain invisible.

            Liked by 9 people

            1. I’m sure that you’re right. This has been going on a long time. They have learned to leave a certain amount of ROOM FOR LEGAL MANEUVERABILITY into which a sufficient amount of malevolence can operate. And that is EXACTLY what they did to President Trump.

              Liked by 7 people

            1. Good thinking. However – and this is VERY important – the black hats at that time had my phone data, and I knew it. The white hats did, too, but the black hats were getting my phone stuff in real time. It was a shocking realization, but I just played along.

              I had several indications during that time frame that they were tracking my phone at all times. For that reason, I could not use my phone in all the ways I would have liked to. Taking a picture of the entrance on the way in would have instantly tipped them off to what I was watching for. I also had to be careful not to look at things too obviously on the security cameras, which were MANY and well-positioned.

              This is part of why I defended so strongly on Khashoggi. The dirty clowns were CLEARLY trying to tear down the “military sixth eye” in Saudi Arabia, because the rest of our system is HIGHLY COMPROMISED.

              Here is the ultimate irony.

              The whole reason this thing happened is that my wife let slip – IN THIS PLACE at an earlier time, – with my phone out – that my business there was connected to an event connected to TRUMP. What she did not say or know, but that I knew, was that anything bad happening to me in that time-frame would embarrass TRUMP. I was specifically going into this place for a reason connected to Trump. I *KNEW* as soon as she opened her mouth that there was a greatly increased chance that the black hats would try to take advantage of the opportunity, because if they created an EVENT in that time-frame, it would be connected to TRUMP. This was at a time, and in a place, where STRONG black hat operations had already taken place recently. So I was being properly careful. And – blow my mind – I was RIGHT. Saved by long-range situational awareness.

              Interesting times.

              Liked by 5 people

        3. Many years ago we went into an antiques shop in Santa Barbara, California, and one had to leave one’s purse behind the counter or, I suppose to prevent shoplifting. Also, in some sports venues, one cannot carry a bag, and there are other restrictions regarding what one can wear. It is for security reasons. I will not go to such places.

          Liked by 8 people

          1. Went to a Blues game yesterday. I purposefully take my smallest cross body purse. It’s much easier to search than a tote. I mean, seriously, you can’t get all that much in there.

            Every year the security gets tighter and tighter, and the reality is that with the city jail right across the street, the fans have tackled escapees on more than one occasion to help police.

            It’s seriously ridiculous.

            Liked by 6 people

          2. SingularZoe
            “Many years ago we went into an antiques shop in Santa Barbara, California, and one had to leave one’s purse behind the counter or, I suppose to prevent shoplifting. Also, in some sports venues, one cannot carry a bag, and there are other restrictions regarding what one can wear. It is for security reasons. I will not go to such places.”
            ____________________________________________
            I visited an art exhibit a couple of years ago they went through my purse and wanted to confiscate a pen and an ink pen. Both pens were a gift from my husband from Levenger and had been expensive.
            I opted to stay outside the art exhibit while my husband and my granddaughter walked though it.
            I did not realize they would take pens and other things from you.
            In Chicago I know one cannot bring backpacks or larger purses and I take a small purse and have no problems.

            Liked by 2 people

      2. “NOW – I believe that “they” are currently deploying devices in test venues – UNSEEN – that can actually (using a variety of EMF and AI technologies) tell exactly what you have in your pockets – down to POCKET KNIVES and possibly even the MAKE and MODEL of guns.”

        ___________________

        Okay, but even so, it’s like detecting that someone is ‘black’, or detecting that someone is ‘gay’.

        They can’t refuse to serve someone because they are ‘black’, and they can’t refuse to serve someone because they are ‘gay’.

        How can they refuse to serve someone who is lawfully armed?

        How can they lawfully DISCRIMINATE against YOU when YOU are lawfully exercising YOUR rights?

        And we’re not even talking about bogus made-up ‘civil rights’, we’re talking about actual God-given, unalienable, Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

        Liked by 7 people

        1. You make an interesting point. HAVE their been cases where people have taken this to SCOTUS? Most state CHL laws are based on the idea that businesses and private citizens CAN prohibit weapons on their own premises. As part of passage of such laws, this has always been viewed as a reasonable compromise. But the fact of the matter is, PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION LAWS and CIVIL RIGHTS may say *EXACTLY* what you are saying – that the legal right to be legally armed in a PUBLIC PLACE may be protected – or at least more protected than it has been.

          I think the place where this runs into trouble is BARS, where there seems to be an interest of the state in separating alcohol and weapons. Interestingly, I think that many if not most state laws allow NON-DRINKING patrons to be armed in at least some places serving liquor. But the question now is – can bars prohibit non-drinking patrons from being armed?

          Interesting idea – that this is REAL “civil rights”.

          Liked by 7 people

          1. The ‘right’ of Self Defense has been established, hasn’t it?

            And unless an establishment can Guarantee that that their customers will come to no harm whatsoever while on the premises…then the customers’ right to self defense should not be infringed upon.

            Liked by 7 people

          2. I have a t-shirt which husband brought home from a gun show. It says, “Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, who’s bringing the chips?”

            Liked by 14 people

              1. “well, one argument they will use is that race is something you are–and cannot change. If you are black, you have to stay black.”

                ______________

                That’s not what Michael Jackson told me.

                And Rachel Dolezal told me you don’t have to stay white.

                But to your point, our God-given rights are ‘who we are’ too, they absolutely define who we are, our freedom, our culture, our country and our history.

                Even more so than race, because those God-given rights apply to every American, whether black, or white, or red, or yellow.

                .

                “Carrying a gun is a behavior. You can choose to engage (or not engage) in it.”

                ____________

                It is a ‘right’… and not just any old privilege made up by government and intentionally mislabeled as a ‘right’ — but an actual God-given right, one deemed so inherently important — both to the individual and for the survival of the Republic as a whole — that it received recognition in the founding documents of our nation, in the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.

                It is far, far more than a ‘behavior’, as the many quotes from our Founding Fathers on this subject attest.

                .

                “So they could say, OK, let’s “protect” all races…but refuse to protect behavior.”

                ____________

                Carrying a firearm is a Right, not a behavior. Even if ‘behavior’ is a secondary definition, it is also a Right, and of the two, the Right is clearly the superior or primary definition for purpose of Law.

                .

                “This is why they were hellbent on getting people to accept that “gay” is something you don’t choose to be, so that they could be made a protected group.”

                ____________

                Agreed — but the simple truth and fact is that we do not ‘choose’ our Rights, they are granted by God, they are “inherent” in us. When you get up in the morning, you don’t pick and choose which ‘Rights’ to put on like you choose your clothes.

                Your Rights go with you wherever you go — ALL of them — because like the color of your skin, they are inherent within you.

                Liked by 1 person

              2. …And one of our inalienable rights is the right to our property. So one could, therefore, tell you not to bring a gun onto their property. You don’t get to enter someone else’s property on YOUR terms. If you can, then that individual doesn’t control his property.

                So which “God given” right takes precedence?

                Get off your 2A “I can dance around with my gun anywhere I like even without the permission of the property owner” high horse. You DON’T have a right to be on someone else’s property; he can set conditions on your entry. If you don’t like the conditions, don’t go there, but don’t claim you have a fucking right to go there anyway!!!

                Liked by 2 people

              3. The difference between forbidding admission of ANYBODY with a weapon, and forbidding NRA members, with or without a weapon, seems like it gets to the crux of the matter.

                Like

              4. “…And one of our inalienable rights is the right to our property. So one could, therefore, tell you not to bring a gun onto their property. You don’t get to enter someone else’s property on YOUR terms.”

                __________________

                If you are referring to private property, then I agree.

                If you are referring to commercial property, then all sorts of different laws apply.

                The bogus ‘civil privileges’ laws (they’re not rights, they’re not recognized anywhere in the Constitution, they were made up by politicians — and what the politician giveth, the politician can taketh away) clearly override commercial business owner’s rights, for so long as that bad law exists and is enforced.

                “If you can, then that individual doesn’t control his property.

                So which “God given” right takes precedence?”

                __________________

                The Right to Life would seem to be a primary or preeminent right, because if you lose that, all the others go with it. So I would say my Right to defend my life takes precedence over a commercial business owner’s politics.

                .

                “Get off your 2A “I can dance around with my gun anywhere I like even without the permission of the property owner” high horse.”

                _______________

                Hey, leave my horse out of this. He’s a good horse, and he only kills what he eats.

                And, I don’t dance.

                Not ‘around’, or anywhere else.

                Certainly not with a gun.

                Have you ever tried to dance with a gun?

                You have, haven’t you… I knew it!

                It seems strange to me… I mean, if you’re going to dance (I wouldn’t recommend it), most people wouldn’t choose a gun to dance with, they would dance with another person. Unless you’re Billy Idol, I suppose.

                And if you’re going to dance in a place where nobody goes to dance, and where nobody else is dancing, it’s probably going to draw a lot of unwanted attention — whether you’re dancing with your gun, or not.

                And beyond all that, it’s very difficult, some would even say impossible, to dance with a gun that is concealed. You can’t make eye contact, you can’t Tango (or slow dance) cheek to cylinder (or cheek to pistol grip, if you prefer the semi-auto). Leaving aside why you would be dancing with your gun in the first place, it’s just not really possible without drawing your weapon first.

                And the subject of this discussion is about concealed carry.

                .

                “You DON’T have a right to be on someone else’s property;”

                _____________

                Even if it’s a registered or licensed corporation, limited liability partnership or LLC that has a portion of the property open to the public for purposes of conducting business, and my purpose for being there is to do business?

                Look, I’m not shooting anybody, I’m not waving a gun around, nobody even knows if I’m carrying it — or not.

                .

                “he can set conditions on your entry.”

                ______________

                Can he refuse entry to a black person?

                Can he refuse entry to a gay person?

                Can he refuse entry to a gay black person?

                Can he refuse entry to a gay black person carrying a concealed weapon?

                How is it that civil statutes override the business owner’s rights with regard to being gay and black, but actual God-given rights inherent to every man and woman, do not?

                How do you reconcile that?

                Constitutionally guaranteed God-given Rights are inherently superior to any made up privileges granted by Congress, yet the privileges made up by Congress are given deference and superiority, while our inherent rights given by God are ignored.

                .

                “If you don’t like the conditions, don’t go there, but don’t claim you have a fucking right to go there anyway!!!”

                _________________

                My rights go with me wherever I go… because they are inherently part of me. Yours should be too…

                So why is a hypothetical business owner allowed to discriminate against me for exercising my Rights — which are always with me, part of who I am?

                Is the business owner allowed to discriminate against me for exercising my 1st Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech too?

                What if I exercise my 1st Amendment right to Free Speech only in my head, silently, where no one else can hear it… can the business owner discriminate against me then?

                No?

                Then how can he discriminate against me for exercising my 2nd Amendment right, silently, where no one else can see my weapon or even know if I am carrying one?

                He can’t hear or know the thoughts in my head, just as he can’t see or know whether I have a lawfully concealed weapon — or not.

                Liked by 1 person

              5. Oooh, slippery there.

                You don’t exercise your first amendement right by thinking, you exercise it by SPEAKING. You take an action. A right is a freedom of action in a social context.

                And you sure as heck won’t get to stay on a business owner’s property long if you start ranting about what a craptastic business it is, on his grounds, loudly. Or carrying signs saying “Business X is Unfair” or anything like that. Even if everything on the sign or in your rant is the truth, and all you’re doing is exercising your first amendment right…you’ll be told to leave.

                Yes, for a behavior which is a “God-given right.”

                Similarly, he can tell you to leave for exercising your 2A right. He’ll almost certainly tell you you can come back without the gun.

                A business owner, even under current stupid law, has every right to set down conditions of behavior and it makes NO DIFFERENCE if your behavior is covered under the BOR, much less if it’s one of the innumerable rights NOT specifically mentioned in the BOR (captured by the Ninth Amendment).

                Under current law he can do this. And that is *correct* law.

                Even the incorrect civil rights law of today makes a distinction between that and something you cannot stop doing or being. He couldn’t tell a black to come back some day when he’s no longer black. But he can tell you to leave until you modify your behavior…or prohibit certain behavior up front.

                I may not like this application of property rights (in fact, I absolutely don’t) but that doesn’t nullify it. And I won’t invent specious justifications to try to give me an entitlement to violate someone else’s rights.

                The correct response to an asshole business owner is to take your business eleswhere. Doing anything else (like sneaking a gun onto his property so you can spend money there) simply rewards him for his anti-gun policy.

                Like

        2. The civil rights laws only apply in the manner which you describe if you are a member of a protected group (race, religion, nat’l origin, etc). Otherwise, the burden is on the person claiming injury to show a right that is deprived involuntarily. You walked in – that’s a voluntary act. Plus, the property owner has superior rights UNLESS the person complaining is (and can prove) membership in a protected class.

          If you are unwelcome in an establishment and refuse to leave, you have committed a trespass. You instantly transform yourself from victim to suspect. A voluntary act.

          Businesses ban blacks nevertheless by basing their banning on behavior instead of race. Blacks cooperate in this strategy by making a loud fuss (or worse) when asked to leave. The disturbance of the peace transforms the incident into one of trespass.

          Hope this helps. FTR, most claims of racial bias fail.

          Liked by 5 people

            1. “I don’t believe the protected class doctrine was a good idea…an even worse idea would be trying to apply it to everyone.”

              ________________

              Applying it to everyone is the only way to restore equality.

              It’s black and white.

              Either everyone is equal under Law, or they aren’t.

              There are no shades of gray, no carve-outs, no exceptions.

              So either EVERYBODY is a ‘protected class’, or NOBODY is a ‘protected class’.

              ANY other avenue is manufacturing inequality by corruption of Law.

              What is the ‘argument’ for ANY ‘protected class’?

              How did it EVER pass Constitutional ‘muster’?

              It didn’t, because it couldn’t. It violates the very foundational premises of equal rights and equal justice under law.

              I know there are Lawyers who read here, what is the lawful argument for a multi-tiered system of justice and rights and benefits and privileges, in a nation founded upon Equal Justice Under Law?

              Surely there must be a fantastic argument, if the wise old sages and liars crafted this garbage and enacted it.

              So what is the argument?

              Liked by 3 people

              1. well, one argument they will use is that race is something you are–and cannot change. If you are black, you have to stay black.

                Carrying a gun is a behavior. You can choose to engage (or not engage) in it.

                So they could say, OK, let’s “protect” all races…but refuse to protect behavior.

                This is why they were hellbent on getting people to accept that “gay” is something you don’t choose to be, so that they could be made a protected group.

                I still oppose the protected classes on freedom of association grounds, but that is an argument for giving to race but not to gun carrying that is internally consistent.

                Liked by 1 person

          1. “The civil rights laws only apply in the manner which you describe if you are a member of a protected group (race, religion, nat’l origin, etc).”

            __________________

            The very CONCEPT of a ‘protected class’ stands in direction contradiction and violation of ‘EQUAL RIGHTS’ and ‘Equal Justice Under Law’.

            And there is no honest, lawful way around that.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. You make good points. My question is what happens if all the stores of a particular type (grocery, convenience, etc.) decide to prohibit guns from being carried into their facility. Gun-bearing citizens’ rights are already being violated, and it would be more obvious if there were no place for them to shop for food while carrying.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. At that point, the gun owners / gun carriers would be shit out of luck. Only alternative is to go to another store. Possibly followed up by a snail mail letter informing management of the decision to shop elsewhere and why. A few thousand of these letters would likely cause reversal of the policy.

              Liked by 2 people

      3. Yes. This stuff is being deployed in Vegas for sure but I know for a fact that (at this time at least) they are not confronting those who have concealed weapons. Perhaps there will come a time that they will but it has not happened yet. I looked into getting a CCW for Vegas because I go there for business reasons pretty regularly. That’s just not going to happen. First, it’s not the state of Nevada, it’s Clark County, and second the regulations associated with even applying are ridiculous and weed out all but those with a lot of money and time.

        Liked by 4 people

      1. Gun free zones do vary greatly by state. Can be affected by the state issuing CCW. Whether the CCW holder is a resident or not that issued the CCW. Sucks greatly.

        *https://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html*

        Liked by 1 person

        1. “Gun free zones do vary greatly by state. ”

          _______________

          And this not how it should be.

          The Constitution doesn’t vary greatly by state… the Constitution doesn’t vary on jot or tittle. The same Constitution for the united States of America applies equally to all 50 states.

          So how can there be restrictions on God-given, Constitutionally guaranteed and protected ACTUAL rights, which ‘vary’ depending on which state you are in, when no matter WHAT state you are in, that state is subject to the Constitution for the united States?

          If we ever bother to get to the core issues of these questions, the answers will be self-evident.

          Our country has wandered so far off the rails of our Constitution that an outside observer wouldn’t even recognize our society and our Constitution as being of and for the same land and People.

          Because they are irreconcilable.

          The solution to that corruption is not to bend the Constitution to the schemes of wicked men.

          The solution is to restore the Constitutional Republic, and destroy the schemes of wicked men — and destroy the wicked men who created and benefited from them.

          Liked by 4 people

  2. If a business isn’t made aware of Why their sales are decreasing…then they will often make up their own reasons to explain it away.

    So it’s probably better for achieving our goals, if we are Very Vocal about withdrawing our patronage of from these ‘Gun-Free Zones’.

    Look at Hollywood for example…lots of us have been avoiding the box office for years, because of the leftist crap that the studios have been cranking out.
    But because there has been no ‘official boycott’ announced, Hollywood has been making up their own excuses for their decline in box office sales.

    Memes are good. So are slogans.

    Even old fashioned hand-bills, plastered on the outside of an establishment, can be very effective.

    GUN-FREE ZONE = KILL ZONE

    Or…WELCOME TO THE KILL ZONE — NO GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS ALLOWED HERE.

    There have been lots of times where a ‘good guy with a gun’ stopped a shooter, in a store or restaurant.
    But the national media doesn’t report on it.
    It doesn’t fit their narrative.

    BAD GUYS DON’T OBEY ‘GUN-FREE ZONES’

    Anything we can do to raise awareness of how “You’re Not Safe Here” at these gun-free zones, the better.
    😀

    Liked by 15 people

    1. I did exactly that. The young black man who was checking off the purchase stub got educated by me. Remember that Iama smiling sweet old grandma. I mentioned how Ididn’t like the nocarry sign on the door and why. We were all sitting ducks for any crazed sphincter who either wanted to rob the patrons, or just shoot up the people there, probablystarting with the people near the door.

      Considering that the Costco is right off the expressway, the policy puts everyone in jeopardy and he agreed with me…

      Liked by 7 people

  3. Som is working now on his “advanced concealed carry permit”.
    The kid has become a walking/talking billboard for the 2nd amendment and has become incredibly effective at convincing young people who are ignorant of their rights…. but he’s also effective in a room of elders.
    He’s good.
    And when it comes to the fine points of debate, we’re pretty tough customers.
    Sidenote: It’s tough to get a word in edgewise in our family. Husband was a mock trial national champ in law school and a trial lawyer out of Boston for 28yrs. I often joke that he will start an argument because he thinks it’s a “sport”. I was on debate team in high school, etc., but was the state champ for extemporaneous speaking…… which meant I could talk about doorknobs/butterflies, better than anyone.
    Let’s just say, our house is HIGHLY VERBAL.
    In fact, when I was pregnant, I wasn’t worried at all about having a disabled child, because I would accept and love the child. I was TERRIFIED I might have a shy child, who would have a difficult time in our family.
    Funny thing happened along the way. Never mind the girls, who are naturally boisterous. The boy child, Gunner, is freakishly good when it comes to personal interviews or group oral presentations. Completely natural – Scott Adams level persuasion. He’s become so good at debating the fine points of the second amendment, he needs to work for the NRA.
    Not sure he can earn a living with said skill, but let’s hope he figures it out.

    Liked by 12 people

        1. I’m just trying to come up with an equally great last name for his ‘nom de plum’ – because of course, he will be the next Tom Clancy or John Grisham.

          Liked by 5 people

              1. Good story about how Gunner got his name.
                Originally, I cashed out of the brokerage firm to pick up an accounting degree, take the test for CPA, then go to law school, and return to Miami. That WAS the plan.
                Met my husband and life got in the way.
                We were dating and watching a Sunday football game. Boomer Esiason was QB for Cincinnati, and half time special was on his son, Gunnar, who had a debilitating disease. I thought wow, Boomer and Gunnar, odd names, what does his wife think?
                But at the time I had returned to Ole Miss, which is a bastion of southern gentility and high-brow sororities.
                I thought, “Damn, if I was a freshman in a sorority at Ole Miss, and I had a blind date with a guy named Gunner, I believe……. I would go.”
                Yep.
                Years later, I ended up pregnant, it was a boy, and no other name was ever discussed.
                Gunner was a perfect name for him.

                Liked by 7 people

    1. Debate is excellent for honing persuasion skills. One of the grandsons was on debate team all Four years in HS, and went all over the country with the team. He is in honors college in E.E. now, so he didn’t go out for debate there.

      His next brother is a HS freshman, and was upped to varsity debate before November. The next brother is in 6th grade and looks like he will follow in same footsteps.

      Oh, BTW, they are all great shots with everything from handguns to skeet.

      Liked by 6 people

        1. The typical fazes of wannabe jocks umtil they realized that brains ruled the world. That was about their Freshman year in HS. The youngest one is still playing baseballjust for fun. Both of the younger ones were exceptionally good second basemen and shortstops and in the outfield. They kept their attention on their job.

          Liked by 2 people

      1. One time, I brought home two of those skeet thrower thingies from an estate sale.
        Husband always bi$ched about my estate sale fetish, but gheez, that day, you would have thought I came home with the Arc of the Covenant.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. I believe that. The boys and SIL bought DH one for Christmas one year. They spent hours on the day after Christmas in a freezing cold garage customizing it.

          Liked by 2 people

  4. The banner picture is hilarious! My son received a S-UCKS gift certificate for Christmas a couple years ago from one of his clueless aunts. He loves coffee but not theirs. He didn’t hesitate one bit as he threw away $20. That’s my boy!

    It’d be handy to have a list of gun free zone businesses by state to target for boycotts. I was only able to find this for Texas. Note the designators OCB and CCB for open carry and concealed carry.
    https://gunfreebusinesses.com/

    More newsworthy gun policy links
    https://www.concealedcarry.com/law/businesses-that-prohibit-guns-or-have-no-gun-policies/
    https://www.pewpewtactical.com/places-you-cant-carry/
    http://concealednation.org/2015/12/breaking-the-law-what-should-we-do-when-encountering-a-gun-free-zone-while-carrying/

    Liked by 8 people

    1. By throwing it away, he simply ensured those assholes got 20 bucks for nothing.

      I could see making a SHOW of throwing it away in front of the clueless giver, but he should have made Starbucks give him something to cost them money–i.e., figure out what has the lowest profit margin and use the certificate for that. Figure out ways to make his visit more expensive to them.

      Liked by 5 people

        1. Another variation:

          Go in, order some of their crappy coffee.

          Sit at some table for hours and hours, apparently nursing the coffee.

          Walk out the door, leave the coffee on the table.

          Or ostentatiously pour it, making it clear you think it’s as drinkable as tyrannosaur urine.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. I would have brought the coffe, accidentally spilled it on their counter, got a courtesy replacement and tipped it out on the pavement outside the door. 2fer

      Liked by 1 person

  5. While targeted boycotts can be effective, there are some pitfalls to the initial idea here until it was fleshed out a bit in the comments. I think of two or three specific places where “Gun Free Zone” signs have sprung up like weeds: Church, grocery stores, and medical facilities.

    Church…I doubt a concealed carry weapon would be detected, and police in uniform are never asked to leave, but the signs are there. Probably virtue signaling.

    ALL of our local grocery stores have gun free zone signs, including Walmart. How do you solve that one?

    Medical facilities all have them now, but since the AMA is in bed with the forces hell bent on destroying us, that shouldn’t be any great shock.

    It’s one of those things that’s going to take a major lawsuit to solve, IMO.

    Liked by 8 people

    1. Not all doctor’s offices – or provider’s offices – have that sign nor believe it should even be posted. Most do that for liability reasons, not because they personally believe it, and they mostly don’t care if you do have a weapon.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. I have carried for years, have a CCP, and will go anywhere I want with it except where it clearly violates our state’s laws (TN). To this point I have not been asked to leave or remove the gun to enter. I have entered every Target and Starbucks I see just to do it – not because I care anything about their products. I have carried in a movie theater the only time I have gone in recent memory to see “I Can Only Imagine” despite their sign. I will not be a sitting duck for criminals. Carrying has not set off any “detectors” yet, so I guess we will see what happens if it does. It is my right to carry per 2A even if my state does not recognize open constitutional carry yet. About 10% of our state’s residents have CCP’s to help curtail crime. I will notify friends and family if any a-hole refuses to serve me or allow me to enter. I will hand the matter off to the Lord to administer his judgment and justice while doing my part. However, I will not go quietly and will notify authorities if it ever happens in violation of law. The key is and has always been education about the outstanding right we have as citizens to bear arms. It is the one barrier we have that the left hates because it keeps us safe from their tyranny. Any infringement on it and other inalienable rights are personal attacks on American citizens and should be met with extreme resistance and prejudice. People who attempt to take away other people’s Constitutionally and Creator given rights should not be given air to breathe in America.

    Freedom. Fight for it as necessary.

    Liked by 12 people

    1. ^^^ Amen! ^^^

      NV here. Seriously going dark blue. Purely at the hands Clark County (Vegas & Henderson). Massive influx of komifornians, dead voters and illegal voters. Probably never go red again.

      Generally OC and CCW friendly, for now. D-Rats working feverishly to screw it up. Thankfully they only meet every two years for 120 days. NV has BS gun free zones (Federal buildings, medical, airport secure zones, schools, etc.).

      Businesses can post no guns…COSTCO, AMC… Many or most of us, (me included), CCW anyway. In NV all they can do is ask us to leave. No need to admit to carrying. Nor would I admit it.

      Rather sure the larger casinos have the scanners Wolf mentions. Some smaller casinos have signs up, but don’t give a rats… Large venues such as concerts, sports, etc. wand and have scanners. Not even knives. Have had to “check” my pocket carry knife at Caesars Palace, Reba, Brooks & Dunn. Guys checking the knives were quite good about it, almost ambivalent about the stupidity of it all.

      Constitutional Carry, God given Rights, or simple human Rights to defend oneself are the only Rights that matter, IMHO. Pick one, two or all. It’s that simple.

      With regard to gun free zones, they are simply stupid, IMHO. As are all anti-gun laws, including background checks, stupid, IMHO.

      Gun free zones are target rich environments for criminals to thrive.

      Laws that restrict possession of guns simply create sheeple. People control. That simple, IMHO.

      IF society deems someone so dangerous they can’t have a gun, then that person should be locked up. The person is a danger, not the gun.

      Rant off.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. Kinda sorta related, not really… (Wolf is tolerant, me thinks)

        So Wal-Mart has started half-@ss scanning receipts and an item or two in folks bags & carts as they leave Wal-Mart.

        Have been “asked” twice if they can scan my receipt?

        Generally as I get near these folks, I preemptively say, have a nice day and continue on my way.

        Two occasions I was approached by the greeter / scanner person.

        – My reply, are you “asking” or “requiring” to scan my receipt?
        – – First time the reply to me was “asking only”. To which I replied, I paid for everything in my bag, have a nice day and kept going.
        – – Second time, the reply was “required to ask”. To which I replied, “you are required to ask”, or I am required to let you scan my receipt”?
        – – Reply was “required to ask”.
        – – I replied well, thank you for asking. I paid for everything here, have a nice day.

        FWIW, I remained pleasant and friendly with the greeters. They are only doing their job as directed.

        The day a greeter insists on scanning a receipt, I’ll require the manager to splain what the hell is going on. Won’t listen to any answer with “random” in it as there is noting random in what they are doing. Nor do I see a policy at the door stating scanning receipts and select merchandise required.

        Simply Wal-Marts way to combat theft / losses as they are cost conscience and reduced cashiers, increased customer scan merchandise and some of their cashiers may not be effective at scanning all merchandise properly.

        Short of a high value item like a TV, not sure there is much Wal-Mart can do beyond “ask” to scan receipts.

        Last rant for the day. (Maybe)

        Liked by 3 people

        1. A brief comment, I think.

          When at COSTCO and the guy or gall waves the Citi Visa card brochure asking if I am interested?

          My reply, clearly, not loudly. “Never”. To which they say something to the effect of why, it’s a good deal…

          My reply, “Citi Bank is Anti-Second Amendment and will never have my business”.

          While not yelling or obnoxious loud, folks in immediate area can hear my reply. Maybe they will “listen” and think about it. Also wearing my MAGA hat.

          Liked by 7 people

            1. Understand. I ignore it. In NV, all they can really do is ask me to leave. I would do so.

              I suppose they could terminate my membership, but don’t believe they’ll do that. I remain polite, civil and all that.

              Until they threaten to take away my membership, no real issue by me.

              Pretty much ignore all private businesses that have a no gun policy. That is in NV. In other states, I follow their laws.

              Liked by 3 people

            1. Well they’ll have to decommission my membership then, along with a LOT of other members in my area….most of the people I know with Costco memberships carry. I live in a constitutional carry state so good luck to them.

              Liked by 4 people

            2. Agree.

              Conditions of a private membership, I suppose. Good with it.

              Still give them an earful when they walk around peddling the Citi Visa card. And the gun free statement. No problem. If they challenge me, I leave.

              Liked by 1 person

  7. Wade was an older guy, owned a local construction company, had a fierce temper, re-headed, and about 5’4″ tall. Wade had a high opinion of himself and was prone to fight at the drop of a hat. He was at a gas station, filling up his new Lincoln, when a guy came out from beyond the parking lot with a long rifle and wanted him to turn over his wallet.

    Wade raised his hands to calm the guy and reached into the car to get his wallet, but also reached under the seat to pick up his 45. He straightened up to draw on the criminal who was trying to rob him. The robber stared at him for a moment, then turned and ran into the trees beyond the parking lot. Wade felt proud and stuck out his chest, yelling at the robber as he fled.

    As Wade turned around to brace himself from the incident, he saw three other gas station customers, one with a long gun, two others with pistols, drawn and ready to go. The young man at the car parked next to Wade, didn’t wait for a thank you. He said, “That’s okay Mr.Wade, we had your back.”

    Would have been a helluva firefight at the local gas station.

    Liked by 12 people

  8. Another gun-free-zone story.
    Columbine had just happened and principals all over the country were instituting new directives for gun-free-zone rules on school grounds.
    Again, we live next door to the town’s school, 7th-12th grades wraps around our property.
    Daniel, the gentle giant, was a high school employee of mine. He was 15 when I hired him. He was red-headed, about 6’4″, wore a size 16 ring and a 17 shoe, and had the biggest chest I’ve ever seen on a man. Daniel played football, offensive lineman. Besides normal stuff, one of Daniel’s primary duties for me was to “carry the baby”. Gunner was born into a whirlwind of activity, but the baby went everywhere with us. So, you have the visual — huge giant Daniel and small infant Gunner – whom Daniel handled like he was a Faberge egg. When Gunner was sick or colicky, Daniel would walk the baby for hour after hour after hour…. and stay, until Gunner fell asleep.
    One weekend, we had been cutting down our Christmas trees, thus Daniel had an ax, chain saw, in the back of his truck bed, and probably a 22 under the back. On Monday morning, someone at the school saw the ax and chainsaw and alerted the principal. They searched his car, and found the gun.
    Daniel was called to the office for discipline…..
    …. and he was in detention, thus late for work.
    Daniel was never late for work.
    I called his mom to see if he was sick that day. No, and I told her I would check it out and get back to her. I called the school office to see if anyone had seen him, when I was informed of what happened. By the tone of the school secretary, “You better get down her quick, Miss D”, I could tell….. we had a problem brewing.
    Daniel was the first student caught up in a stupid school policy. The principal was the husband of a member of my “Culture Club”. I knew him well. The kids called him Skeletor. He was an underweight wimp of a man who was looking to make an example of Daniel, who was MINE.
    Never leave a man behind, right?
    I went to the school, by myself, at first, to talk to the principal, Larry. Apparently, Larry always hated football players and took out decades of personal animosity on poor Daniel. Ten days of ISS suspension, meaning he would miss two weeks of school, but under ISS, he had to go to school and sit, in a room, under supervision, and not be educated, PLUS two hour of detention after normal school hours.
    If Daniel missed two weeks of school, chances are, he would fail his classes and not be allowed to play football. The “sentence”, for Daniel, was unreasonable and life-altering. Daniel was the furthest thing from a criminal but “Skeletor” would not budge.

    I failed and a member of my little army was a “political prisoner”.
    Had to do something.
    I called the Principal’s wife, and made an appeal to her. I called the Mayor, aldermen, and every member of the school board, and got nowhere. The knew it was wrong but no one would buck the system and stand up for Daniel.
    Nothing was working.
    Other of our employees were demoralized and frankly, angry.

    I decided we would join Daniel in his “incarceration”. The ISS building, the “prison”, was only about 25′ from my lot line. At the time, we could go onto school grounds and no doors were locked. One of the football coaches was the “supervisor” for ISS, and he knew Daniel was innocent. I called all Daniel’s teachers and got his homework. They understood Daniel was a good boy. During school hours, various members of my staff would go and sit with Daniel and work on his school work. Every day for lunch, we catered a special meal for Daniel, T-Bone steaks, butterfly shrimp, all his favorites. After school, we all went, all 27 of us, went to join Daniel. We brought home made cakes from my mother-in-law and drinks. We also brought work to do and small things for Daniel to fix. He had a gift with weed eaters and other things.

    We created quite a stir but the Principal let us go. He had calmed down and was taking heat from the townspeople.
    We were beaten by the system but the most important thing to us, was that Daniel not feel dejected, as if he had done something wrong. We loved Daniel.
    Daniel never again played football.
    Instead, he opened a small engine business at age 17.
    My husband threw business his way, as did others.
    Today, he’s about 35yrs old, married with 4 kids – which are all tall, and owns a thriving small engine repair business.
    Daniel is one of us…….. always.

    Liked by 11 people

    1. Thanks for helping stand up to the monster of the Columbine psy-op. This is a BEAUTIFUL example of what they were trying to accomplish with MURDER. The DISARMAMENT of America at all levels – achieved by STEALTH – is what they are all about. It’s pure Stalinism.

      By the way, the definitive book on Columbine was written by a British “journalist” who was very likely the British intelligence analog of Yuri Bezmenov, the KGB disinformation specialist who functioned as Soviet media overseas, and defected to America. There are “British Bezmenovs” everywhere, acting as media, but in reality are agents lording over this nation’s brainwashing.

      So what I’m saying is that this British “author” on Columbine was (IMO) clearly a Tavistock-type Brit-Com psy-op participant. I am utterly convinced that Columbine was a manipulated MK event, and the people who pulled it off, or were aware of it (that would include the Clintons) need to HANG FOR THEIR CRIMES after those crimes are well-proven in military tribunals.

      I believe that much of The Plan is based on Yuri Bezmenov’s thinking on how it might be possible to defeat the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy.

      Liked by 7 people

  9. Small weapons and the TSA at airports:
    When Gunner was a little tike, he used to love picking up spent brass shells, out at deer camp over the weekend. Little boys being the way they are, I found countless brass shells in the bottom of my washing machine.
    We were in Boston for the summer but were flying home when it was cooler. At airport drop off, I put a hoodie on Gunner, thinking he might get cold as we had a long walk to our car at home airport.
    Terminal E, downstairs at Logan in Boston is an additional check-in, much faster, and there were only about 4-5 people in line. Suddenly, Gunner’s pockets on his hoodie began to “jingle”.
    In a flash, I realized he had spent bullet shells in his pockets – which might trigger some kind of TSA gun residue sensor – which meant ill-trained TSA workers drawing a weapon, or strip searching my 6yr old son.
    What to do?
    We got to the conveyor belt and I said, “Stop” and put out my hands, open. I explained we were from the south, son loves bullet casings, etc., and Gunner unloaded his pockets.
    There must have been 75-100 of them.
    The TSA agents laughed, and smelled them, and passed them all around to each other.
    Like they had never seen spent shells before…..
    They rubbed the top of Gunner’s head and joked with him.
    We went right through.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. I found countless brass shells in the bottom of my washing machine.

      On the one hand, you wanted to chew him out for not emptying his pockets before putting the clothes in the hamper.

      On the other hand you had to have been proud.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. Echoing comment…but in reality, knowing the one who activates the laundry, simply must check pockets. I forget, and no matter how many times over the years I end up with Kleenex particles on dark clothing, I still sometimes forget! 🙂

        Liked by 5 people

      2. That’s the way he was. Still proud of him.
        Never found a live frog, but he did sneak a big salamander into the house one time.
        Scared the crap out of me.

        Liked by 2 people

  10. What I found offensive, even though we do not have guns in our house, when doctor office began asking “if I owned a gun and if I keep it under lock.”
    The next year they apologized and said by law they had to ask me. I said” who wants to know?” Answer was “government.”
    I am on the side of people having a right to own but do not know enough concerning concealed.
    My husband handled guns since high school and then was on a rifle team in college. They competed against West Point. He was good marksman but when we had kids he never wanted guns in the house.
    I come for a culture one only had a rifle for hunting. Being on this site I get more info why people own guns and why it is important to you all. This is quite an education 🙂

    Liked by 7 people

    1. The permanent distribution of arms to the people themselves, as a preventative against tyranny over the people, was simple genius! 😀

      Mao only REDISCOVERED that power flows from the barrel of a gun – and he USURPED that power from the Chinese People for ONE-PARTY RULE.

      I’m a big proponent of locks and gun safety, but we’ve seen how SNEAKY the left is, in trying to hide their government power agenda behind “good intentions”, so I generally distrust any health provider asking questions about gun ownership.

      HOWEVER, I think that doctor’s offices are a GREAT PLACE to offer child safety instruction booklets and the like, that people are FREE TO TAKE. People ALWAYS need more training, more gun safety (including MORE SAFES), more smart *individual* choices.

      I’ve talked a lot of people OUT of getting guns, believe it or not. More than I’ve counseled who ended up getting them. Many people who are ambivalent about gun ownership are simply not good candidates – irresponsible, fear-foolish, addicted or prone to slipping back into bad habits, lazy, reckless – the list goes on. They have a RIGHT to own, but they are not responsible. Thankfully, most people sort this out correctly, and using DUE PROCESS (cough), we can deal with the exceptions.

      The time to take responsibility is BEFORE one considers gun ownership, IMO. Many people, interestingly, DO NOT TRUST THEMSELVES to own a gun. I counsel people to LISTEN TO THAT FEAR. Don’t apply it to others – let THEM own to protect YOU. But people who don’t trust themselves with weapons – who don’t trust themselves with the danger or responsibility – should feel good about either TRAINING UP to the responsibility, or simply foregoing it, and most of the time, it’s the latter.

      Supporting gun ownership by law-abiding citizens as an important check and balance, and being a gun owner, are two entirely different things. My mother was an NRA member – never owned a gun.

      Liked by 7 people

        1. Thanks! 😀

          A lot of my attitude toward the Second Amendment came from my parents and friends’ parents, mostly “Greatest Generation” folks, and most of all a guy who served with Patton! One could not be in his presence and not feel the dual tug of rights and responsibility.

          Liked by 4 people

  11. I can’t even get my best friends (thoroughly 2A-believing people who welcome my open carry into their house) to drop their frigging CostCO membership.

    (The membership paperwork has a no-guns policy in it; you agree to it when you sign up.)

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I won’t drop mine; they’ll have to ban me and revoke my membership. But if they do, they’ll have a firestorm on their hands since I live in a Constitutional Carry state and MOST of the people I know who have Costco memberships ALSO carry even at Costco. If I were to get my membership revoked for that reason, the negative publicity they would receive would matter quite a bit to them. My personal feeling on that is you can post your nonsense all you want. I am going to do what I am legally allowed to do. Period.

      Liked by 9 people

        1. Costco is based in Washington State which explains the corporate policy. Not one they are going to make a big deal about in fly over country. I don’t advertise when I carry and I don’t give a damn what their policy is. I don’t read fine print and don’t look for no guns allowed signs. If I hear about a company making a big deal regarding 2A issues then I may boycott. Dick’s Sporting for example. Most just do it for show for the PC crowd.

          If they search such as sporting events then I don’t carry if I want to attend. So I make the choice when I feel it is safe versus my risk at being caught carrying in a place where they do not want my weapon. Also, cities such as Denver do not look kindly at people who carry even with a valid permit. You get involved in a shoot it best be on video and 100% defensible.

          So pick your battles and carry smartly and discretley. At the end of the day the last thing you will ever want to do is pull your weapon in public. No matter the outcome it will change your life and not in a good way.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. AMEN! Great comments!

            “Pick your battles” for sure. And that is not the same for everybody. Different state, different city, different time, different place, different scrutiny.

            Like

      1. I think Costco knows what a publicity disaster it would be if they made that policy public and obvious to all. Many people sign up and don’t read all the guidelines. (What rules could be so important? You just pay your membership and shop.) I

        have not seen a Costco with any of the state-endorsed “no guns allowed” signs on their doors. If they really wanted to enforce that policy, they would so what each state requires by posting notification on the doors. Nonmenbers can walk into Costco stores, and they are not bound by the membership policy. So it looks like a cowardly virtue-signaling policy that they don’t want to enforce because people would have a fit and they would lose a lot of business.

        Liked by 8 people

        1. I think you’re right. Many great points there.

          The real question to me is (1) how good are their scanners, (2) are the scanners integrated with customer recognition software, and (3) who has access to their data? Very easy way for the feds to work around restrictions to lists of CHL holders. Obama’s secret commie database comes to mind.

          Customer face recognition software in the major department stores was identifying me correctly, just looking at stuff, YEARS ago.

          To test this, sign up for emails with a store where you have a card or online account. Then GO IN, look around at things that are very uncustomary for you, act interested, pick things up, touch them, but, don’t buy anything. You will get emails and messages for stuff like you looked at but did not buy. Then remember – just because you don’t sign up and don’t get their emails, and maybe even paid CASH, doesn’t mean they don’t have a DATABASE ENTRY FOR YOU with all the same data.

          KNOW YOUR CUSTOMER is totally automated now, and bad people have access to the data.

          Liked by 4 people

  12. Just thought I would mention this…

    in our CC course in SC… the instructor said that places that wanted to be gun free had to have the correct signs… There were rules (at least in SC)… about notices, the size of the notice, and where it had to be posted….. A little post it,,, or something hap hazard was not legal notification…

    So, if push comes to shove, I wonder if the Gun restrictions at some places are even legal… hmmmmmmmm

    Liked by 7 people

  13. HELLO EVER’BODY !!

    T’other day on CTH, replying on a BlackKnightRides post, a lot of folks brought up early posters we haven’t seen for a while, and how we miss ’em. I tossed in that I miss Wheatietoo.

    The fellow now known as Chimpy searched me out and sent an email. Thanks Ke… er Chimpy! Was there some kind of mass banning going on back at the old tree? Wow. Stuff goes on and goes right over my head.

    I can hardly wait to read yer personality-filled posts. Maybe now that I’ve arrived, ol’ Q+ will drop some news.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hi – welcome. Yeah – all the Q tolerant and “disagree with SD” posters ended up here! Pretty much all of us were banned, but there is little looking back! Happy to see you here!

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s