• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Owning stock in a publicly-traded company, change in your rights?

Merlin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
487
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Hmm, you are right very well said. "Public accommodation" is a good way to explain it. So, I guess a way I can accept this would be to put it this way: A public accommodation (a store that is open to the general public) cannot deny a constitutionally protected individual right, as long as that right does not infringe upon the rights of other patrons.

In other words, you still can't picket. :)

That's what I needed, you've changed my mind. :)

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
Hmm, you are right very well said. "Public accommodation" is a good way to explain it. So, I guess a way I can accept this would be to put it this way: A public accommodation (a store that is open to the general public) cannot deny a constitutionally protected individual right, as long as that right does not infringe upon the rights of other patrons.

In other words, you still can't picket. :)

That's what I needed, you've changed my mind. :)

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

It was what I was trying to say all along but I just don't have the talent of communication that the Judge has. He of course believes ownership does not matter, private or corporation and of that I'm still not convinced but he does make me think. The only words I knew to use was "open to the public". Put another way, if you put your hook in the water you can't complain when you catch a carp. If you open your doors to the public, you have to take me as I am with all my rights intact.

TBG
 

DON`T TREAD ON ME

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,231
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
You are right about the individual decreasing and the collective increasing. Since I have own a business, I come from that angle, It seems like you yearn for the Mom and Pop store days on one hand, yet want to tell people who have mortgaged their home and future to take on a risk, who their clientele should be. That behavior disincentives people from taking the risk! Who wants to Open a sleepy little wine /martini cottage on the roadway back from the vineyard just to find out it is a good motorcycle road and the "patch clubs" decide they like your place more than you do and they will "exercise their rights" to ensure you serve them and their friends. (or vice versa)

What happens here is the shift from interaction to "policy" This is another area that is problematic. You insert your rights and force the issue, take the shopkeeper out of play and then wonder ten years later why you are shopping in a "big box store" with little service and much Policy.

Another example, Bob Irwins CCW class is free, and misleading. we have all heard stories of the misinformation that perpetuates there. If I renew my CCW, I choose to go see Mac. not try to change Bob. The fact is Every time you insist on making someone "respect" your rights there is a downside.

1. The merchant is being told how to run their business.
2. There is certainly another like minded merchant who is not getting business while we "convert" a merchant who is likely to smile in our face, while he contributes YOUR money to the Brady campaign.
3. We force the decision makers out of business, the people who opened their doors as a "American dream" are pummeled everyday by regulations, from ADA to OSHA, and then they get told who they need to do business with?

If someone (non government) does not like my firearm, I apologize, and leave. They do not receive a letter, or a reason to dislike me. My time is better spent in my book, looking for a business that caters to my needs. I am thankful, not resentful to the clerk who asks me to leave.

1. He let me know that I was in a gun free zone, (dangerous area!)
2. let me know that I was not supporting my cause. When I could be.

Lets put the shoe on the other foot.
So you mortgage your home and retirement. Open your retail store in the place you carefully chose to obtain the clientele that you selected to sell to, Get your occupancy and go through the Govt. alphabet soup of agencies, Get your OC friendly signs put up, just to have a couple of cats in Birkenstocks (with socks) and Peace T- shirts come in and tell you that they do not want to do business in your store because of your OC policy. Do you let them run your place? Will you try to "placate" them? Do you have bigger things pending? Would trhere time be better spent supporting the retailer of their choice, are they going to convince you that OC is bad?

I think if a merchant opens the door and is willing to hear similar to what PT's did that's not a bad thing, and it went ok when we went there. But all night long we were down there pushing ourselves on PT's, while Magoo's who doesn't flinch and is supportive, went without all the money that could have gone to an established friendly.

It might be better to have a OC friendly list than the usual "Anti" list.
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
I think if a merchant opens the door and is willing to hear similar to what PT's did that's not a bad thing, and it went ok when we went there. But all night long we were down there pushing ourselves on PT's, while Magoo's who doesn't flinch and is supportive, went without all the money that could have gone to an established friendly.

It might be better to have a OC friendly list than the usual "Anti" list.

By convincing PT's to get on board with us, it gives Magoo's less incentive to change their policy. In the end, we must strive to make forward progress with our cause. Yes we should patronize those establishments that honor our rights, but we have to move to see to it that more are brought on board. If we don't we will lose by attrition. The goal has to be to make OC the norm. To do that, we need more OC'ers and more places to carry in. When you guy's got PT's in line you did the cause a great service and helped assure our future.

TBG
 

Merlin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
487
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
A similar example is Walmart. By Walmart having a documented policy of respect for local law, that puts every single one of their competitors on the hot seat. That goes the same for any other line of business.

"I could take my money to x, y, or z, because they respect my rights. But I would like to take it to you, because you have good nachos, and today, I am in the mood for nachos."


Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
 
Top