COSTCO Corporate Formally Bans Firearms

OC for ME · Jun 5, 2015

OC for ME said:
Hyperbole and not addressed in my post(s).

You patronize a business that does not respect your RKBA, while there is a comparable business that respects your RKBA.

You should focus your advocacy efforts in UT to enacting legislation denying a employer the right to peaceably control his property (business) as he sees fit, mandating that employees cannot be denied their RKBA while on the job, if they choose to do so. You clearly do not recognize the right of a property owner to peaceably control his property as he sees fit, and such a law would be consistent with your position on property rights.

twoskinsonemanns said:
This is a interesting point for me to ponder. Once or twice a year I am faced with the choice of refusing the Little Lady's insistence we go to a movie, going unarmed, or intentionally ignore the theater's wishes and carry secretly.
I guess I always justify it to myself with the excuse that I am not directly hurting the property owner, but I do concede that I am ignoring his wishes.

No big deal, we all make choices. You do not rationalize the decision you knowingly make and thus act upon.

I have the utmost respect for those who make no excuses to justify the choices they make in their daily comings and goings. +1 to you Sir.

In my opinion, respecting rights is respecting rights. I choose to behave using this a my foundational principal. I find that I get along with folks better when I respect their rights when on their property. Where we disagree, I leave them be and go on about my business...no hard feelings.

Again, a business recognizes my RKBA, I patronize their business if they provide a service or product to my liking. They do not recognize my RKBA, I recognize their right to control their property as they see fit, and I will not patronize their business.

Grim_Night · Jun 5, 2015

Where do we draw that line?

Where do we draw that line? We all can identify a location where it is not illegal to possess and carry a lawfully owned firearm but such location is posted by property owner that firearms are "prohibited". In Washington state, I can pull up multiple in which there are NO alternatives to patronizing such locations. First among them are hospitals. I have yet to identify a single hospital in the entire state where firearms are not prohibited, yet there is no alternate facility in which to obtain the services in which they provide.

Here's how it breaks down regarding hospitals.

Option #1 respect the private property rights of hospital "owners" and not carry per their wishes while seeking services at such locations
Option #2 ignore the private property rights of hospital "owners" and carry concealed against their wishes while seeking services at such locations.
Option #3 choose to respect the private property rights of hospital "owners" and not carry per their wishes while NOT seeking services at such locations.
Option #4 is there another option?

Personally, I choose option #2. I only seek services at a hospital when I absolutely need to and I refused to be disarmed at a location that I have no legal requirement to do so when there is no other alternative location for seeking such services. Is this morally or ethically wrong? I don't think it is.

OC for ME · Jun 5, 2015

Grim_Night said:
Where do we draw that line? ...

Costco or Sam's Club, not, hospital or no medical treatment.

SouthernBoy · Jun 6, 2015

cjohnson44546 said:
its not. The membership agreement I signed never mentions this at all, and no store I've ever been to has been posted. They want to ignore it so people who conceal can just be safely ignored, but they can claim a "policy" if someone complains or they get into "legal" issues.

I don't recall ever seeing anything in the membership documents either but I admit I have not read through all of this. I have never seen any sort of signage at their Manassas, VA store and since 2007, have openly carried many times in that location. At one time, one of the managers was a member of this website and told me on a thread to stop by and say 'hey' to him the next time I was in his store. A number of the cashiers have talked to me about my sidearms and not one person, customer or employee, has ever said anything negative or derogatory to me. In fact, quite the opposite.

I no longer openly carry in that Costco, not because I have seen or read anything but because I rarely open carry at all anymore. And I have my reasons for this so please... no chastising or disparaging my decision. I still fully and completely support open carry and on occasion, do so myself. You folks have my complete support.

Wild Dog · Jun 6, 2015

It's disgusting how a corporation like Costco is serving up the sheeple who patronize their store to the wolves to be eaten. This sheepdog ain't having none of that. My money goes were my guns go. A store can't have one without the other.

solus · Jun 6, 2015

SouthernBoy said:
I don't recall ever seeing anything in the membership documents either but I admit I have not read through all of this. I have never seen any sort of signage at their Manassas, VA store and since 2007, have openly carried many times in that location. At one time, one of the managers was a member of this website and told me on a thread to stop by and say 'hey' to him the next time I was in his store. A number of the cashiers have talked to me about my sidearms and not one person, customer or employee, has ever said anything negative or derogatory to me. In fact, quite the opposite.

I no longer openly carry in that Costco, not because I have seen or read anything but because I rarely open carry at all anymore. And I have my reasons for this so please... no chastising or disparaging my decision. I still fully and completely support open carry and on occasion, do so myself. You folks have my complete support.

it is a nondescript comment in their contract https://ems02071lb.egain.net/system...EZONE_OFFSET&CMD=VIEW_ARTICLE&ARTICLE_ID=2837 and on their signage by their entrance stating you will abide by the organization's 'security' policies.

so you have now advocated on public carrying a firearm, abet concealed, against the owner's express wishes.

and while you stated...no chastising or disparaging which i was about to conceded to as it is your perception of the world!!
BUT, BUT then you had to put the condescending comment...quote you folks unquote what arrogant hypocritical BS so IMHO you now due all the chastising and disparaging you receive.!!

ipse

Trakanon · Jun 6, 2015

This saddens me, but in this case my disapproval of their policy doesn't outweigh my desire to shop there.

Bikenut · Jun 6, 2015

I guess I just don't understand how folks who say they support the right to bear arms are willing to give money to businesses that are against the right to bear arms. Money those who run those businesses can then use to open yet another business that is against the right to bear arms.

Don't folks know that helping an anti gun business make more money is helping the anti gun agenda become stronger?

Or is personal convenience and/or saving a few bucks more important than the right to bear arms?

What I really don't understand is how anyone can intentionally support an anti gun business by either disarming or sneaking in a concealed gun and then complain about..... anti gun businesses. Rest assured that business is very happy to take the money you gave them and use it against your right to bear arms by opening more stores where guns are banned and possibly by donating some of the money you gave them to anti gun politicians whether you disarm or think you are getting away with something by sneaking your concealed gun in.

It's all about the money and those who give money to anti gun businesses are, in effect, helping to finance the fight against the right to bear arms. Kinda like our country giving money to our enemies so they can buy more ammo to shoot at us with. Makes no sense at all.

sudden valley gunner · Jun 6, 2015

Bikenut said:
I guess I just don't understand how folks who say they support the right to bear arms are willing to give money to businesses that are against the right to bear arms. Money those who run those businesses can then use to open yet another business that is against the right to bear arms.

Don't folks know that helping an anti gun business make more money is helping the anti gun agenda become stronger?

Or is personal convenience and/or saving a few bucks more important than the right to bear arms?

What I really don't understand is how anyone can intentionally support an anti gun business by either disarming or sneaking in a concealed gun and then complain about..... anti gun businesses. Rest assured that business is very happy to take the money you gave them and use it against your right to bear arms by opening more stores where guns are banned and possibly by donating some of the money you gave them to anti gun politicians whether you disarm or think you are getting away with something by sneaking your concealed gun in.

It's all about the money and those who give money to anti gun businesses are, in effect, helping to finance the fight against the right to bear arms. Kinda like our country giving money to our enemies so they can buy more ammo to shoot at us with. Makes no sense at all.

Its an understandable sentiment. I think one thing is left out though profit is a two way street, some simply weigh the benefit they receive from the voluntary exchange even if that exchange is with those they wouldn't associate with in any other means. Then there are those who use rationalizations to justify it instead of just being straight up.

Bikenut · Jun 6, 2015

sudden valley gunner said:
Its an understandable sentiment. I think one thing is left out though profit is a two way street, some simply weigh the benefit they receive from the voluntary exchange even if that exchange is with those they wouldn't associate with in any other means. Then there are those who use rationalizations to justify it instead of just being straight up.

While I understand that some folks might consider convenience and/or saving money to be a short term "profit" I guess I see that as a long term "loss" from the perspective of the right to bear arms.

Sometimes I think the most destructive enemies of the right to bear arms are some of the folks who say they support the right to bear arms as they financially support the enemies of the right to bear arms.

Not only that but how can those who support the right to bear arms expect to be taken seriously when it is painfully obvious they are financially supporting the very ones who are against the right to bear arms?

J_dazzle23 · Jun 6, 2015

Bikenut said:
While I understand that some folks might consider convenience and/or saving money to be a short term "profit" I guess I see that as a long term "loss" from the perspective of the right to bear arms.

Sometimes I think the most destructive enemies of the right to bear arms are some of the folks who say they support the right to bear arms as they financially support the enemies of the right to bear arms.

Not only that but how can those who support the right to bear arms expect to be taken seriously when it is painfully obvious they are financially supporting the very ones who are against the right to bear arms?

Here is where your point gets a little sticky-

I'm willing to bet it would take more effort to completely disassociate with any business that had anti-gun leaning policies than it would to sweep every single speck of sand out of a beachhouse.

I'd be willing to wager that for most people here, I could look at who they actively used as vendors in their lives and gave money to for products/services and find a company/individual that does not care much for people bearing arms.

Obviously, I'm not going to go eat at a restaurant owned by the late Mrs. Brady. But if you are going to disassociate yourself with any possible way your money could make it into the pockets of an anti-gun minded corporation/person, you may find it harder than you think.

Some would even say they are furthering property rights by wanting to control what is and is not acceptable on their property.

Trakanon · Jun 6, 2015

I see a difference between them not wanting guns in their store and them financially supporting the anti-gun lobby. Hell, maybe they do support it, I don't know. If that's the case, then I'll rethink shopping there. Costco is just a great company all around. Quality products and service, and they treat their employees great. For that I will disarm and shop there. If this were walmart, I would simply stop shopping there.

J_dazzle23 · Jun 6, 2015

Nightmare said:
In other Costco discussions here it has been related that the corporation does preferentially contribute to progressive/anti-gun causes.

I'd be interested if there is a cite for that. Not to call you out- I'd be genuinely interested.

Bikenut · Jun 6, 2015

J_dazzle23 said:
Here is where your point gets a little sticky-

I'm willing to bet it would take more effort to completely disassociate with any business that had anti-gun leaning policies than it would to sweep every single speck of sand out of a beachhouse.

I'd be willing to wager that for most people here, I could look at who they actively used as vendors in their lives and gave money to for products/services and find a company/individual that does not care much for people bearing arms.

Obviously, I'm not going to go eat at a restaurant owned by the late Mrs. Brady. But if you are going to disassociate yourself with any possible way your money could make it into the pockets of an anti-gun minded corporation/person, you may find it harder than you think.

Some would even say they are furthering property rights by wanting to control what is and is not acceptable on their property.

And your point about being able to completely disassociate one's self from all anti gun businesses being very difficult is true (considering how businesses are so interconnected these days it might even be impossible) ... however... to use that (not saying you are! but some do) to justify intentionally and knowingly patronizing an anti gun business is just soothing the conscience/providing an excuse. And yet, the reason there are anti gun businesses is because those businesses are making money... sadly some of it is coming from the folks who are complaining about anti gun businesses.

To use your example:
Intentionally eating at Mrs. Brady's restaurant knowing full well who Mrs. Brady is and what her stance is on guns just because lots of restaurants are anti gun would be using the excuse that lots of restaurants are anti gun to justify supporting a restaurant that is known for a fact is anti gun. And some folks go to great lengths (again.. not saying you!) to justify that excuse.

As for private property rights? Of course each and every business owner has the private property right to ban guns if they so wish but their exercising of that right still doesn't justify supporting their gun ban by giving them money. And if enough pro gun folks would stop intentionally supporting those anti gun businesses because of convenience and/or saving a few bucks then those anti gun business owners might change their minds and there wouldn't be so many anti gun businesses. But as long as pro gun folks continue to give anti gun businesses money why would the anti gun businesses bother to change?

J_dazzle23 · Jun 6, 2015

Bikenut said:
And your point about being able to completely disassociate one's self from all anti gun businesses being very difficult is true (considering how businesses are so interconnected these days it might even be impossible) ... however... to use that (not saying you are! but some do) to justify intentionally and knowingly patronizing an anti gun business is just soothing the conscience/providing an excuse. And yet, the reason there are anti gun businesses is because those businesses are making money... sadly some of it is coming from the folks who are complaining about anti gun businesses.

To use your example:
Intentionally eating at Mrs. Brady's restaurant knowing full well who Mrs. Brady is and what her stance is on guns just because lots of restaurants are anti gun would be using the excuse that lots of restaurants are anti gun to justify supporting a restaurant that is known for a fact is anti gun. And some folks go to great lengths (again.. not saying you!) to justify that excuse.

As for private property rights? Of course each and every business owner has the private property right to ban guns if they so wish but their exercising of that right still doesn't justify supporting their gun ban by giving them money. And if enough pro gun folks would stop intentionally supporting those anti gun businesses because of convenience and/or saving a few bucks then those anti gun business owners might change their minds and there wouldn't be so many anti gun businesses. But as long as pro gun folks continue to give anti gun businesses money why would the anti gun businesses bother to change?

I'm not arguing your point. It's a good one. I think there is a distinction between a business that actively contributes monitarily to anti-gun legislation and one that simply has a no-gun policy.

For example, my work does not allow firearms on the premises. It does not have power of law, but it also required me to sign a document stating I would not bring weapons to my place of employment. Now I know this business (non-profit) does not contribute politically to anti-gun legislation. It is the only one in my area that I have an option to work at. So should I quit my job because of their policy? How am I doing anything differently to hurt gun rights than an individual that shops in a "free fire" or "gun free (eyeroll)" zone?

In theory, I agree with you. In practicality, it seems a little harder to draw a hard line in the sand.

MAC702 · Jun 6, 2015

Some stores have an easy alternative, others do not. This factors into most people's decisions whether or not to patronize someone that is against them. Everyone gets to decide what their limits of financial disadvantages, location disadvantages, and political disadvantages they are willing to accept or stand firm against.

Costco is a popular store for many good reasons, but they have always made it clear to anyone who asks that they are anti-carry unless you are a cop.

I don't fault someone who decides they will shop at Costco because, for them, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. But I see it as different when someone simply says they will shop there because they are concealed and therefore "it doesn't matter." These are the people that have convinced Costco not to change their policy.

SouthernBoy · Jun 7, 2015

solus said:
it is a nondescript comment in their contract https://ems02071lb.egain.net/system...EZONE_OFFSET&CMD=VIEW_ARTICLE&ARTICLE_ID=2837 and on their signage by their entrance stating you will abide by the organization's 'security' policies.

so you have now advocated on public carrying a firearm, abet concealed, against the owner's express wishes.

and while you stated...no chastising or disparaging which i was about to conceded to as it is your perception of the world!!
BUT, BUT then you had to put the condescending comment...quote you folks unquote what arrogant hypocritical BS so IMHO you now due all the chastising and disparaging you receive.!!

ipse

Oh God, another one. Seems this site is full of people who can't seem to get off of their high horse and lose the idea that they are a legend in their own mind. Does anyone here ever think why a lot of people have given up on this website?

twoskinsonemanns · Jun 7, 2015

Bikenut said:
I guess I just don't understand how folks who say they support the right to bear arms are willing to give money to businesses that are against the right to bear arms. Money those who run those businesses can then use to open yet another business that is against the right to bear arms.

Don't folks know that helping an anti gun business make more money is helping the anti gun agenda become stronger?

Or is personal convenience and/or saving a few bucks more important than the right to bear arms?

What I really don't understand is how anyone can intentionally support an anti gun business by either disarming or sneaking in a concealed gun and then complain about..... anti gun businesses. Rest assured that business is very happy to take the money you gave them and use it against your right to bear arms by opening more stores where guns are banned and possibly by donating some of the money you gave them to anti gun politicians whether you disarm or think you are getting away with something by sneaking your concealed gun in.

It's all about the money and those who give money to anti gun businesses are, in effect, helping to finance the fight against the right to bear arms. Kinda like our country giving money to our enemies so they can buy more ammo to shoot at us with. Makes no sense at all.

I admire and agree with your sentiment. While I make the rare hypocritical exception to avoid marital inconvenience, I strive to make any reasonable effort to avoid places that discriminate against OCers.

SouthernBoy · Jun 7, 2015

Just for the record, as some seem to think otherwise, my decision to carry concealed most of the time has absolutely nothing to do with Costco or Walmart or any other business. None whatsoever. I don't do it to sneak into a business that has posted some sign (such signs are rare where I live) nor do I do it because of something some LEO said, some customer, some manager, or some anything. I have my reasons, they are no one's business but mine, I owe no one any explanation, and could care less what others think.

boundlessdyad · Jun 7, 2015

SouthernBoy said:
Just for the record, as some seem to think otherwise, my decision to carry concealed most of the time has absolutely nothing to do with Costco or Walmart or any other business. None whatsoever. I don't do it to sneak into a business that has posted some sign (such signs are rare where I live) nor do I do it because of something some LEO said, some customer, some manager, or some anything. I have my reasons, they are no one's business but mine, I owe no one any explanation, and could care less what others think.

[emoji106]

COSTCO Corporate Formally Bans Firearms

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Bikenut

Guest

Regular Member

Bikenut

Guest

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Bikenut

Guest

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member