KBCraig
Regular Member
imported post
While at my family's Independence Day gathering (about 90 miles from where I now live), I was reading the local paper and saw that the local bowling alley had closed. It seems that after bowling league politics and a 5-year lawsuit (won by the alley owner), the owner found out he couldn't bar some of the parties involved. Rather than be forced to let them in, he closed the doors.
If you want to see the mudslinging involved, read here:
http://community.bowl.com/forums/t/87589.aspx?PageIndex=1
What I find curious is that Arkansas repealed the law allowing business owners the right to refuse service. Would this not invalidate any "no guns" signs, and negate any trespassing charges brought against a CHL?
As a strong advocate of property rights, I don't believe any property owner should be required to admit someone he doesn't want, but I thought this would be an interesting take on the change in the law.
Thoughts?
While at my family's Independence Day gathering (about 90 miles from where I now live), I was reading the local paper and saw that the local bowling alley had closed. It seems that after bowling league politics and a 5-year lawsuit (won by the alley owner), the owner found out he couldn't bar some of the parties involved. Rather than be forced to let them in, he closed the doors.
If you want to see the mudslinging involved, read here:
http://community.bowl.com/forums/t/87589.aspx?PageIndex=1
What I find curious is that Arkansas repealed the law allowing business owners the right to refuse service. Would this not invalidate any "no guns" signs, and negate any trespassing charges brought against a CHL?
As a strong advocate of property rights, I don't believe any property owner should be required to admit someone he doesn't want, but I thought this would be an interesting take on the change in the law.
Thoughts?