• 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.

Have you seen this?

lil_freak_66

lil_freak_66

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
1,799
Location
Mason, Michigan
imported post

loved it.

left a comment on there about women carrying concealed,openly and not at all.

its a very well known and used argument in the firearms community,both by OCers and CCers.



i favorited it too
 
eastmeyers

eastmeyers

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
1,363
Location
Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
Big Gay Al

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
imported post

Yeah, I saw that, but decided to start my own thread anyway. ;)

Actually, I had a brain fart and forgot about the other thread completely. :uhoh:
 
jeremiahJohnson

jeremiahJohnson

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
375
Location
fenton, Michigan, USA
imported post

I wish he was right, I wish he was on the Supreme Court, but He is wrong.......................He even slipped, he started to say the gun right is protected from the Fed...Constitution.
He should have finished the word Federal. He is right that you are invited, but you are not forced to go in, as oppose to a Post offic, court, etc. therefore your rights are not being shed or striped. You may be denied to go into Starbucks, but I don't recall seeing that right to enter Starbucks in the Constitution. Now if the Feds. start telling me to go to Starbucks well then we have a case.
Furthermore if Starbucks is a so called public accommodation, and required to serve the public, this kinda means that starbucks cannot close at any time for any reason because it might deny you the right to carry a gun, and that is just stupid.
 
Big Gay Al

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
imported post

CrossPistols wrote:
I wish he was right, I wish he was on the Supreme Court, but He is wrong.......................He even slipped, he started to say the gun right is protected from the Fed...Constitution.
He should have finished the word Federal. He is right that you are invited, but you are not forced to go in, as oppose to a Post offic, court, etc. therefore your rights are not being shed or striped. You may be denied to go into Starbucks, but I don't recall seeing that right to enter Starbucks in the Constitution. Now if the Feds. start telling me to go to Starbucks well then we have a case.
Furthermore if Starbucks is a so called public accommodation, and required to serve the public, this kinda means that starbucks cannot close at any time for any reason because it might deny you the right to carry a gun, and that is just stupid.
Click to expand...
Not according to US Code.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/12181.html

Also the City of Phoenix.
http://phoenix.gov/eod/discpubl.html

Basically, any business open to the public, is a public accommodation.
 
Big Gay Al

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
imported post

CrossPistols wrote:
Your point?

oh ok Now it is clearer i agree it is a public accommodation, but the key word is Invite, not forced
Click to expand...
True, you're not forced to go in, but I think the Judge.....actually, I don't know what the judge's point is. I wonder, if I asked him, would he explain in greater detail? I'll have to try that.
 
jeremiahJohnson

jeremiahJohnson

New member
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
375
Location
fenton, Michigan, USA
imported post

Big Gay Al wrote:
CrossPistols wrote:
Your point?

oh ok Now it is clearer i agree it is a public accommodation, but the key word is Invite, not forced
Click to expand...
True, you're not forced to go in, but I think the Judge.....actually, I don't know what the judge's point is. I wonder, if I asked him, would he explain in greater detail? I'll have to try that.
Click to expand...
Believe me if the supreme court ruled his way. I would be in seventh heaven, but you know as well as I that if we went into a Michigan store with a gun, and they said leave because of the gun, and we did not. The police would show up and escort us to jail, based on Trespass, this is why I don't think he is right. Plus I like the Idea of being able to say what and what is not ok in my store, remember I pay the taxes, and I am Liable for any and everything that happens.
 
Big Gay Al

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
imported post

CrossPistols wrote:
Big Gay Al wrote:
CrossPistols wrote:
Your point?

oh ok Now it is clearer i agree it is a public accommodation, but the key word is Invite, not forced
Click to expand...
True, you're not forced to go in, but I think the Judge.....actually, I don't know what the judge's point is. I wonder, if I asked him, would he explain in greater detail? I'll have to try that.
Click to expand...
Believe me if the supreme court ruled his way. I would be in seventh heaven, but you know as well as I that if we went into a Michigan store with a gun, and they said leave because of the gun, and we did not. The police would show up and escort us to jail, based on Trespass, this is why I don't think he is right. Plus I like the Idea of being able to say what and what is not ok in my store, remember I pay the taxes, and I am Liable for any and everything that happens.
Click to expand...
If I go into a store, and they deny me service because I'm packing, the smart thing to do is leave and then sue them. Problem is, with things they way they are, I'd have a hard time finding a lawyer who'd take the case, and and even harder time finding a judge who would treat it right.

Unless I was in Judge Napolitano's jurisdiction. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top