Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: No gun signs.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    58

    Post imported post

    Just received a text from a coworker who works part time at his fathers sign shop. "Dad has been getting a large amount of quotes and orders for no gun signs, I hate making these things..."
    The dang thing has not even been signed yet and business owners are freaking out...

  2. #2
    Regular Member wewd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    664

    Post imported post

    I would refuse to make them. They can take their business somewhere else, just as the gun owners will when they see the signs.
    Do you want to enjoy liberty in your lifetime?

    Consider moving to New Hampshire as part of the Free State Project.

    "Live Free or Die"

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Laveen, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    432

    Post imported post

    It will be like when concealed carry originally passed in the mid 90's and when restaurant carry passed last year. You will see some signs go up, but eventually, they'll be removed.

  4. #4
    Guest
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    958

    Post imported post

    If Arizona business are gonna' post signs banning guns inside, they should post this....

  5. #5
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    Money is getting hard to come by. I think the signs are a wonderful thing, because they let you know who your hard earned money should go to.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    Michigander wrote:
    Money is getting hard to come by. I think the signs are a wonderful thing, because they let you know who your hard earned money should go to.
    QFT

  7. #7
    Regular Member March Hare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Arridzona - Flatlander
    Posts
    355

    Post imported post

    Michigander wrote:
    Money is getting hard to come by. I think the signs are a wonderful thing, because they let you know who your hard earned money should go to.
    Amen, brother!
    I let the businesses I spend my dollars at know that I appreciate their supporting the right to self defense.
    Money talks!

    -MH
    $2 Bill - Calling Card of the 2A Movement
    If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
    Seriously, who is John Galt?
    Vires et honestas

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    Just inflate the quote as much as you can to either a) get them to go pound sand or b) take that difference and send it off to the AZCDL =) Nothing like using the anti's money against them, hehe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    58

    Post imported post

    Talked to my friend today and he told me some orders are going as far as putting "NO CONCEALED WEAPONS PER ARS #" on the signs....

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Douglas County, CO.
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    I can see the NEW's now. Store robbed despite the No Concealed Guns or No Gun's sign on the front door. What was this robber thinking of, when he entered this establishment. Oh wait, the sign does not apply to Criminals, so I hope the store owner is going to take up his own case of self defense. The signs provide a false sense of security to customers and once again criminalizes customers for carrying concealed. If it is properly concealed, ie no printing ect, then how will the store owner or clerk even know you're carrying... Unless you use it to defend yourself or someone else in the store, but then you are the criminal... Just does not make any sense to me...

    As others have stated, I would likely start to make decisions on where I go and what stores I visit based on their ability to allow me to abide by the law and carry accordingly...

  11. #11
    Regular Member Sabotage70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Fabulous Las Vegas, NV, ,
    Posts
    844

    Post imported post

    Will this work?
    EDC=XDm40 16+1+16+16

    RED DRAGONS!!!!

  12. #12
    Regular Member brokenbarrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    blowing dust, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    see in southern california you dont need that sign the sheriffs disarm the law abiding for the criminals 24/7,I know its all politics if the people are not armed crimes will happen more and in return the sheriff can ask for more money to help fight crime..job security its not a new idea it just gets motified and implemented in new and creative ways.......

  13. #13
    Guest
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    958

    Post imported post

    BUT.....as the Brady Bunch bleeding heart anti-gun commies insist, these "Gun Free Zone" signs do work.....

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post


  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956

    Post imported post

    Michigander wrote:
    Money is getting hard to come by. I think the signs are a wonderful thing, because they let you know who your hard earned money should go to.
    I agree 100%. If I had a sign company I'd advertise in the newspaper below any handgun article.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    35

    Post imported post

    Print Shop owners...ask: "Is your business willing to accept Constitutional fiduciary responsibility for the people you deny the right to protect themselves?"

    When we arm ourselves, we are accepting the fiduciary responsibility of ourselves and anyone around us. And those who refuse to arm themselves, and demand that we disarm ourselves are rejecting fiduciary responsibility. What it comes down to, is that we are to beresponsible for ourselves, our family, friends, and neighborhood if you will. Those who refuse to accept this responsibility are no better than those who perpetrate crimes against us.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    RockyAcres wrote:
    Print Shop owners...ask: "Is your business willing to accept Constitutional fiduciary responsibility for the people you deny the right to protect themselves?"
    How about personal responsibility, instead of foisting it off on someone else? Your position sounds to me like the people who would make gun sellers or manufacturers responsible for gun crimes.

    I say, hold the criminal responsible for the crime. Hold the business owner banning guns (and not the sign company who makes the sign) responsible for the ban.

    If a gun owner chooses to go into such a business with a gun and receives a trespassing citation, or decides to go into such a business without a gun and receives much worse, hold the gun owner responsible for the stupid decision to patronize a "gun-free" business.

    I don't see where the print shop holds any responsibility in this situation at all, as long as they made a proper sign.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    35

    Post imported post

    mzbk2l wrote:
    RockyAcres wrote:
    Print Shop owners...ask: "Is your business willing to accept Constitutional fiduciary responsibility for the people you deny the right to protect themselves?"
    How about personal responsibility, instead of foisting it off on someone else? Your position sounds to me like the people who would make gun sellers or manufacturers responsible for gun crimes.

    I say, hold the criminal responsible for the crime. Hold the business owner banning guns (and not the sign company who makes the sign) responsible for the ban.

    If a gun owner chooses to go into such a business with a gun and receives a trespassing citation, or decides to go into such a business without a gun and receives much worse, hold the gun owner responsible for the stupid decision to patronize a "gun-free" business.

    I don't see where the print shop holds any responsibility in this situation at all, as long as they made a proper sign.
    You obviously did not read the entire post, and what you did read, was taken completely out of context. I was simply asking the print shop owner to remind the purchasers of such 'No Weapons' signs, to consider their actions of disarming responsible citizens of their right to protect/defend themselves. They (the business owner with the sign on their door), then, need to be willing to provide protection/defense of said now-unarmed individual.

    An individual has the right to protect/defend themselves - anyone demanding to take that right away, should know that they become responsible for that unarmed individual.

    If that's not clear enough, maybe you need someone else try to explain it to you.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    RockyAcres wrote:
    mzbk2l wrote:
    RockyAcres wrote:
    Print Shop owners...ask: "Is your business willing to accept Constitutional fiduciary responsibility for the people you deny the right to protect themselves?"
    How about personal responsibility, instead of foisting it off on someone else? Your position sounds to me like the people who would make gun sellers or manufacturers responsible for gun crimes.

    I say, hold the criminal responsible for the crime. Hold the business owner banning guns (and not the sign company who makes the sign) responsible for the ban.

    If a gun owner chooses to go into such a business with a gun and receives a trespassing citation, or decides to go into such a business without a gun and receives much worse, hold the gun owner responsible for the stupid decision to patronize a "gun-free" business.

    I don't see where the print shop holds any responsibility in this situation at all, as long as they made a proper sign.
    You obviously did not read the entire post, and what you did read, was taken completely out of context. I was simply asking the print shop owner to remind the purchasers of such 'No Weapons' signs, to consider their actions of disarming responsible citizens of their right to protect/defend themselves. They (the business owner with the sign on their door), then, need to be willing to provide protection/defense of said now-unarmed individual.

    An individual has the right to protect/defend themselves - anyone demanding to take that right away, should know that they become responsible for that unarmed individual.

    If that's not clear enough, maybe you need someone else try to explain it to you.
    If I've said it once on these forums, I've said it a million times... NOBODY is 'forcing' anyone to give up their right to self defense. If you CHOOSE (notice this word, it's a choice, not someone forcing you) to enter a business that doesn't allow firearms, YOU are choosing to disarm yourself as a condition of entry. If you don't like that, GO ELSEWHERE. This is really very very simple. If that's not clear enough, well...

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    RockyAcres wrote:
    mzbk2l wrote:
    RockyAcres wrote:
    Print Shop owners...ask: "Is your business willing to accept Constitutional fiduciary responsibility for the people you deny the right to protect themselves?"
    I don't see where the print shop holds any responsibility in this situation at all, as long as they made a proper sign.
    You obviously did not read the entire post, and what you did read, was taken completely out of context. I was simply asking the print shop owner to remind the purchasers of such 'No Weapons' signs, to consider their actions of disarming responsible citizens of their right to protect/defend themselves. They (the business owner with the sign on their door), then, need to be willing to provide protection/defense of said now-unarmed individual.
    ...
    If that's not clear enough, maybe you need someone else try to explain it to you.
    OK, I'm tracking now, Rocky. Because of a missing word or two, I took your question to ask: "Print Shop owners...ask YOURSELVES: "Is your business willing to accept..."

    Instead, it now appears that you meant: "Print Shop owners...ask YOUR CUSTOMERS WHO ARE ORDERING THE SIGNS: "Is your business willing to accept..."

    I find that much less objectionable than the way I originally read it, but I still don't agree. What business is it of the print shop owner what the sign reads? As long as it's legal and they're willing to print it, so what? Asking the shop to question the customer reminds me of the pharmacists who refuse to sell "morning after" pills on some shaky moral ground. If you can't handle the job, get out of the industry.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    35

    Post imported post

    Take it easy, Thoreau...I do not condone going into a business with such signs, and very seldom do...as much as possible, I/We take my/our business (aka: money) elsewhere.

    Mzbk21 wrote:

    ...the pharmacists who refuse to sell "morning after" pills on some shaky moral ground.
    Careful...that has nothing to do with this forum, and does not belong here. That's a volatile debate...

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    RockyAcres wrote:
    Take it easy, Thoreau...I do not condone going into a business with such signs, and very seldom do...as much as possible, I/We take my/our business (aka: money) elsewhere.

    Mzbk21 wrote:

    ...the pharmacists who refuse to sell "morning after" pills on some shaky moral ground.
    Careful...that has nothing to do with this forum, and does not belong here. That's a volatile debate...
    You're right. It has about as much place here as asking a print shop to make a judgment on what type of signs they print.

  23. #23
    Regular Member brokenbarrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    blowing dust, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    206

    Post imported post

    mzbk2l wrote:
    RockyAcres wrote:
    blah,blah,blah...

    ...blah,blah,blah
    blah,blah....
    You're right. It has about as much place here as asking a print shop to make a judgment on what type of signs they print.
    +1

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    210

    Post imported post

    Thoreau wrote:
    If I've said it once on these forums, I've said it a million times... NOBODY is 'forcing' anyone to give up their right to self defense. If you CHOOSE (notice this word, it's a choice, not someone forcing you) to enter a business that doesn't allow firearms, YOU are choosing to disarm yourself as a condition of entry. If you don't like that, GO ELSEWHERE. This is really very very simple. If that's not clear enough, well...
    Nobody is being forced to give up their rights, but it's not unreasonable to assume that when someone disallows defensive tools in their establishment then they are assuming responsibility for looking after the defense of their guests (and liability if they fail to do so).

    Wouldn't it be reasonable to expect that if someone doesn't allow people to wear shoes in the establishment, that they have an increased duty to ensure that there isn't any broken glass or rusty nails lying around?
    http://arizonagunowners.com - The best AZ gun board around!

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Susanville, California, USA
    Posts
    529

    Post imported post

    Jessel, right on !

    Like my Grandma always said " (If you give a dog enough rope he will

    hang himself ) Robin47

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •