Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 86

Thread: Asked to leave Best Buy!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    2

    Asked to leave Best Buy!

    Alright ive been openly carrying in the same Best Buy for about a year and a half and have never had any issues untill a week ago i was asked by an employee to leave for the safety of the other customers, no where is it posted that i cannot carry my firearm and when i asked the store manager she was unable to show me anywhere in the company policies stating that i couldnt be in there.

    luckely this didnt involve the local authorities as i have had to deal with them on several other occasions.

    My question is do these companies such as wal mart, target, best buy etc. have the right to bar us from the property or do they have to abide by state laws which allow us to openly carry in public... i know these are not state owned and operated companies but is there anything i can do to continue to carry in these places?

    I dont want to boycott these companies just because one of one hundred employees feels uncomfortable by my presence with a firearm.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    215
    In my opinion legislation will have to be passed just like other civil rights, to force businesses "OPEN TO THE PUBLIC"
    to honor your right to carry a firearm. It is discrimination, period. If they don't want to be open to the public then they can be a club. Members only.
    Life is tough, its tougher when your stupid.

    http://www.itsnotthelaw.com

    Feds: U.C.C. 1-308, State: U.C.C. 1-207, Both: U.C.C. 1-103.6

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    These companies have private property rights just as you do. They may lawfully disallow firearms on their premises.

    However, you have the right not to do business with chains that do not allow firearms.

    I recommend that you write to the corporate offices for a clarification of their chain policy. Also, you may want to call the district manager to report the incident. The manager may well have overstepped his authority.

    If you will provide details about time and place in this thread, you will find that many members will contact corporate to find out their policy and to remind them that many gun owners will not shop there if they have an anti-gun policy.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    These companies have private property rights just as you do. They may lawfully disallow firearms on their premises.
    I'd agree except I'm not keen on saying its ok to discriminate against armed Americans, but not Chinese Americans.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Gravel Switch, KY
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    I'd agree except I'm not keen on saying its ok to discriminate against armed Americans, but not Chinese Americans.
    None of us were born with a gun on our hip so it's not discrimination.

    It's not a matter of civil rights, it's a matter of property rights.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    I'd agree except I'm not keen on saying its ok to discriminate against armed Americans, but not Chinese Americans.
    Two things: You, as a person, are still free to enter the store. The gun cannot.

    I disagree as completely with laws that force people to give up property rights under the guise of preventing discrimination against protected classes as I would with laws that force store owners to give up their property rights based on the carry status of a prospective customer.

    Let me ask: If you owned a store, should you have to allow a person to stand in your store and campaign for a candidate you find loathsome? Of course not. But, wait, the person you want to kick out is just exercising his 1A rights.

    Your rights end where others' begin. If we are honest about wanting Liberty, we must want Liberty for all.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    2

    Wink Thanx

    Thank ya'll for the feed back on this...

    I did go back and speak with the manager in person today and im assuming she couldnt find anything in writting in their policies but she told me that Best Buy recognizes state laws and has no problem with open carry rights and appologized...

  8. #8
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by flb_78 View Post
    None of us were born with a gun on our hip so it's not discrimination.

    It's not a matter of civil rights, it's a matter of property rights.
    So it would be ok to discriminate against the Chinese if they could change their skin color at will?

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Let me ask: If you owned a store, should you have to allow a person to stand in your store and campaign for a candidate you find loathsome? Of course not. But, wait, the person you want to kick out is just exercising his 1A rights.
    I think simply wearing a firearm would be more like wearing a shirt that is supportive of the loathsome candidate.

    Not sure why I'm arguing though since I do agree with your sentiments on property rights and wouldn't want to make a purchase from someone who is that against bearing arms.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    I think simply wearing a firearm would be more like wearing a shirt that is supportive of the loathsome candidate.

    Not sure why I'm arguing though since I do agree with your sentiments on property rights and wouldn't want to make a purchase from someone who is that against bearing arms.
    In both cases, rights are being exercised on someone's property where the store owner doesn't want the rights exercised. Since one would be free to exercise those rights elsewhere, the rights are not being denied by not allowing him in the store.

    However, the property rights of the store owner would be denied if you forced him to allow others to exercise rights on his property in a way to which he objects.

    The only way to preserve everyone's Liberty is to allow the property owner to decide which rights will not be allowed to be exercised on his property. After all, he is not saying that one cannot exercise his rights. He is saying do it elsewhere, not on his property.

    If someone says the to me about my 2A rights, my dollars and I will be happy to comply.

    Ain't Liberty wonderful?

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Ain't Liberty wonderful?
    absolutely.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by flb_78 View Post
    None of us were born with a gun on our hip so it's not discrimination.

    It's not a matter of civil rights, it's a matter of property rights.
    Although I understand the "property rights" argument, and respect the property rights of private individuals, I tend to disagree with the "private property rights" argument with regards to businesses that are open to the public for the EXPRESS PURPOSE of doing general business with the public.

    And anyway, you're concept of what constitutes a Fundamental Human Right is Wrong. Wrong. Wrong...

    None of us were BORN with a yarmulke on our heads, or a rosary in our hands, or wearing a pentagram necklace or whatever, but that doesn't make one's religious expression any less a Human Right than the color of one's skin.

    None of us are BORN knowing how to operate a printing press, or use a word processor, or even speak a language, but that doesn't make the exercise of a person's RIGHT to free speech any less a HUMAN RIGHT either...

    Rights are NOT based on unchageable physical conditions. Rights are based on the fundamental HUMAN-NESS of an individual. It is because we are HUMAN BEINGS that we have rights. Rights are not "granted" to someone because of some incidental genetic variance that somehow effects their physical appearance.

    Your idea of a Right is fundamentally flawed.

    Get thee to a library...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 09-12-2010 at 07:30 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  13. #13
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Yes, but limited.

    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    These companies have private property rights just as you do. They may lawfully disallow firearms on their premises.

    However, you have the right not to do business with chains that do not allow firearms.

    I recommend that you write to the corporate offices for a clarification of their chain policy. Also, you may want to call the district manager to report the incident. The manager may well have overstepped his authority.

    If you will provide details about time and place in this thread, you will find that many members will contact corporate to find out their policy and to remind them that many gun owners will not shop there if they have an anti-gun policy.
    Corporations property rights are limited in many ways. Corporations trade away their owners rights in exchange for governmental protections and regulation. Just as protections were extended to the handicapped by statute so can your right to self defense be statutorily enforced against corporations that open their doors to the public for commerce. I am a business owner I do not consider it my right to deny others their right to self defense, especially since my company provides my customers no security while on my premises.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Their property rights are not limited.

    It is a proper purview of government to dictate how buildings are to be built for the health and safety of the general public. Rules for access and building codes fall under this heading. Such limitations are not always applied strictly to corporations, and certainly not strictly to corporations who receive some benefit from the government.

    Building codes apply to all. Private citizens, corporations, partnerships, proprietorships, publicly owned buildings, churches, etc. Building rules for safe handicap access apply to all buildings open to the public regardless of who owns them or why they are open to the public.

    You may not consider that you have the property right to deny others the privilege to carry on your property, but, under the law, you would be wrong. You have that right.

    I applaud you for not choosing to stop folks from carrying. But, you have that right.

  15. #15
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711
    Quote Originally Posted by DmDick View Post
    Alright ive been openly carrying in the same Best Buy for about a year and a half and have never had any issues untill a week ago i was asked by an employee to leave for the safety of the other customers, no where is it posted that i cannot carry my firearm and when i asked the store manager she was unable to show me anywhere in the company policies stating that i couldnt be in there.

    luckely this didnt involve the local authorities as i have had to deal with them on several other occasions.

    My question is do these companies such as wal mart, target, best buy etc. have the right to bar us from the property or do they have to abide by state laws which allow us to openly carry in public... i know these are not state owned and operated companies but is there anything i can do to continue to carry in these places?

    I dont want to boycott these companies just because one of one hundred employees feels uncomfortable by my presence with a firearm.
    And, your followup call tot he store manager resulted in ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    wait a sec are you arguing fundamental rights or privileges given by law. governments and laws do not establish or create rights; they only can protect them or illegally infringe upon them.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    When I said "privilege," I meant a privilege granted by a property owner to someone he has invited onto his property.

    Denying him that opportunity would be denying him his fundamental property rights.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Their property rights are not limited.

    It is a proper purview of government to dictate how buildings are to be built for the health and safety of the general public. Rules for access and building codes fall under this heading. Such limitations are not always applied strictly to corporations, and certainly not strictly to corporations who receive some benefit from the government.

    Building codes apply to all. Private citizens, corporations, partnerships, proprietorships, publicly owned buildings, churches, etc. Building rules for safe handicap access apply to all buildings open to the public regardless of who owns them or why they are open to the public.
    Interesting how you don't seem to consider it within ones right to build how one sees fit.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    Interesting how you don't seem to consider it within ones right to build how one sees fit.
    Considering that how you build within a community directly affects the ability of others to safely enjoy their property rights, government has a compelling interest in establishing building practices.

    No, I don't think there is a fundamental right to build something however you want.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    I am unsure how making your building inaccessible to the handicapped is going to impede another's property rights.

  21. #21
    Regular Member 45acpForMe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorktown, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,803
    I respect property rights of others and fully believe that any business should be able to hire, serve, sell or not to anyone they wish. There are consequences to their actions though. If they choose to not allow shoppers to defend themselves we need to make a law that transfers all liability to those same stores owners that prevent people from defending themselves.

    If I own a store and I don't employ armed security, I would think twice about disarming the customers (and employees) if I were held liable both civily and criminally if anything happened to one of my customers. How about the regents at VA Tech sitting in jail for banning firearms? How about the Superintendant and Board of Supervisors sitting in Jail for not protecting the students at Columbine? (probably more state and federal hold responsibility than local school staff)

    If people are allowed to protect themselves, or choose not to, business would removed of all liability.

    (Actually in my humble opinion, every state and federal representative that votes against allowing citizen self defense should be strung up. After all we only have so much room in jail!)
    Last edited by 45acpForMe; 09-13-2010 at 07:36 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    much string that would require.

  23. #23
    Regular Member 45acpForMe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Yorktown, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,803
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    much string that would require.
    Rope is environmentally friendly and reusable! :-)

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by flb_78 View Post
    None of us were born with a gun on our hip so it's not discrimination.

    It's not a matter of civil rights, it's a matter of property rights.
    I do not agree that civil rights should overrule individual/property rights, unlike the right to defense, which IS inalienable!.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Rights don't override rights. They coexist.

    The way that private property rights and the RKBA coexist is that the property owner exercises his Liberty in choosing to allow people to carry or not to carry on his property. The way the gun owner exercises his RKBA is to choose not to go onto anyone's private property who chooses not to allow carry.

    Ain't Liberty (for all) wonderful?

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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