Fallschirjmäger
Active member
I think what you're missing is that he simply provided a link to something that had nothing at all to do with Utbagpiper's "No Irish", "No Coloreds", or "No Homosexuals" post.
Last edited:
I think what you're missing is that he simply provided a link to something that had nothing at all to do with Utbagpiper's "No Irish", "No Coloreds", or "No Homosexuals" post.
Do what I do. Go in and ask for the manager. Show him what I call the 4. His sign, your permit (just to impress him you have official permission), your sidearm and your leaving.
Also go to my buddy Tim Oliver's site and you can download NO GUMS=NO $$ cards for printing off.
http://www.learntocarry.com/nogunsnomoney/
"GUMS"?
Periodontal disease is a serious matter.
There is no discriminating - privte propery rights still prevail.Are there any efforts in any state to make discriminating against a citizen who bears a firearm unlawful?
Are there any efforts in any state to make discriminating against a citizen who bears a firearm unlawful?
There is no discriminating - privte propery rights still prevail.
Offensive and discriminatory are not the same flea on the dog's back.
You know the distinction, yet would seem to insist that they are of the same phylum.
My friends are all discriminating, but the don't qualify for the federal exemption on that alone.I discriminate good from bad from evil.
If the carry of a firearm were a immutable human trait then we would have statutory protections for being denied access to private property open to the public due only to our carry of a firearm. Our RKBA cannot be infringed by government. Giving no firearms signs the weight of law is government infringing upon our RKBA.
KFC is not a vital public service provider. If the KFC in question can be prompted to remove the sign, well done to those who facilitated the removal of the sign. If the sign remains take your business elsewhere.
There are those who would point out that the results of such persistance might be unwanted attention from a moderator.And here lies the difference that many people fail, or refuse, to see. You and I can leave our firearms in the car or leave them at home. A black person doesn't have that option with his race, his skin is part of his body. Even things that are not physically attached can be part of a person's "being" and impossible to leave behind, like religion, gender or age. These items get special consideration and any attempt to include our gun rights in that group will meet a lot of opposition, even from pro-gun people, because guns simply don't fit the category. I'd like to see an end to, or at least a smaller number of, these signs, but trying to get them include in this group is not going to produce any results any time soon.
That cigarette was Herbert Tarrinngton. Think they are still being manufactured by R. J. Reynolds.I can remember from my childhood (a long time ago) when there was a cigarette band that advertised that it was for "discriminating people". The word could be used in a negative sense, but at that time, was not the most often used meaning, as has become the case today. Even in that era, discriminating could be used to describe a person that was overly "picky". Today, a large section of our population has no idea that "discrimination" can be a good thing while in fact, they do it every day. They do it when buying groceries that they prefer while leaving the ones they don't like, they do it while selecting TV shows to watch. Any choice involves some amount of "discrimination". All of this is done without much notice, but the average person would be very offended if you accused them of "discrimination". Just a few decades ago it would have been a compliment to indicate that they had a good sense of value and quality.