Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 1, 2016 11:42:56 GMT
In essence it is saying that if you don't want me to protect myself in your business, then you should protect me. To demand that patrons be defenseless is not acceptable, that's why this act is going to be in place. I think this act is more than fair. you can choose not to go there. You are making a choice to go, you are responsible for that action of going. A lot of people are making that choice, I'm sure.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 1, 2016 11:44:45 GMT
They have to take responsibility for their action in putting the sign up and disallowing patrons the option to protect themselves. The establishment is then responsible for the safety of patrons. nope, you take responsibility for your actions. Not according to this act. It says if you deny a person the right to defend themselves in your establishment then you sure as hell better protect them yourself.
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Jul 1, 2016 12:28:31 GMT
As I was reading this, I had the news on in the background. The story was a homeless man, outside a McDonald's with a long plastic pipe. He was charging people, swinging the pipe, hitting people, chasing people...it was beyond erratic behavior. The good news is that there was only one person who suffered very minor injuries.
So I am watching this and wondering about how weird we are as a society. Will those people try to sue McDonald's now for not protecting them? For the actions of an obviously disturbed man? Is McDonald's responsible for the patrons safety for the random act of violence that occurs on their property because they prefer to be a no gun zone? Would an armed citizen take a shot at the homeless man? Etc.
My personal opinion about bills like this: It is a knee-jerk reaction that is as not well thought out as it could be.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jul 1, 2016 12:56:17 GMT
I thought that guns didn't kill people, but people killed people. So how could the responsibility be shifted from anyone but the killer him or herself regardless of the weapon he or she used? Unless you think that guns actually do kill people. And then well... ETA: the establishment owners are not prohibiting anyone from defending themselves in a situation, just from using guns in their private businesses. There are many ways to defend yourself in a situation. Bad guy has a gun and you don't. He sprays bullets and you - throw a stapler?Sure. If that is what is in your purse. A stapler to the head would do some damage.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jul 1, 2016 12:59:33 GMT
No. We have the right to arms. We have the right to be free of arms in our own privately owned business. You don't like my business choices. Don't shop there. Sounds very familiar. I may be assuming the wrong reference - if I am, my apologies - but there is a fundamental difference between being willing to serve everyone equally in an establishment, just banning firearms (not really different than no shoes, no shirt, no service), and not being willing to serve/provide service to someone because of WHO they are (LGBT, in the cake and photographer instance). One is discrimination, one is not.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 1, 2016 13:11:15 GMT
No. We have the right to arms. We have the right to be free of arms in our own privately owned business. You don't like my business choices. Don't shop there. Sounds very familiar. I think the difference is that in one case, service is refused based on who a human being is. The other is based on a person wanting to bring something the establishment has forbidden...kind of like no masks in a bank or not outside foods or drink.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 1, 2016 13:14:17 GMT
nope, you take responsibility for your actions. Not according to this act. It says if you deny a person the right to defend themselves in your establishment then you sure as hell better protect them yourself.WHICH Is Why I Think It Is stupid. It will not hold up in court and is just some gun owners or the NRA'so of stomping their feet when a game doesn't go their way. That's not fair, I would have gotten that basket if you hadn't... I'm going to go over here and make up my own rules. It won't be basketball anymore and most people won't play, but it will make my childish self feel in charge.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 1, 2016 13:17:03 GMT
assigning blame for whatever happens. It is no one's fault but the person committing the crime. This act shows that the establishment has a responsibility for your safety and security if they deny you the ability to do it yourself. I think that's fair. Saying "you can't protect yourself and I'm not going to either" is not gonna work.sure it does. Has for years.
|
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,354
Aug 9, 2014 23:13:22 GMT
|
Post by DEX on Jul 1, 2016 13:20:06 GMT
My personal opinion about bills like this: It is a knee-jerk reaction that is as not well thought out as it could be.
|
|
purplebee
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,726
Jun 27, 2014 20:37:34 GMT
|
Post by purplebee on Jul 1, 2016 13:29:08 GMT
I think that people that have such anxiety that they need a law like that one are suffering from something akin to agoraphobia. They should have all their groceries delivered and call it a day. I rarely post on these threads, but I gotta say I agree with this statement. We are responsible gun owners. Dh and Ds hunt, and our guns and ammo are handled and stored safely. We are for gun rights with reasonable gun control measures. I would hate to think that I was so paranoid about my personal safety that I couldn't run to town for a gallon on milk without packing a sidearm. I think a prescription for Valium would be a much better solution to an issue that is negatively affecting a person's daily life.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 5:13:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2016 14:48:29 GMT
Fair in what way, exactly? If you don't want me to defend myself in your establishment then you sure as hell better be defending me. Someone will be defending me and ensuring my safety. Defenseless is not an option.I have to ask, where do you live that it is so dangerous that you can not go anywhere unarmed? I have never felt the need to be armed 24/7 no matter where I've lived or worked.
|
|
|
Post by refugeepea on Jul 1, 2016 15:02:53 GMT
I really have a hard time wrapping my head around such fear that many Americans such as Rainbow feel. It's less than you would think.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 1, 2016 15:05:49 GMT
This act shows that the establishment has a responsibility for your safety and security if they deny you the ability to do it yourself. I think that's fair. Saying "you can't protect yourself and I'm not going to either" is not gonna work. sure it does. Has for years. Apparently not anymore, in Tennessee.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 1, 2016 15:08:17 GMT
If you don't want me to defend myself in your establishment then you sure as hell better be defending me. Someone will be defending me and ensuring my safety. Defenseless is not an option. I have to ask, where do you live that it is so dangerous that you can not go anywhere unarmed? I have never felt the need to be armed 24/7 no matter where I've lived or worked. Fayetteville, NC. But it could be anywhere. Somebody was shot down the street at the McDonald's for pete's sake. You just never know.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 5:13:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2016 15:18:23 GMT
Fair in what way, exactly? If you don't want me to defend myself in your establishment then you sure as hell better be defending me. Someone will be defending me and ensuring my safety. Defenseless is not an option.I've asked you this before but you never did answer so I'll ask you again. Have you at any time in your day to day life been in a situation where you had to defend yourself with a gun? Your level of fear over this just seems way over the top.
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 1, 2016 15:29:34 GMT
If you don't want me to defend myself in your establishment then you sure as hell better be defending me. Someone will be defending me and ensuring my safety. Defenseless is not an option. I've asked you this before but you never did answer so I'll ask you again. Have you at any time in your day to day life been in a situation where you had to defend yourself with a gun? Your level of fear over this just seems way over the top. It isn't fear, it's reality. The reality is that someone was shot down the street at the McDonald's. There was another shooting at the gas station. As a civilian, I have not had to defend myself with a gun, thankfully. Hopefully I will never have to. I'd rather be ready than not. This is preparedness, not fear and not paranoia. Nothing wrong with being prepared.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 5:13:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2016 15:44:41 GMT
All that prepper propoganda has fried your brain. It's sad.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jul 1, 2016 16:14:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jul 1, 2016 16:16:33 GMT
|
|
|
Post by disneypal on Jul 1, 2016 16:36:33 GMT
I think any business should make it as safe as possible for all their clients/customers but you cannot foresee every circumstance. If a business wants to ban firearms from their establishment, I don't think it is their responsibility to do anything other than normal/usual safety measures.
|
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,354
Aug 9, 2014 23:13:22 GMT
|
Post by DEX on Jul 1, 2016 17:27:02 GMT
Rainbow, you have responded thoughtfully in this thread. Here is hoping it continues to be civil,
|
|
flute4peace
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,757
Jul 3, 2014 14:38:35 GMT
|
Post by flute4peace on Jul 1, 2016 18:10:53 GMT
I've asked you this before but you never did answer so I'll ask you again. Have you at any time in your day to day life been in a situation where you had to defend yourself with a gun? Your level of fear over this just seems way over the top. It isn't fear, it's reality. The reality is that someone was shot down the street at the McDonald's. There was another shooting at the gas station. As a civilian, I have not had to defend myself with a gun, thankfully. Hopefully I will never have to. I'd rather be ready than not. This is preparedness, not fear and not paranoia. Nothing wrong with being prepared.Taking a bit of a time-out here to share some thoughts. I hope you'll receive them in the way I'm intending.
One time in a previous thread, you alluded to some time spent in combat. If that's the case, I can see where your feelings of concern might be affected by your prior experience. I'm just speculating here, but if you've been in that sort of a situation and have PTSD or other lasting affects, it might help us better understand where you're coming from.
Our personal history plays a very big part in shaping our fears and concerns. Sometimes that is the known, sometimes it's the unknown. Two examples for myself:
1. I have a phobia of tornadoes. I'd always had a healthy fear of them, but when I was in college out of state, my hometown took a direct hit, and I didn't know if my immediate and extended family members were alive until the following day. Since then, I've had recurring nightmares about being hit by a tornado in a public place. My emotional response to severe weather is not always rational, and it's only been in the past several years that I've been able to help myself by becoming a storm spotter and helping with communication between local spotters and the NWS. My "phobia" is not gone, but by helping to eliminate the unknown and non-control part of the situation, it makes it easier to handle.
2. My son is going to college in Virginia in the fall. I'm terrified. I'm terrified because he'll be within driving distance of Washington D.C. and will have to fly into/out of the airport there. I'm scared to death of a terrorist attack or bombing or whatever. Ironically, a few months ago there was a workplace shooting in the quiet, peaceful, small Mennonite community where he attended college last year, and where my family lives. He was safe, but statistically much more likely to have been injured in that event, than he will be in Virginia. While I know that in my head, in my heart I have absolutely no concerns about sending my daughter to the same college he just graduated from, but I'm still a mess about Virginia.
My point here is, perhaps if Rainbow could share some of the reasons behind her fears and concerns, we might be more tolerant/understanding of them.
Of course, I could be way completely off base and she's just trying to yank our chains, in which case I've made a fool of myself, but I think it's at least worth considering.
And now back to the thread (which, incidentally, has turned into a pretty good discussion topic)
|
|
johnnysmom
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,682
Jun 25, 2014 21:16:33 GMT
|
Post by johnnysmom on Jul 1, 2016 18:57:37 GMT
I thought that guns didn't kill people, but people killed people. So how could the responsibility be shifted from anyone but the killer him or herself regardless of the weapon he or she used? Unless you think that guns actually do kill people. And then well... ETA: the establishment owners are not prohibiting anyone from defending themselves in a situation, just from using guns in their private businesses. There are many ways to defend yourself in a situation. Bad guy has a gun and you don't. He sprays bullets and you - throw a stapler?Personally I'd be more likely to throw a stapler than shoot a gun. Honestly I'd prefer there be no guns out and about in public places (I have no issues with hunting rifles, and even handguns, at home or shooting ranges). If a bad guy is spraying bullets around me, I figure it goes down a couple of ways: 1. If I had a gun, I pull it and while I'm busy peeing myself he gets it away from me and shoots me. 2. If people around me had guns, they all pull their guns, bad guy has his gun, shots going off from all around and my kid who is terrified and hides ends up in the crossfire. If there's such a risk of bad guys then maybe we need to be like Mexico and other countries and place heavily armed guards with ARs in public places (no, I don't think that's the answer, but of course it's an option)
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 5:13:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2016 19:00:41 GMT
Absolutely ridiculous.
Eat/shop/trade elsewhere before you (general you) expect business owners to save you with their guns.
I seriously can't even believe this is a thing.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2016 20:17:30 GMT
I think it's very short-sighted. The state will end up spending a mint in legal costs to defend the inevitable challenge.
Just because some gun rights folks think something is "fair" doesn't make it constitutional.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 5:13:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2016 20:26:07 GMT
Sounds very familiar. I think the difference is that in one case, service is refused based on who a human being is. The other is based on a person wanting to bring something the establishment has forbidden...kind of like no masks in a bank or not outside foods or drink. I disagree that it is based on the human and believe it to be based on the event. I believe that because they are willing to serve and have served them 100% of the time that doesn't involve that event. But that's another argument entirely because as I've stated I'm fully and completely in favor of gay marriage and don't agree with not participating in the wedding. Although, I do agree with their right not to take on that contracted job, just as I agree with their right to not have guns in their establishment. Back to the original topic, how the two compare is that it is said here and agreed with by most, if you don't like that you can't carry a gun into that business, you choose another business. You don't demand they let you carry a gun or have one themselves and make a law that demands it. That idea is acceptable by most here. But when the same standard is applied to a business owner who can't contract with you to photograph your wedding, you contact another photographer. You don't demand they photograph your wedding or sue them out of existence if they don't. That idea was unacceptable to most here.
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jul 1, 2016 20:33:54 GMT
Fair in what way, exactly? If you don't want me to defend myself in your establishment then you sure as hell better be defending me. Someone will be defending me and ensuring my safety. Defenseless is not an option.But choosing not to patronize an establishment *is* an option. I don't want to be frisked by armed guards at the grocery store, nor I do want to see you open carrying in the same grocery store. If you are that afraid for your safety, then you need to only patronize establishments that will offer the assurances you are looking for, or that will allow you to open carry. You make the argument that more anti-gun laws aren't the answer because people who commit gun crimes don't care about the law in the first place. You seem to think that it's naive of people to think that gun control will make them safer. So it's a bit hypocritical of you, IMO, to then demand the creation of MORE laws, just so you can feel safer. For the record, I'm pretty moderate when it comes to gun control and firearm ownership. I do not personally own a gun, but many of my loved ones are responsible gun owners. I don't know the answer, but I find your expectation completely laughable.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 5:13:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2016 20:36:58 GMT
It isn't fear, it's reality. The reality is that someone was shot down the street at the McDonald's. There was another shooting at the gas station. As a civilian, I have not had to defend myself with a gun, thankfully. Hopefully I will never have to. I'd rather be ready than not. This is preparedness, not fear and not paranoia. Nothing wrong with being prepared. Taking a bit of a time-out here to share some thoughts. I hope you'll receive them in the way I'm intending.
One time in a previous thread, you alluded to some time spent in combat. If that's the case, I can see where your feelings of concern might be affected by your prior experience. I'm just speculating here, but if you've been in that sort of a situation and have PTSD or other lasting affects, it might help us better understand where you're coming from.
Our personal history plays a very big part in shaping our fears and concerns. Sometimes that is the known, sometimes it's the unknown. Two examples for myself:
1. I have a phobia of tornadoes. I'd always had a healthy fear of them, but when I was in college out of state, my hometown took a direct hit, and I didn't know if my immediate and extended family members were alive until the following day. Since then, I've had recurring nightmares about being hit by a tornado in a public place. My emotional response to severe weather is not always rational, and it's only been in the past several years that I've been able to help myself by becoming a storm spotter and helping with communication between local spotters and the NWS. My "phobia" is not gone, but by helping to eliminate the unknown and non-control part of the situation, it makes it easier to handle.
2. My son is going to college in Virginia in the fall. I'm terrified. I'm terrified because he'll be within driving distance of Washington D.C. and will have to fly into/out of the airport there. I'm scared to death of a terrorist attack or bombing or whatever. Ironically, a few months ago there was a workplace shooting in the quiet, peaceful, small Mennonite community where he attended college last year, and where my family lives. He was safe, but statistically much more likely to have been injured in that event, than he will be in Virginia. While I know that in my head, in my heart I have absolutely no concerns about sending my daughter to the same college he just graduated from, but I'm still a mess about Virginia.
My point here is, perhaps if Rainbow could share some of the reasons behind her fears and concerns, we might be more tolerant/understanding of them.
Of course, I could be way completely off base and she's just trying to yank our chains, in which case I've made a fool of myself, but I think it's at least worth considering.
And now back to the thread (which, incidentally, has turned into a pretty good discussion topic)
I know you're trying to be helpful here, but this is why you'll never get a comprehensive discussion here. The need to classify people who carry a gun as living in fear, being paranoid, having PTSD or some other sort of mental disorder is what causes most people who carry, not to participate. Unless you're someone like Rainbow, who doesn't care what people think, most others don't want to be labeled in such a manner and affect their enjoyment of the board. So this causes you (general you) to come to the conclusion that Rainbow must be an anomaly and your classification of people who carry must be correct. The problem with that thinking is that carrying a gun is no more living in fear, paranoia and having a mental disorder, than having a fire extinguisher, wearing a seat belt, having insurance or locking your doors, is living in fear, paranoia and having a mental disorder.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 5:13:00 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2016 20:46:37 GMT
Rainbow, Can you point me to where the Constitution says that you have the right to demand that others defend you while you're voluntarily patronizing a business?
|
|
|
Post by rockymtnpea on Jul 1, 2016 20:48:16 GMT
Rainbow...I am curious...what type of handgun do you own? What type of holster do you carry it in? Is it a side holster or do you carry in your purse? How often do you train with it ? (shooting is a perishable skill) when training what type of drills are you training? What type of ammo? When training do you change the conditions? (For example shooting from prone, in adverse weather, if you wear glasses (RX) shooting without them) How many yards out do you shoot? Do you train strong and weak side? Do you practice malfunctions?
There is no snark to these questions. Thanks
|
|