Author Topic: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..  (Read 57350 times)

TAB

  • DRTV Rangers
  • Top Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10232
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #60 on: June 12, 2008, 09:34:10 PM »
so does property owners rights... go way, way back.  king james law and etc.


There is also a big diffrence between a company that is in "protection" and one that is not.
I always break all the clay pigeons,  some times its even with lead.

Pathfinder

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6451
  • DRTV Ranger -- NRA Life Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #61 on: June 12, 2008, 09:54:29 PM »
show me one court case that says carrying a firearm , is a right.  hell show me one court case that says we can own a firearm as a person, not part of a group.

I'll help, as of this post there are not any.

Also a employer can ask you to wave any right they want too...  all it takes is you to sign on the dotted line.( or even becoming an employee in some states) 

Same thing when you join the armed forces, you wave several of your rights. 

Get use to it, thats not something that is ever going to change.

Don't need to show you a court case. I showed you the verbatim language in the ND state Constitution. So important a clause that they put it freakin (I changed the original word here) first! I don't need a judge to tell me what that says.

And I will never get used to tyranny - corporate or gummint.

As for corporate weasels having me sign on the dotted line, in all of the companies I have worked for I have never signed anything that says I have read and agree to every clause - no company has ever asked me to. At best, I acknowledge I have received a copy of the policies. But these days, so many corporate policies are online, that they don't even ask that anymore.
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do this to others and I require the same from them"

J.B. Books

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #62 on: June 13, 2008, 01:51:07 AM »
Do you know of any?

Yes, Virginia Tech was sued as was the Mall in Omaha.

TAB

  • DRTV Rangers
  • Top Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10232
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #63 on: June 13, 2008, 01:54:25 AM »
Yes, Virginia Tech was sued as was the Mall in Omaha.

both of those were NOT sued do to them having a  no weapons policy.

The Vtech had to do with them doing nothing and the omaha mall was thrown out.
I always break all the clay pigeons,  some times its even with lead.

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #64 on: June 13, 2008, 02:13:51 AM »
show me one court case that says carrying a firearm , is a right.   hell show me one court case that says we can own a firearm as a person, not part of a group.

I'll help, as of this post there are not any.

Also a employer can ask you to wave any right they want too...  all it takes is you to sign on the dotted line.( or even becoming an employee in some states) 

Same thing when you join the armed forces, you wave several of your rights. 

Get use to it, thats not something that is ever going to change.


Just off the top of my head I can't think of any Constitutional Rights I surrendered when I enlisted, I'm sure you will refresh my memory      The only differance is you are governed by the UCMJ instead of civilian law because the MILITARY and CIVILIAN live in seperate worlds. When a civilians boss tells him be here at 7 am  it's up to him whether or not to be there, he does not have other peoples lives depending on him.
Maybe YOU need to get use to the fact that, one way or another people you dont agree with are the wave of the future.
You are in Ca. Most of the time when you post on these types of subjects you seem to have drank the liberal Kool-ade, and you get tons of opposition. You know they lie about Iraq, Illegal immagration, and taxes, maybe you should re - evaluate how they influence your opinions of these forum subjects .

Sponsor

  • Guest

kdcarlso

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #65 on: June 13, 2008, 06:09:42 AM »
So TAB, tell me you believe this is ok?
I have a CCW and a constitutional RIGHT to BEAR arms. My employer says not on their property (Car included) my state says not on school property. I drive 50 miles to work, dropping the kids off at school at the 30 mile mark and park in the company parking lot. I'm on the road two hours a day. Those are the two hours I believe I most need my firearm. If my car breaks down or I get caught in a storm, stuck on the highway for whatever reason I want my firearm. This is also the time when we do most of our shopping and running araound. This is when I should have access to my firearm but am technically prevented by my employer and a stop in a school parking lot. This is WRONG! I don't need to carry at work as the building is pretty secure but my right to carry for the entire non working day should not be violated either..

gunman1911

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 695
  • DRTV Ranger Emeritus
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #66 on: June 13, 2008, 06:24:59 AM »
I work in a Tribal casino and the people allowed to carry on property are Tribal police,Federal agents and the armored truck drivers, State, County and city police are not allowed on property unless the have permission from the Tribal police. Armed also includes knives of ANY kind,and yes we do approach those that have knives and tell them to take them out to their car or we can hold the offending blade and they can have it back when they leave by escort.
Back up guns---Better to have and not need than to need and not have!

Solus

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8666
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #67 on: June 13, 2008, 08:20:01 AM »
Tab,

There are a couple of court cases that do find that the 2nd Amendment pertains to a Individual Right.

1st Case - I'm sure you have heard of the case now known as Heller vs. D.C?  A local court found that that the DC gun ban was unconstitutional because it violated the 2nd Amendments protection of an Individual Right to bear amrs....

2nd case - DC appealed the case above and an appeals court upheld the decision.



On another point, any contract that violates the law is invalid.  Indentured Servitude, for example, is illegal no mater how many times the Indentured Person signs on the dotted line.



On another point,   I actually agree with your view of the rights of property owners.  A business owner should be able to make decisions about how to run their business.  If they think not hiring Blacks or serving Blacks or folks who carry guns is a good business decision, they should be free to do so.

They can post all the signs they want about their exclusion policies and ask anyone they want to leave the premise.  However, all their postings of their preferences does not make it law. 

If someone enters the establishment the owner needs to ask them to leave and if they refuse, they are guilty of trespassing, but guilty of no crime before that (I know local laws say differently, but they are as wrong as the laws that prohibit the property owner from asking those he wishes to leave).

So, if the owner cannot tell that the customer is Black or Irish or carrying a gun or had fish for lunch or whatever his personal criteria might be for service and does not ask the customer to leave, no crime has been committed.

In this same vein, an employer should be able to say you cannot carry on their property and terminate you if they find you carrying.  However, there should be no violation of law involved. 

Now, the employer should not be able to restrict you from keeping a firearm locked in your personal vehicle, which should be considered an extension of your home.  To allow the employer to do so would then extend their restriction beyond their personal property.



Please note that I am in no way a legal expert or in the legal profession.  This is just my view of what is correct so that each partiy's Rights are protected.
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
—Patrick Henry

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
— Daniel Webster

TAB

  • DRTV Rangers
  • Top Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10232
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #68 on: June 13, 2008, 04:14:37 PM »
So TAB, tell me you believe this is ok?
I have a CCW and a constitutional RIGHT to BEAR arms. My employer says not on their property (Car included) my state says not on school property. I drive 50 miles to work, dropping the kids off at school at the 30 mile mark and park in the company parking lot. I'm on the road two hours a day. Those are the two hours I believe I most need my firearm. If my car breaks down or I get caught in a storm, stuck on the highway for whatever reason I want my firearm. This is also the time when we do most of our shopping and running araound. This is when I should have access to my firearm but am technically prevented by my employer and a stop in a school parking lot. This is WRONG! I don't need to carry at work as the building is pretty secure but my right to carry for the entire non working day should not be violated either..


Nothing is stoping you from droping your kid off on the street and findig another parking lot for work.
I always break all the clay pigeons,  some times its even with lead.

Rastus

  • Mindlessness Fuels Tyranny
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7313
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 870
Re: A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..
« Reply #69 on: June 13, 2008, 05:47:02 PM »
If the police don't have to protect you( this has come up many, many times in court cases)  a private company will not have to.

It seems everything you are about is for the public to stick their butt up in the air. 

Not gonna do it.

Don't give a damn about the law if it means my family or I is a victim.

I'm responsible for my family and my wellbeing...not the police and not the law.  But then I'm not afraid to break the law and die for what's right either....no yellow here.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
-William Pitt, British Prime-Minister (1759-1806)
                                                                                                                               Avoid subjugation, join the NRA!

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk