Ken, what is your confusion.? I gave what I thought was a clear comparison…. when I mentioned wearing shoes…or not smoking…. in a restaraunt.Geo,
Just to clarify your position, would it then be permissible to refuse service for said business owner to refuse entrance or service based on sex, color of skin, religion? If so, what is the distinction between these subsets of customers?
I personally do not see the distinction between discrimination between that set of people or a person legally able to carry a concealed weapon even though some State laws pertaining to businesses open to the public can choose to discriminate against CCW and open carry patrons.
Is not choice of religion a choice of behavior, if a shop owner is intimidated by a certain religion and that person wears clothing or symbols does that shop owner have the right to refuse entrance ?Ken, what is your confusion.? I gave what I thought was a clear comparison…. when I mentioned wearing shoes…or not smoking…. in a restaraunt.
That example has Nothing to do with a persons gender or race or religion.
Gun-carry is a choice of Behavior….….. not an innate human characteristic.
A business owner… Or.. a Home Owner… has every right to set such restriction.
(Before I’d CC into your home …I’d have your permission first, IMO. In fact…if you carry into someone’s residence, you might be well-advised to consider the Home-Owner who takes your gun-carry as a threat….and who might lawfully defend himself against you.)
And don’t reply that the home-owner would have to see you draw or display your weapon to take a defensive action. If you, without prior permission, carry a “hidden” firearm into someone’s residence that in itself can be viewed as an aggressive action.
You’re trying to take this is into a different direction than the subject at hand. Owner “intimidation” is not the same as prohibited actions. The law is specific about signage a business owner can display and control.Is not choice of religion a choice of behavior, if a shop owner is intimidated by a certain religion and that person wears clothing or symbols does that shop owner have the right to refuse entrance ?
Your opinion though, in that instance , can a shop owner refuse to serve or admit a person based on his religion and the outward symbols he or she may be wearing? I see no difference between this and not allowing a CCW carrier into a business based on the shop owner owing the shop that is otherwise open to the public.You’re taking this is into a different direction than the subject at hand. Owner “intimidation” is not the same as prohibited actions. The law is specific about signage a business owner can display and control.
Well, Ken…then you see this differently than the law has established. (in other words, sorry, but you are simply wrong.)Your opinion though, in that instance , can a shop owner refuse to serve or admit a person based on his religion and the outward symbols he or she may be wearing? I see no difference between this and not allowing a CCW carrier into a business based on the shop owner owing the shop that is otherwise open to the public.
Disagree, we are not talking about prohibited actions. If the state allows CCW carriers into shops and stores, but also left up to the shop owner to decide. Generally it is not prohibited , specifically it is the shop owner that makes the call to not allow ccw holders into his store, and I would argue that many times the shop owner that does not allow is intimidated by the presence of a firearm.You’re trying to take this is into a different direction than the subject at hand. Owner “intimidation” is not the same as prohibited actions. The law is specific about signage a business owner can display and control.
You knew that already.
What does it matter if he‘s “intimidated” or not.? If You were that shop owner…and You wanted to have tighter control over the number of firearms being carried-around by strangers in your business-place….. Why would …You or Should You … be restricted from controlling what is brought onto your property?Disagree, we are not talking about prohibited actions. If the state allows CCW carriers into shops and stores, but also left up to the shop owner to decide. Generally it is not prohibited , specifically it is the shop owner that makes the call to not allow ccw holders into his store, and I would argue that many times the shop owner that does not allow is intimidated by the presence of a firearm.
Yes we are Constitutional carry BUT the LTC is needed to get into an establishment that only allows licensed possession on their premises. I’m in the group that believes the US Constitution gives me the Right to carry & own any type firearm but I don’t buck the systemIf what you're saying about Texas law is accurate, then Texas is not really a Constitutional Carry state. Constitutional Carry means no license is required for concealed or open carry in or outside your car for non-prohibited persons.
Our government offices/courts don't allow firearms. Not because they don't believe in the 2nd, it's because they know how bad of a job they do.The argument that a store owner can dictate who shops in his store is specious at best. Store owners are licensed by some level of government authority and therefore are required to operate by rules set by the licensing agencies. Therefore, the place of business is open to the public and the rules/laws that are in place dictate whether or not a business owner can legally discriminate against any population. I take those signs with a huge grain of salt. They mean nothing more to me than the ones that say "Protected by S&W".
I think in theory CPL/CC/etc education is great, but not in practice. They are poorly put together and lack important information from what ive seen and experienced. Also, when I did mine, they spent 3 hours of the 8 hour class time trying to sell us "concealed carry Insurance" and how dangerous it is not to have it.Texas is a Constitutional Carry state.
I recommend to my friends that they attend a CC course and obtain the LTC for no other reason …….(besides the valuable education it affords, even to experienced gun owners)… it allows most, if not all, of the same privileges when traveling in reciprocal states.
I feel that “Open Carry” makes one a target. If a bad actor intends to massacre anyplace…I suspect he/she would desire to first identify and remove any armed opponents. (Plus the fact that open display of any firearm …other than at a sporting/shooting-event… is simply Rude! )
My earlier comment was intended to express my desire that Federal Law pre-empt state-laws in such cases… so that a LTC holder might maintain his “right” to carry in Illinois, NY, etc etc. <edit> Let me specifically add CA!)
PS: It does not diminish anyone’s “rights” if I place quotation marks around a word. It only places that word in isolation for context and emphasis.
If you think your politicians do a bad job, imagine how I feel living in one of the highest taxed states in the US. Take the Washington State Climate Commitment Act, it currently adds between 33% and 35% to the price of regular gasoline here. Diesel is even more. None of the money collected in the last three years has gone toward what the fund was created for. That is how incompetence works in Washington State.Our government offices/courts don't allow firearms. Not because they don't believe in the 2nd, it's because they know how bad of a job they do.
I know what you mean.I think in theory CPL/CC/etc education is great, but not in practice. They are poorly put together and lack important information from what ive seen and experienced. Also, when I did mine, they spent 3 hours of the 8 hour class time trying to sell us "concealed carry Insurance" and how dangerous it is not to have it.
Honestly I think the classess are a massive cash grab by people in the firearm industry. A great example of that is how companies in michigan are advertising classess to renew your CPL as something you have to do. You do not need to take a class to renew your CPL. You are supposed to review laws and updates for a certain number of hours and shoot for a certain number of hours inbetween renewel periods. For Michigan, you go to the county clerks office, fill out a form saying you did that, and be done with it.
I don't like admitting this, but I grew up most of my life in Massachusetts. I know just how bad of a job politicians can do. For one, the MBTA communities act is straight out of agenda 21. And it was signed into law by a (R)If you think your politicians do a bad job, imagine how I feel living in one of the highest taxed states in the US. Take the Washington State Climate Commitment Act, it currently adds between 33% and 35% to the price of regular gasoline here. Diesel is even more. None of the money collected in the last three years has gone toward what the fund was created for. That is how incompetence works in Washington State.
Sounds like your BIL and myself had a similar experience. I was extremely disappointed because I thought I would be learning new information but I paid $250 to essentially here what anyone with a pulse knows and then get advertised to for the other half of it. Couldn't bring your own guns, the range was in some dudes flooded field 15 miles away from the training and you just had to put 10 shots on paper. They were the 22lr glock trainers, mine jammed twice LOL.I know what you mean.
When I first took the class (circa 2002) it was an 8-hr course taught by a LEO who was moonlighting as a LTC Instructor. It was a thoroughly-developed course which spent almost half the day teaching the law and the realities of self-defense and also taught the principles of Conflict-resolution.
After lunch (which his wife prepared and served the class of a dozen of us), handgun familiarization and handling safety was taught for 2 hrs, which included each applicant demonstrating handling, disassembly, and general maintenance. A coffee break was followed by range-practice, Then Qualification shooting, and a written-test which was basically a “review” what was learned that day.
The Test was “scored-and-corrected”….I.E. no one “failed”… but deficiencies were corrected.
The course-completion certificate was presented to local Law Enforcement where fingerprints and back-ground checks were accomplished. Total cost was $300 for course and state application.
The certificate was valid for a couple years after-which a refresher-course was required to renew the LTC.
My bro-in-law accepted my challenge and attended a course near HIS home….also taught by a local LEO. He reported back to me that course was almost 4 hours of “You can’t shoot someone for blank blank bland…. Bur you CAN shoot someone if they Blankety-Blankety-Blankety.”
BIL said target shooting followed and a course-completion certificate was issued…with applicants having to complete all other state application requirements on their own.
He said it was one of the wasted days of his life.
And THAT is an unfortunate truth about it… Instructors were Licensed by the State…but very low qualifications were required of them….. and course curriculum was pretty much whatever the Instructor made it. ….He paid the Instructor-Licensing fee so he could sideline-moonlight charging for his “course”….. And that is as it was a little over a Decade Ago.
About 2005 wife and I attended another course (we never actually mailed-in our previous certificate-applications…I had bought the course for her and my daughter who had just turned 21 … for the purposes of education for them only. (I had a short LE background as a small-town “reserve officer“ on the local P.D. in the 1970s and was already familiar.)
In 2005 wife and I attended another course and completed the process. Since that time, the state of Tx has, in its infinite wisdom… Completely Dropped any requirement for “refresher training”… simply mail or put on the credit-card the $150…and you’re ”Good to Carry”. Makes no difference if self-defense laws have changed or if you’ve kept up with them or not…… or if you’ve subsequently become senile as long as no one has made it official…. You still got a drivers license..?? Got $150…??
Now they’ve made it “universal”. The Founding Fathers said it was OK back when we were a rural muzzle-loading hunter-gathering society…. Sooo… Got a $150…?? ….Don’t bother with any training….
…..No matter you’re 21 years of age only exposure to the law and firearms is video games and TV-shoot ‘em ups… What..? Got $150 bucks….?? Yeah?…. Don’t matter! Spend it on a cheap gun at a Texas Gun Show! No background checks, No Training. No record-keeping…. Get Out there and Show ‘em who’s Boss!
The reality is almost nobody draws a gun. Even still, how much people spend doesn't factor into the situations. How much should a person have to spend and/or train to exercise a right in this country?Get Out there and Show ‘em who’s Boss!
That’s because of the logic you previously stated…. The vehicles cause more issues because more people actually utilize them…. often and repetitively.The reality is almost nobody draws a gun. Even still, how much people spend doesn't factor into the situations. How much should a person have to spend and/or train to exercise a right in this country?
It seems that vehicles are far more dangerous and cause more issues, but I guess that only matters if we consider facts.