51% Sign
- Thread starter Bud-9
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Ummmm.....are you saying the Constitutional rights don't apply to private entities?
txinvestigator
TGT Addict
OK, whatever.
txinvestigator
TGT Addict
No, and you know it. Restrictions in the bill of rights do not restrict private entities.
I can bar you from carrying in my house. Not a violation of the 2nd. If you say something in my house I don't like I can kick you out. Not a violation of the 1st.
If a loss prevention officer searches a person suspected of theft and finds drugs, no 4th amendment issues apply.
If I conduct an internal theft investigation at my company and the employee I suspect demands an attorney before he answers questions, I can continue to question him and if he makes an admission it is not a 5th amendment issue.
Private personal property is one issue....but do the same statements you just made be applied to private businesses open to the public?
So you think it should be valid and legal for murderers, pedophiles, rapists, crack heads, etc. to own firearms? After all, those people are citizens also.
But I must say, however interesting it is to see all the varied opinions, it's really nice to have a few folks that can and do quote the actual laws. Once we know what the actual laws say, then we can all make our own decisions and can't blame anyone else for our screw-ups!!!
txinvestigator
TGT Addict
Mexican_Hippie
TGT Addict
The whole 51% premise is retarded. You already can't be intoxicated and carry. Why couldn't they just leave it at that when creating the laws.
Instead they had to make it all complicated about this location or that license, blah, blah, blah. It's all a waste of time. After you pass the background check and get your CHL the only restrictions should be (1) 30.06 to honor private property owners rights and (2) that you're not drunk.
Even the airline restrictions are ridiculous. They should offer an "airline endorsement" on your CHL, similar to CDL or motorcycles on your drivers license. Then you attend extra airline training and you can carry on planes too. Geez, it's not that hard.
Instead they had to make it all complicated about this location or that license, blah, blah, blah. It's all a waste of time. After you pass the background check and get your CHL the only restrictions should be (1) 30.06 to honor private property owners rights and (2) that you're not drunk.
Even the airline restrictions are ridiculous. They should offer an "airline endorsement" on your CHL, similar to CDL or motorcycles on your drivers license. Then you attend extra airline training and you can carry on planes too. Geez, it's not that hard.
So, if you don't like a certain race, you may ban them from your store without legal issue?
txinvestigator
TGT Addict
Race, is not in the bill of rights, is it? But you know that.
If you come into my store and say ANYTHING I don't like I can tell you to leave. No violation. The restictions in the bill of rights are those against the government.
There have been laws passed that prohibit certain discrimination based on religion, race, etc., but those are unlawful do to LAW.
So....we can pass a law allowing discrimination of a Constitutional right?
If the restrictions are those against the government, then how can they outlaw cc on non-federal (or hell - even federal) property?
If the restrictions are those against the government, then how can they outlaw cc on non-federal (or hell - even federal) property?
You are fighting a losing battle. the Constitution places restrictions on the government, not on personal property and the rights of the owner. The government can't keep you from "keeping and bearing arms" (in theory), but a private property owner can keep you from his property for any reason.
In theory....if a black man comes in your store and you dont like black people, you can call the police and they will make him leave. You don't need to give a reason. You are the property owner, you say who stays and goes...period. (The civil implications are far reaching but that is another story)
If you dont like those who carry guns and you dont want them in your store, they are gone...period. The reason why you bounced them is irrellevant.
Perfectly legal.
Constitutional rights are not absolute.
Go ahead and try that one, scooter.
I didnt say to tell the police "Make him leave because he is black"... I said you can make him leave and you dont have to give a reason.
Point is you cant violate my constitutional rights and I cant violate yours (well, maybe I can, but most folks cant)
Point is you cant violate my constitutional rights and I cant violate yours (well, maybe I can, but most folks cant)
