Rethinking 30.06 and private property rights

[bones_708]

I think we should eliminate the 30.06 sign laws from the books. And let the property owner enforce their own desires on the open to the public property.

I don't agree and I'm a gun guy who carries everywhere. If your idea fails me think about everyone else who hears it.

 

[jordanmills]

Don't feel safe, don't go there. They aren't responsible for the actions of a low life.


We are responsible for our own safety. We make choices based on each of our perceived risks weighed against the reward.

They're also an attractive nuisance. They draw criminals like unfenced pools draw toddlers.

 

[bones_708]

If a private business wants to ban firearms I will respect their rights, though I disagree with them. Not sure how many more shootings we need to have before it is proven Gun Free Zones are just Target Rich Environments but some people are determined to be misguided.

However, the 30.06 law is crap. Once again, additional legislation was enacted for something that already existed. You could have told people no guns, asked them to leave, and if they refused it becomes trespassing and they can be removed by force of law anyway. 30.06 signs are just another burden on lawful gun owners and do nothing to stop those that would do harm. Do you really think someone who intends to rob a store gives two craps about that sign?

I'm not for forcing my views on another or violating their rights in the assumption that mine are greater. I would like to see this bullshit law repealed though.

So you want to go back to the mess that it was before 30.06? Because it didn't work as you wanted then and it wouldn't going forward either. 30.06 isn't perfect but it's better than what we had and better than what you propose which is just getting rid of 30.06.

 

[Younggun]

They're also an attractive nuisance. They draw criminals like unfenced pools draw toddlers.

Well, I'm actually against fencing requirements for pools also.


Seems we're on different sides of the...fence.

 

[jordanmills]

So you want to go back to the mess that it was before 30.06? Because it didn't work as you wanted then and it wouldn't going forward either. 30.06 isn't perfect but it's better than what we had and better than what you propose which is just getting rid of 30.06.

I think it's a good idea to have a standardized set of notifications for things like that. If I'm in one field with the owner's permission, and walk into someone else's adjacent field, should I be prosecuted for trespassing even though there's no fence, sign, barrier, or other indication of the property line? What if the owner thinks that I should have realized that the three beech trees a mile apart with four pots of poesies between them should have made it obvious to me that I was crossing a line? But if there's a standard in the law that a fence, "no trespassing sign", or purple paint marks are the standard to mark a reserved property line, then it's easier for him to put up and easier for me to realize what its purpose is.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I'm against toddlers. I've had a few and they were an infringement on my sanity.

 

[jordanmills]

Well, I'm actually against fencing requirements for pools also.


Seems we're on different sides of the...fence.

Lol fair enough. On the other hand, if you don't want to deal with chasing off four-wheelers or fishing babies out of your pool, you should consider putting up an effective barrier. There are plenty of situations where someone might reasonably make a mistake about which property they have permission to go on.

 

[jordanmills]

I'm against toddlers. I've had a few and they were an infringement on my sanity.

Well insanity is hereditary, you get it from your kids. Which explains why I'm so sane and smart - I have no kids.

 

[Younggun]

Lol fair enough. On the other hand, if you don't want to deal with chasing off four-wheelers or fishing babies out of your pool, you should consider putting up an effective barrier. There are plenty of situations where someone might reasonably make a mistake about which property they have permission to go on.

Chasing off four wheelers? From a swimming pool?

At any rate, it comes back to responsibility. It is the parents responsibility to watch their kids, not the homeowners to keep kids out.

Same with a businesses. It's your responsibility to be safe, not the business owners to keep you safe. Personal responsibility, I'm all about it.

 

[Dash Riprock]

Chasing off four wheelers? From a swimming pool?

At any rate, it comes back to responsibility. It is the parents responsibility to watch their kids, not the homeowners to keep kids out.

Same with a businesses. It's your responsibility to be safe, not the business owners to keep you safe. Personal responsibility, I'm all about it.

But if a big part of keeping yourself safe means that you need to carry a handgun, and the business owner doesn't allow you to do so, I don't think it's unreasonable for him to bear at least some responsibility for your safety while you are on his property respecting his wishes.

So what about my earlier question - what do we do when run out of options because everything is posted 30.06, and you have to disarm just to conduct your daily business? Do you trust the insurance companies not to start requiring 30.06 postings as a condition of getting coverage? I don't. I think that day is coming.

I think it would behoove us to consider our options now, before it's too late.

 

[Younggun]

But if a big part of keeping yourself safe means that you need to carry a handgun, and the business owner doesn't allow you to do so, I don't think it's unreasonable for him to bear at least some responsibility for your safety while you are on his property respecting his wishes.

So what about my earlier question - what do we do when run out of options because everything is posted 30.06, and you have to disarm just to conduct your daily business? Do you trust the insurance companies not to start requiring 30.06 postings as a condition of getting coverage? I don't. I think that day is coming.

I think it would behoove us to consider our options now, before it's too late.

I think with the number of CHL holders businesses would open (or refrain from posting) to fill that niche.

Aside from that, you have no right to enter that place of business, even if every grocery store in town posted.

If you don't feel safe in a business unarmed, don't enter.


This whole debate is hinging on wants, not rights.

 

[Vaquero]

Mail order tobacco and beer.
Problem solved.

 

[Whistler]

Mail order tobacco and beer.
Problem solved.

Now there's a man with vision!

 

[jordanmills]

Mail order tobacco and beer.
Problem solved.

I need to go back to being a delivery driver for pizza hut and do my part to make part of this vision a reality. Lord knows enough people asked about it.

 

[Booyah]

But if a big part of keeping yourself safe means that you need to carry a handgun, and the business owner doesn't allow you to do so...

That does not and cannot happen (legally). 30.06 is a trespassing law and does not address your ability to carry at all. It addresses your ability to be on the property...and even if your permission to be on the property is revoked they still cannot disarm you or restrict your ability to defend yourself.

 

[TheDan]

...these stories are making me wonder why we as gun owners continue to give private property rights the benefit of the doubt and defer to the business owners wishes when it comes to the exercise of our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. We seem to be the only group willing to do that in America today.

Because we're not hypocrites. Without property rights, we have nothing.

Just because other people use the force of government to infringe on other's rights doesn't mean we should.

 

[Recoil45]

Nevermind

 

[TheDan]

30.06 doesn't restrict your rights; it just says you're trespassing if you bring a gun in there. Simple solution is don't go there. I think it's already been said elevnty-billion times in this thread.