Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America are continuing their so-far-unsuccessful campaign to get the Kroger supermarket chain to ban open carry in states where it’s legal. Meanwhile, an unknown number of Terre Haute, Indiana gun owners are boycotting businesses that ban guns. Their two-week-old Facebook page No Guns = No Money listing gun-averse commercial enterprises in The Crossroad of America – has garnered 1000 likes. So should all gun owners boycott all businesses that post no-guns signs? I do. Do you?
I would, but I haven’t seen a “No Guns” sign in a Massachusetts store.
Every Target Store has a no gun policy
I do not buy from any Businessthat has a no carry policy.
I carry everywhere everyday and I’m not taking it off so they can make money off of me. Sorry no gun no buy!
I worked at Target. It has a no guns policy for employees — it’s in the employee manual — but no signs affecting customers.
I know Target has “requested” that customers not bring guns into their stores, but in Texas at least they’ve done nothing to legally prevent customers from carrying in their stores. Most of the businesses caving to MDA have done so in a way that allows business to continue as usual. Starbucks says “Please don’t, but we’ll obey all local laws”. They then proceed to do nothing differently the next day. MDA is claiming hollow victories.
Having said that, if a business posts a no guns sign I’ll give that sign the full legal consideration that it deserves. In Texas that means I’ll obey 30.06 signs and shop elsewhere. I also disarm prior to entering an establishment required to post a 51% sign. However, if you post a gun buster sign, or are required to post a blue TABC sign and instead post a 51% sign, I simply ignore the signage.
I’ve personally carried in Target at least twice in the past week.
There would be a fun thread, what prohibited places have you carried this week. Send a link to all the folks who think anyone cares about their silly laws. If the cops knock on your door you can always say you lied. I’m Costco twice, Sam’s if that counts, two theaters, two restaurants which served liquor, and where I had a couple drinks, Not sure which others, since I don’t look for signs.
Sign sign everwhere a sign……
You silly ass sign dones not trump my Bill of Rights.
Gun owners should boycott the whole state of Massachusetts.
You can add NJ, NY, RI, Ct, Pa , Me , Ca , SC, IL and NH to that list
Why NH?
Why would PA be on that list? Things are pretty gun friendly here in the Pittsburgh area.
And Maine? Really? We’ve got it pretty good up here, too.
Why SC other than no OC. & economy is crap.
You missed MD.
If all fairness, IL’s self defense laws are excellent and our new concealed carry law…could be a lot worse.
We just got SBRs and we’re working on other NFA stuff.
I wouldn’t recommend moving here, but mainly for reasons other than the gun laws. States like CT, CA, and NJ make IL look like WY.
Yeah, why New Hampshire?
On the way home from my range in Manchester, I often stop at a sub shop. I don’t want to leave my M&P in the car, so I open carry. You don’t need a permit to OC in NH.
No one in the sub shop has said a word. I’ve been in line behind a guy with a Glock on his hip.
(And, while they require a LEO to okay it – NH is a “shall issue” state – getting a CC is perfunctory.)
While RI isn’t the most gun-friendly state out there, its not nearly as draconian as say.. NJ, NY, MA, MD
‘Cause PA’s new attorney general Kathy Kane is a Hillary hanger-oner who is anti-gun. She has opposed The National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act and The Respecting States’ Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act and she has pressured counties not to issue non-resident carry permits, although a few of them still do.
Kane is indeed bad news, though so far she has hurt non-residents more than residents. Basically, if you are a PA resident who doesn’t live in Philly, you wouldn’t really notice anything unless you are paying attention. Some Philly residents carried on Florida or Utah permits because Philly wouldn’t issue LTCF to legally eligible people. Kane ended that, so that Philly could go back to illegally denying LTCF applications.
Thank you and for the rest of you asking why my state. Just because you can carry in your home state dose not help others who travel and eastern 2/3s of the US these are the states that don’t recognize any other states permit. DC is not a state but is the same. Even if you have let’s say a state of Ct. Resident permit and a Utah and Florida NONRESIDENT permit the northeast is the largest percentage of states in any area of the country that dose NOT RECOGNIZE ANY OTHER STATES PERMIT. You can see for your self just go to NRA OR USCCA site and look for yourself
SC has no reciprocity.
SC has plenty of states reciporcal just not GA due to no training or knowledge of DGU laws requirement. Just the bucks & a friendly judge.
Bills have been prefiled to correct that now that the restaurant/alcohol bill has been changed. I’ve had mote problems carrying under LEOSA than with my CCW. P/O other cops when a few of us go to an FFL. They have to be run NICS + paperwork & get a delay when the computers busy & I do a 4473 copy of ccw & out the door.
Thank you and for the rest of you asking why my state. Just because you can carry in your home state dose not help others who travel and eastern 2/3s of the US these are the states that don’t recognize any other states permit. DC is not a state but is the same. Even if you have let’s say a state of Ct. Resident permit and a Utah and Florida NONRESIDENT permit the northeast is the largest percentage of states in any area of the country that dose NOT RECOGNIZE ANY OTHER STATES PERMIT. You can see for your self just go to NRA OR USCCA site and look for yourself.
Retired LEO, You say that like it is a good thing. Are you against Constitutional carry? You actually believe that someone in a DGU is going to pause to think about the minute differences in the law from state to state?
No just stating the reason there is no reciprocity. But I do think you should be able to shoot before you carry. Sat in on a few citizen classes & several failed shooting portion. When you can’t load the pistol or you shoot another persons target no way should they carry. More range time then come back.
I see the same thing with cops at the range. Drivers get licensed yet there are more idiots behind the wheel than behind a gun. Sounds like a solution waiting for a problem.
Does GA require a hunter safety course for kids. Idiots on the road are everywhere once you get the DL you forget turn signals & how to read speed limit signs. True constitutional carry would not require a fee to the Government or paying a probate judge a few bucks. Should people that carry firearms know how to load them, properly & safely use them? Where else will they learn & provide proof other than a proper instructor.
Here is a novel idea…you trust them! If they screw up, they get dealt with. You are using the same reasoning that gun banners use. You are automatically assuming that the average person is going to maim somebody if they don’t get “proper training”. Most people that are ignorant about guns won’t have them anyway and many more will only own guns. Those that carry will do so responsibly…or they won’t, then punish the ones who are negligent. Don’t punish everybody because somebody may screw up. We have to rid ourselves of this elitist attitude that people can’t be trusted to make good decisions. I am all for literature being included with a firearm explaining safe use and even PSAs on the subject but mandates are not conducive with the bill of rights. There is no proof that mandatory CCW classes prevented negligence anyway. It is just another Liberal feel good policy.
Since all but 3 gun store sales persons I have dealt with in last 10 years new exactly zero about guns, including being handed a loaded .45 I don’t trust them. These are the ones that are supposed to tell them about safety? What is wrong with teaching people that know nothing about shooting rules & making sure they can handle a weapon. My wife bought a Hi-Point based on a gunsmiths suggestion because he had a ton to move. Told her it was equal to the sig 229 I told her to buy. She knew nothing which is the average person buying a gun these days.
Long gone are the days of kids learning from parents about guns, because the parents don’t know. So gun use is inbread in DNA? Why are you against people being trained to shoot & basic where not to carry which is what a CCW class is for the most part. Because certain states don’t recognize your GA permit, you seem to know why training is a waste have you ever taken a class? Constitruional carry if it goes through which it should will likely have some sort of training or testing requirement. How many do you know that own guns that have never been to a range. I know of quite a few personally, I have carried a pistol for 32 years daily & have taught thousand + basic shooting had only a few that had shooting expierence before but a lot that went on to practice & start others into shooting sports. Thats how you keep the bill of rights alive, bring more into shooting the proper way don’t assume everyone knows how to use a gun.
The issue isn’t that training isn’t necessary. Anyone here would agree that it is. Rather, the issue is making the exercise of a constitutionally protected, human right *contingent* upon such training.
And let’s be frank: teaching someone safe gun handling practices isn’t exactly rocket surgery. There are four rules.
Owning is a right, carrying, for now is a privilege. If people that sell guns day & out cant grasp basic safety can they teach it. 95% of people that take mandatory training do not ever go to a range again.
What is wrong with making a new gun owner go to a range, learn how to put lead in the middle before they carry. The stores with ranges usually give free or discounted time. I’ve talked with the range owners of 8 ranges on average with FREE time they get 10-15% use.
Owning is a right, carrying, for now is a privilege.
Not according to the Second Amendment (…the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.), as confirmed by Heller, among other cases.
If people that sell guns day & out cant grasp basic safety can they teach it. 95% of people that take mandatory training do not ever go to a range again.
…which not only is an argument against government mandate/control/regulation of training, but also does not constitute reasonable grounds to infringe the rights of responsible, law-abiding citizens.
Case in point: I just moved back to Indiana. To get my lifetime CCW, I simply have to fill out a form, get fingerprinted, and pay some money. No class time or range certification required. With both my Missouri CCW and my Ohio CCW, I had to take classes that included both classroom time and rage qualification. Do I need to re-take the same for Indiana? No, I don’t need to. Would I? Yes, I would. And in fact, I will, because in order to join the range I intend to join, I have to show certification from a list of approved classes.
Two points:
1) There is a difference between voluntary participation and state regulation
2) The streets of Indiana aren’t running red with blood shed by irresponsible, untrained CCW holders. Empirical evidence proves that the State doesn’t need to regulate training in order for responsible, law-abiding citizens to exercise their second-amendment rights.
What is wrong with making a new gun owner go to a range, learn how to put lead in the middle before they carry. The stores with ranges usually give free or discounted time. I’ve talked with the range owners of 8 ranges on average with FREE time they get 10-15% use.
The problem arises when doing those things becomes a requirement or a prerequisite for exercising a constitutionally protected, basic human right.
Instead, what the State can and should do is hold people accountable for misuse/abuse of that right – a reasonable action that requires no infringement of the exercise of the right itself.
The crux of the issue is that we are all assuming that people that own guns are all responsible adults, when a large percentage clearly are not.
When it comes to guns, I am firmly in the “must show competence” when it comes to public carry. What you do in the privacy of your own home is your own business. You can play “Russian Roulette” with your gun if you want to! But once you are in public, you are putting ME at risk if you are incompetent or dangerous with the use of your gun. So if you are going to carry around me, I demand that you be checked out, trained and regularly requalified.
And I expect you to respect other peoples right to fear you if you carry. People are not afraid of guns, they are afraid of random people with guns. Not many people are afraid of the gun of an LEO in it’s belt, but we assume that the LEO has been checked out and trained. And calling people ignorant just because they are afraid of something is not right. I own non-venomous snakes, but I would not expect for a second to be able to openly go to the supermarket with a snake draped around my neck and not expect some people to be very uncomfortable, yet I would not call then ignorant either. If I want to educate them about snakes, and reduce their fear, I can make presentations at meetings where I am invited, they are invited to attend, and nobody is forced to be in an uncomfortable position.
We should be able to assume that any person carrying a gun in public has at least some proven basic level of competence. And that starts with background checks and certification.
@Awake:
The crux of the issue is that we are all assuming that people that own guns are all responsible adults, when a large percentage clearly are not.
First, you’re factually incorrect. While gun ownership is at all-time highs, rate of accidental gun deaths is at historic lows. Whether people are generally irresponsible or not, their behavior has not translated into accidental/negligent discharge of their firearms.
Second: no matter what percentage of adults act irresponsibly, the State doesn’t have the right to infringe upon the exercise of a constitutionally protected, basic human right by the rest of the responsible, law-abiding populace.
When it comes to guns, I am firmly in the “must show competence” when it comes to public carry. What you do in the privacy of your own home is your own business. You can play “Russian Roulette” with your gun if you want to! But once you are in public, you are putting ME at risk if you are incompetent or dangerous with the use of your gun. So if you are going to carry around me, I demand that you be checked out, trained and regularly requalified.
Sorry, boss, but you don’t get to make demands upon my exercise of my rights. Period. End of story. Bottom line. That is a very bright line in the sand, that I will demand that you not cross. I think you might find a more favorable audience among the Everytown crowd with that sort of demand.
And I expect you to respect other peoples right to fear you if you carry.
Expect away, but don’t hold your breath. I refuse to respect irrational fear, just as I refuse to let the irrational fear of perpetually aggrieved people dictate or infringe upon my exercise of my rights.
People are not afraid of guns, they are afraid of random people with guns. Not many people are afraid of the gun of an LEO in it’s belt, but we assume that the LEO has been checked out and trained.
And yet, LEO commit crime at a rate an order of magnitude higher than the general populace of CCW holders. Not only is their fear irrational, but it’s ignorant.
And calling people ignorant just because they are afraid of something is not right.
If their fear is irrational, and contrary to easily obtainable fact, then it is ignorant. LEO commit crime at a higher rate than CCW holders. And criminals? You’re not going to know that they’re (illegally) carrying until they are in the process of committing their intended crime. Concealed carriers (and yes – even the much-maligned open carriers) are, quite literally, the last people anyone needs to worry about committing a crirme. Fear of them is ignorant and irrational.
I own non-venomous snakes, but I would not expect for a second to be able to openly go to the supermarket with a snake draped around my neck and not expect some people to be very uncomfortable, yet I would not call then ignorant either.
What a sophistic, vacuous analogy. A gun strapped to the shoulder or carried in a concealed holster can’t lash out and bite and envenom someone. Also, there’s that minor point that a venomous snake doesn’t meet the definition of arms, and therefore carrying one does not fall under the protection of the second amendment.
If I want to educate them about snakes, and reduce their fear, I can make presentations at meetings where I am invited, they are invited to attend, and nobody is forced to be in an uncomfortable position.
Be my guest; it’s a free country. I’d probably even come; I enjoy learning.
We should be able to assume that any person carrying a gun in public has at least some proven basic level of competence. And that starts with background checks and certification.
You don’t have a right to feel safe. You don’t have a right to know anything about any person you see on the street. Any problem you have with seeing someone lawfully exercising their rights is your problem, and yours alone. Your fear and concern do not cause your problem to become the problem of the law-abiding citizen minding his own business, going lawfully about his affairs.
While I don’t have an inherent problem with background checks to the extent that they are effective (the jury is still out on that one), “certification” is a blatant violation of the second amendment. Anything that must be “certified” by the State is no longer a right; it is a privilege.
“I demand that you be checked out, trained and regularly requalified.”
Oh no you di-n’t!
I demand your citizenship be revoked because you clearly have no clue as to what it is to be American.
I just picked one asinine line out of your statement but the whole thing was full retard. I yield to Chip Bennett to set you straight.
Go back to sleep!
Retired LEO,
I will try to answer your incoherent question assuming it was a typo.
“Because certain states don’t recognize your GA permit, you seem to know why training is a waste have you ever taken a class?”
I never said training was a waste. I merely said mandating it is unconstitutional. Yes I did take a class, not for the CCW but for access to the county police range. By the time I took the class, I had watched so many Youtube videos (mostly Hickok45) that the class was useless to me. There was a couple in the next lane that were pretty clueless and they failed to follow orders to put down the weapon when the range was called cold, but dumb asses will always be dumb asses no matter what you “teach” them. You have to allow them to try to defend themselves with a gun until they break a law, or shoot themselves. Guns are not that complicated. They have been designed over the years to be more user friendly. It kills me when guys think the thumb safety on a 1911 takes 10 years of 100 draw and fires a day to perfect its nuance. In a perfect world everybody would be as adept with firearms as you and I (and I am very new to this), but we can’t have that utopia any more than the Liberals. I have trained for a year shooting 3,000 rounds, perfecting my draw, accuracy, trigger control and recoil. I shoot at 1″ dots from 10 yards strong hand only and I don’t miss. A year ago I could not hit a 6″ spot from 7 yards two handed. Now I can double tap inside that spot. Why? Because I enjoy it. But it is not my place to require anyone else to practice or qualify for the right to own a gun.
Correct – she recently cancelled Pennsylvania’s recognition of Idaho CWLs. No reason given.
Idaho, on the other hand, recognizes any CWL/CCP issued by any state in the nation.
@RetiredLEO:
Where else will they learn & provide proof other than a proper instructor.
Parents, perhaps?
And that’s beside the fact that natural human rights protected by the constitution require no such training or evidence in order to exercise (even though that attendant with the exercise of such rights is the responsibility to exercise them properly).
Majority of parents don’t teach common courtesy really expect firearms use. Since personal responsibility has given way to blaming twinkies etc… why should they not be required to have instruction. It is required for a hunting license for most. We have a God given right to hunt. God given supercedes mans dictated rights. Either parent(s) start teaching kids again (but who will teach them) it is a job someone has to do. We are on what 4-5 generations that know nothing but welfare & blame game, not a bit of personal responsibility.
Michael in GA is right, if a state is going to have a carry permit, then GA’s standard is the way to go. Why? less freaking government meddling and less money spent by the private citizen for the RIGHT to use the 2nd amendment. GA is working on constitutional carry too, as we should, because that’s how it should be. Screw a government mandated class, cant use your weapon properly? that’s on you bud. Another place the government doesn’t need to be sticking its big filthy money filled nose.
GA without training actually costs more than SC with training on average. Also the South is a gun based culture & hasn’t had the influx of NY, NJ etc… that some have I live in an area that has had a 600% increase in persons mostly from the blue states. Now making up for lost time buying what they could only dream of before. I dont trust them with no knowledge of guns reading a
book not the same as live fire. If nothing else you can buy a gun w/o NICS as your already vetted.
And further more, the idea that “all you peons require gov mandated training” to begin with is moot, because GA is proof such a system works. The state has not run rampant with negligent discharges or accidental shooting of bystanders in a DGU. If it did the liberals would be plastering it all over the news. Citizens can handle themselves just fine.
Careful making rules, here. There is no reason why you should be able to lad a gun in order to carry it. My wife carried a Sig P230 for years, though she could not manage to load the magazine. Why should she have to? *I* load the magazines, and she can hit what she aims at, what is the problem? No more qualifications required, and her actual carry gun is a revolver for several years, she just qual’d with the semi in order to be ABLE to carry either. Somebody finally figured out that all those complex rules accomplished exactly nothing, and dropped them. I’m hoping for constitutional carry in a few more years.
Ralph – that’s because the signs are posted as you enter the state. Signs on individual businesses would be redundant.
If Google glass catches on, MA will probably just mandate a permanent augmented reality “no guns” sign. It makes things easier.
MD already has a virtual reality “No Guns Allowed” sign because our state government and most local “leaders” live in a fantasy world anyway.
Sure if alternatives are available. However, if they succumbed to Shannon Watts’ harassment – Yes. (IMO).
I do. I actually pay to have my groceries delivered because my local store put up “no guns” signs. It costs me a little more, but it saves me a headache and lets me not help feed the monster.
Just a thought, but, scan your receipt and email it to them to let them know how much revenue they’re missing because of their stance.
If you’re still buying from them, then you aren’t banning them.
I think he meant he has his groceries delivered from another store. (If I understood him wrong, however, you have a good point.)
Not really. It’s a completely different delivery only company. They don’t have physical stores.
Yes. Some of the businesses on this website don’t post signs, even if they have a “no guns” policy. For example, the only cinemas in my region are Regals. I carry anyhow.
Yup. Even in states where signs carry the force of law, a policy without a sign is a legal nothing.
It may be a legal nothing, but it’s not a moral nothing; it’s a moral negative. I won’t go anyplace that I am aware has made an anti-gun statement, much less a legally toothless “policy.”
Sure, if there’s a reasonable alternative.
In Iowa there is no law enforcing the business owners’ self defense free zones so you’re free to ignore the signs. That said there was only one business I know of that had the sign and they went out of business so it’s all good.
I generally do. As I understand it, posted signs here in WV don’t have much legal force (though if they ask me to leave and I don’t I could be charged with trespassing) but since they don’t want me as a customer, I’ll go elsewhere if I can. After spotting a no gun sign I’ve walked away from places where I was about to go and spend money. Their loss.
I’m more forgiving to stores like Target or Starbucks that have made some public request that guns be left at home, but aren’t doing anything to promulgate and enforce a no-gun policy. Likewise, I’ve seen it said in gun forums that there’s a no-gun policy buried deeply in the Cosco membership fine print, but I’ve never seen it.
Basically, I don’t get too worked up if someone makes a polite request or has an unenforced policy somewhere in the fine print. However, when a storefront goes out of its way to advertise that the owner doesn’t want me as a customer, I’ll take my business elsewhere.
Costco:
http://www.costco.com/member-privileges-conditions.html
Last item under general policies.
Local COSTCO does not have the signage required by SC law. As such it does not prevent Concealed Carry.
Have a few AG opinions backing that.
Choice is them or Sams Club picked lesser of the 2 evils, Sams prices are higher than Wal-mart
I suggest you picked a poor yardstick to measure evil with.
The fact that they bothered to print the policy means they are anti gun, more so than places that just said “please don’t” in a letter. Why spend your money there? And if it’s because Sam’s is more expensive than Walmart, well… shop at walmart then. They at least respect your right to self-defense.
If. Wal-mart respected our rights they would have kept the long guns. They would also stop cutting back on knives, ammo, & gun accessories.
If they had not forced the smaller local stores out of business with predatory pricing I’d shop them.
Boycott them all but if you don’t make it known they could care less.
All they care about is how cheap the Chinese can make it.
The East Texas Walmarts have been expanding the ammo and accessories. Long gun display is still weak but about half on display are sporting rifles and no .22 ammo. No pistols.
Ours are getting rid of it all. Past time to move as long as not Houston or DFW.
Let’s see here. Neither Costco nor Walmart sells long guns (the ones here do albeit not semi-auto AR-15 style, but leave that aside). Walmart doesn’t sell all the kinds of ammo they used to, whereas Costco doesn’t sell any at all. Walmart has cut back on accessories, Costco never ever sold them. Walmart lets you carry to whatever extent state law allows, Costco wants you to leave the gun outside.
WHICH one of these is more anti 2A?
Logic Fail. It appears as if you’re trying to rationalize, as pro-gun somehow, your anti-Walmart stance, when guns in fact have nothing whatsoever to do with why you don’t like Walmart.
You indicated your real complaint about Walmart later in your post. We can agree to disagree there, I think. But I have to ask, if you don’t want to shop at Walmart because of predatory pricing and selling Chinese goods, how on earth does that justify shopping at Costco?
Our wal-marts have discontinued long guns as of 10/1 no ammo or even a cleaning kit. Maybe they do in CO. Problem is my choices are limited to wal-mart, sams or costco we have 1 K-mart haven’t shopped them since they caved in to rosie & the other idiot. So unless I drive 90 miles 1 way or shop @ the legally posted mall that’s the lesser of the evils. Have everything but basics shipped in. Toilet paper, towels, foods are bought in bulk & frozen or dried. Built a greenhouse & hunt & fish as much as possible. The only advantage to disability is your sportsmans license is free. I even had an old time butcher teach me too process my own game. 3rd BR is devoted to bulk storage. Eggs & milk is nearly all we buy in small qty.
All of my Walmarts sell AR-15s and and 18 inch shotguns. Can’t ask for much more than that.
My understanding is that the owners of Costco threw a lot of money Obama’s way during his campaigns, they also refuse to put certain Conservative books on the shelf. That being said, I guess they treat their employees pretty well and pay them well too. That tears me as I have more political ideals than just 2A, even though 2A is the leading one for me at this moment. I will say I shop there less than I used to once I heard they are very liberal and my membership there is free, so I’m not paying them to be a member.
Re: WalMart – I guess it depends where you go. Around me, there are 4 WalMarts. Two of them carry arms, two do not. All 4 carry ammunition, though some have more in stock than others. Also, i always see folks doing the WalMart carry – handgun OC is pretty common where I am in VA.
Retired LEO asked a while back: “Why SC other than no OC. & economy is crap.”
Do you understand now? You are ready to move to Texas.
TX is no OC but the wal-marts still sell guns economy is better. Had my full choice I would be in WV or PA mountains but economy is past in the toilet.
“Do you understand now? You are ready to move to Texas.”
Which, as we all know, has no limitation on Open Carry whatsoever. /sarc
Logic fail for you too.
I was being a bit sardonic better economy reason to move. Wal-mart not. Although I can get Vietnamese food in Houston have to go into Charlotte NC to get it here. If you knew what a cops medical pension is you would wet yourself laughing. 29 years after taxes it makes my mortgage payment only.
I carry in Costco all the time. Concealed, though.
I would, but there is only one such sign here in town… a dentist. There is another dentist, but I’ve had no need or desire to see either one. If I do, the choice won’t be difficult.
The senior center here put up “no gun” signs a few years ago, but everyone just ignored it. Signs came down a while later. The best armed people in town ARE the seniors. 🙂
Sounds like a good place to retire to.
Come visit NE rural Wyoming. A wonderful place to live. 🙂 Not perfect, but close.
Hell, it’s even endorsed by aliens. At least some parts of it anyhow.
(I have been to Devil’s Tower, and it’s pretty evident that that part of Wyoming is far more scenic than anything I remember seeing along I-80.)
Have not seen any aliens, any kind so far. But they’d be welcome as long as they know how to wipe their feet. The mud here is terrible sometimes. LOL
To quote Professor Reynolds [Instapundit]: “Yes. Next Question.”
Although the Target “ban” is weak and mostly for show, I haven’t been in a Target since they invoked it. As opposed to the three or four times a month I shopped there before that.
The signs carry no force of law in MI, so most of the time I dont care. The products are a bit more of an issue with me though, I will never buy anything made by Apple for example.
While they carry no force of law, they still indicate a statement by the owners/managers telling you how they feel about you and your rights.
+1. Such a statement has no force of law but they’ve still slapped me across the face. Screw ’em.
Unfortunately, the lure of the Buffalo Wild Wings is too strong to resist! Must have Parmesan Garlic!
YES. In Illinois they are everywhere. No Berettas or Taurus 92. It’s nearly impossible to avoid all the antis but we can try.
I’ve seen those No Berettas signs a lot. I see the occasional Glock or 1911 on a NO sign as well, as well as some revolver or another. No one has ever been so utterly lacking in class as to ban the CZ-75. (Maybe those signs show up in Europe.)
Seriously, it must be hard carrying in Chicago. I don’t envy you.
I haven’t lived in Chicago for 25 years. And Bosh is right-I’ve been around a bunch of government buildings lately. I haven’t got CC yet($). I’m fairly well armed anyway. And it really sucks living less than a mile from Indiana.
I’m in Illinois, and aside from government-funded buildings and properties, those “no guns” signs are fairly rare at commercial businesses… Furthermore, the ones that went up earlier this year are coming down like crazy.
John
“Furthermore, the ones that went up earlier this year are coming down like crazy.”
Do tell … what is the story behind that?
I live in Illinois, and I pretty much only see those signs at places that are required to ban guns (schools, government buildings, bars…) and for some reason most theaters.
I ignore in theaters constantly. Shoot, you don’t even have to conceal, it’s freakin DARK!
From Former Water Walker:
“It’s nearly impossible to avoid all the antis but we can try.”
My experience varies greatly from his, and I’m guessing the prevalence of the official, statutory, Illinois State Police-approved “No guns” signs is very much a local thing.
I have seen precisely three of those signs in my county. One at a bank, one at an auto parts store/junkyard, and one at the county fair.
There are more than half a dozen banks in the county, and only one (locally owned) has posted signs. I sent a letter to its president, though I don’t do personal business there. The owner of the junkyard received a letter from me as well.
Avoiding these places isn’t enough. We need to politely and respectfully notify the business owner why we avoid them.
It’s Cook County,Illinois Curtis. Not Rockford. Looked up on people smart. A mile from Indiana. At least my city isn’t officially anti-gun.
unless there is a 30.06 or 51% notice… carry on. I dont open carry and so far not a single business has “banned” guns with any measure that has force of law so I see no reason to go out of my way to prove anything. That’s no better than the underhanded smear campaign Shannon is running on her side.
In addition to your statement, most of the 30.06 signs in Texas are old. Do not meet the requirements for signage under the recent revisions to the law.
OOOops. The sign has been changed? That probably means the one I ignored last week and giggled because it was wrong, was the new one. But hey, if they wanted me to observe it, they should have notified me of the change, right?
Yeah, go ahead, continue handing your money to some jackass who doesn’t support your second amendment rights. So *what* if the sign has no force of law? He’s still anti gun and you’re still handing him money.
You must be the life of every party you go to
I’m sitting here watching a guy rationalize self-destructive behavior that he is engaged in. Yeah at some point being the life of the party fades to insignificance.
Sorry but it’s true you just cann’t fix stupid. Anyone that supports any vendor that post any sign enforceable or not is just plain stupid. Keep feeding the very people that are trying to take your god given 2nd amendment right. As far as places like Buffalo wild wings they have a liquor license that why it’s posted. You can’t carry anywhere liquor is sold. As far as the comment about Walkman and SAMs club I would hope you know they are one in the same. Walmart has had firearms license pulled in some states such as NY due to small gunshops blaming them for lost sales NY state has given Walmart back firearms permit but also let Gandermountain open stores. The NY Safe Act as it is called was done without any public input. Pushed through at night and made law before anyone knew what was going on. In NJ I give the gov. A lot of credit for vetoing that ridiculous bill that was sent to him by the legislature it woul have bannd all magizine capacity over 10 rounds but without any provision for grandfathering in the guns and magizines owned legally in the state.
Sorry but it’s true you just can’t fix stupid. Anyone that supports any vendor that post any sign enforceable or not is just plain stupid. Keep feeding the very people who are trying to take your god given 2nd amendment right. As far as places like Buffalo wild wings they have a liquor license that why it’s posted. You can’t carry anywhere liquor is sold. As far as the comment about Wal-Mart and SAM’s club I would hope you know they are one in the same. Wal-Mart has had firearms license pulled in some states such as NY due to small gun shops blaming them for lost sales NY state has given Wal-Mart back firearms permit but also let Gander mountain open stores. The NY Safe Act as it is called was done without any public input. Pushed through at night and made law before anyone knew what was going on. In NJ I give the gov. A lot of credit for vetoing that ridiculous bill that was sent to him by the legislature it would have banned all magazine capacity over 10 rounds but without any provision for grandfathering in the guns and magazines owned legally in the state. We gun owners who carry do need to stand together Bloomberg I putting tons of money into these anti gun fights. One last thing those of you who carry into anyplace that is posted no guns. Stop you can and will face charges even if they don’t stick it will cost you and may even cost you you right to own never mind carry. Just avoid anyplace that is posted it is not worth it. If you have to go into a posted place keep a lockbox in your car. Be safe be legal.
“You can’t carry anywhere liquor is sold.”
Depends on what state you’re in. Some states don’t have that prohibition.
Most places I’ve seen explained, in fact I think all, The sign means if they catch you carrying they have the right to ask you to leave, and if you refuse you are guilty of misdemeanor trespassing, which has no effect on your right to own or carry. If they don’t catch you, or don’t ask you to leave, or if you leave when requested, there are no charges. And, obviously, if you are asked to leave you should be certain not to waste any time at the cashier, that would get you a misdemeanor. Straight out the door, say thanks if you got to eat free, promise to come back. They’ll learn.
This is very different than what you are saying. Does anyone actually know which is correct?
No…boycotts don’t work. Better to ignore the policy and conceal carry and if something goes down in this “gun free zone”, defend yourself and prove the need for armed defense…everywhere.
It’s confusing. I just got an iPhone app called “Criminal Protection Zone.” It lists sites in my area that are supposedly posted “no gun.” But one of them is a place I go regularly and I’ve never seen a sign. I wonder if some of these places try to have their cake and eat it too by having a sign to keep the anti-gunners happy, but keeping the sign out of sight so as not to upset the pro-gun people.
“..So should all gun owners boycott all businesses that post no-guns signs? I do. Do you?”
As much as possible, yes.
But it needs to go one step further, and someone upstream already suggested it…. when you go elsewhere you need to copy your receipt and send it to the place you didn’t go. Just not going there has little effect except in the long-run. Sending a copy of a receipt with a nice letter stating why that money went somewhere else will have a much more immediate effect. And if several people do the same, the offensive policy will change much quicker.
If there is a choice I always pick the business that does not post no gun signs.
A sign would carry no weight here.
But if I see one, I’ll boycott it and let them know. And I’d spread the word
Most of the No Guns signs in Missouri disappeared. I can’t really say who has them since I ignore them anyway. I guess if I decide to boycott I’ll have to start paying attention.
St Charles Convention Center has one up for the main ballrooms. ignored it
I hadn’t noticed 🙂
Even if it’s an informal request (a la Starbucks, Chipotle, and Target) I boycott. And those who say they will just conceal, are wrong, wrong, wrong.
The only thing that matters to a business, in the end, is the bottom line. By continuing to shop there you have shown them that their action in going anti-gun, to whatever degree, has no consequence whatsoever. You may be smugly walking around thinking “I am breaking their stupid rule and the sign has no force of law so nyah, nyah, nyah,” or even worse, the oft-repeated “concealed is concealed,” but some anti-gun oxygen thief is still laughing all the way to the bank with your money.
Think about it, and maybe you’ll realize you aren’t being as clever as you think.
Really good point, can’t argue, so maybe I’ll tighten up. Cleverness never was my motivation, but the bliss of ignorance.
Except that, in the MDA extortion examples, the stores really aren’t being anti-2A at all. They are merely maintaining the status quo (following state laws, no explicit carry prohibitions), while writing some non-binding weasel worlds on a piece of paper to make the MDA trolls go away.
They don’t want to be political. They don’t want to get involved. And they clearly don’t want to turn away their 2A constituency. That’s why they’ve responded with non-binding, “polite requests.”
I have no problem with that. They’re trying to run a business, not engage in political issues.
Chip, just followed you on Twitter. You are one of about 3 guys on TTAG that make perfect sense consistently. And no I am not among the 3.
Oh dear; I apologize in advance for the Colts and WordPress overload on your timeline.
Yeah I was checking that out wondering if there would be anything interesting and started thinking…I may have acted too soon.
Grass Roots North Carolina (GRNC) has a program in which the membership identifies businesses to avoid.
http://www.grnc.org/safe-restaurants
Without exception.If I can’t carry my gun there I can’t spend my money there and I let them know it too. I have business cards that say no gun=no money and leave them with the manager.
You can on principle, but unless their customers are overwhelming pro-gun and there are alternatives, it has zero impact. I have yet to see any boycott movement of any kind ever work. Add to the fact that organizing gun owners is like herding cats, its very difficult to make an impact. I see this effort pointless in places like CT, RI, NY or MA.
People said that about places around gun unfriendly IL too, but as I stated in my comment, I have seen the signs come down and have talked to a few business owners who didn’t put up signs because managers warned them of the potential backlash. Granted, these were all independently owned smaller businesses but it has happened, oh and btw, these things only happened when they got word that customers were taking their business elsewhere.
Moms Against All Guns have had some measure of success without the whole country being rabidly anti-gun. Perhaps it can work the other way too.
In IL there was a full on onslaught to get businesses to post the state no carry sign. The politicians that hated the realiy of CCW coming to our state basically threw a tantrum and a bunch of them held meetings with “expert” speakers from anti-gun groups attempting to scare businesses into posting. Luckily some local pro rights groups got people to show up to these meetings uninvited to give our side.
I’m happy to say that most businesses where I live (Western Suburbs of Chicago) do not have signs. I have noticed a few signs that do not conform to the state requirement such as at Buffalo Wild Wings and the closest movie theatre, which means that if I ignore them, I am in no legal trouble, but I just try to stay away from those places since there are competing businesses that respect my rights and my familiy’s safety (there’s a smaller chain wing place in town that’s got better food than BWW and no signs of any kind- score) and provide as good or better products and services anyway. As far as Target, I hate that they had to go the way of Starbucks (which I never purchased from anyway) and I definitely shop there less than before, but I haven’t boycotted them completely since they did not post any signs (again, required to stop me from legally carrying).
I’ve even noticed that the local pizza joint that my family used to go to every Friday evening took down their sign, I hadn’t been there since they posted it and just drove by the other day to check and it was gone, so luckily they got some sense and I can go back there. But any place that has a sign (not required by law, such as bars) is very unlikely to see a dollar from me.
Boycott, no. Avoid, yes.
Indiana(where I live) and Kentucky(where my business is) share reciprocity and neither applies force of law to signage on a business(unless I am mistaken). I will go out of my way regularly to support those businesses that won’t cave or even support my right to carry INSTEAD of any of the target rich environs created by “no weapons allowed” signs. Any other time I just ignore the sign and will gladly leave if asked WITHOUT making a scene.
I’m a bit torn on the boycott subject because the employees usually have no choice when it comes to company policy but their paycheck may still suffer.
I live in a very small town and am not overly concerned with deep concealment(1911, owb, t-shirt) so most people know me by now and know that I carry. The local Waffle house AND Denny’s now have signs but the staff continue to ignore the policy and have never made it an issue. As long as that’s the case I’ll still go there even if it is less often.
If they have a sign I will boycott it. I seldom see any unless I go to Portland and I typically don’t shop the kind of place that has a sign posted anyway.
Local grocery store in STL area (Schnucks) took down their signs in 2009-2010 when an organized boycott began brewing since their main competitor (Dierbergs) did not have signs. Schnucks even gave $$ to the campaign to stop implementation of the CCW law, and they have admitted it was a mistake to alienate their customers. Funny thing is their stores all have banks inside them near the front entrance. Often they got robbed, and the criminals clearly ignored the signs. Even started posting an unarmed guard.
My dentist had a sign up. I had gone once to him, and made the decision I was gonna find a new dentist. Sign was down 6 months later when I went back. I asked him about it. He lifted up his shirt and showed a XDS in a belly band. Apparently, one of his office workers put up the sign without his ok. She got fired and the sign was taken down. All is good. 🙂
This brings up an important point.
When a business sees the light, be sure to forgive them for their prior transgressions!
By your own argument then, Target should be off the table. Shortly after the MDA fiasco, their PR people released statements saying they have no such “no guns” policy. It was linked to here several times by several people if memory serves.
I get your overall point…I really do. But where do we draw the line? In the case of Target, for example, the CEO issued an asinine statement but apparently did not set any company policy and certainly did not place legal signs. TARGET is not ‘anti-gun’ if we judge them on the basis of actions, but perhaps, maybe, the CEO is. Even that is not 100% clear since he sure could have set policy if he wanted to.
Is it to our long term benefit to ‘punish’ an entire business enterprise on the basis of one stupid statement by one employee?
I’m not defending Target specifically, but I think it is all too easy for our pendulum to swing too far into “emotional reactionary mode” on this particular issue.
By my own argument, Target should be off the table? Hardly.
The CEO is no mere rogue employee; he is the agent of the owners. And to the best of my knowledge the request that I not bring my firearm in still stands, even if they didn’t codify it as a policy. He didn’t retract the request; some mealy mouthed corporate bureacrat came along after the fact and tried to straddle both sides of the fence by saying the request wasn’t a part of written policy.
If the owner of a local business asks you not to bring your gun in, they don’t have to write it down in a formal policy document, do they?
Well, see, therein lies what is central to the disagreement we have on this particular example. You are willing to put all the weight on the statement of the CEO and discount the “mealy mouth bureaucrat,” and I’m willing to discount the CEO’s statement as political pandering and take the PR person’s word regarding what actual policy is.
Target, including the CEO, could have ACTED. That’s my criterion for judgment the vast majority of time. What did they DO? Actions speak louder than words.
I don’t care what Target’s CEO “asked me to do.” I really don’t. If he asked me to wear a blue shirt instead of gray, I’d dismiss that as easily. He’s one guy, and though he had the power to set policy he did not do so. He could have, with the mere slightest of effort, written a memo or email declaring a new policy. The absence of action is very telling.
You and I are certainly free to disagree on this and act according to our own interpretations.
Oh, and by the way, I wanted to add that our real beef is with MDA and that ilk that prompted the stupid statement anyway. It is a calculated strategy of the anti’s (and Statists in general) to divide us into factions. They are pretty good at it.
I can’t imagine a less appealing job than being an unarmed bank guard at a bank that has been recently robbed. Mind numbing boredom until someone shows up and, at the very least, ties you up and steals from you. I wonder what they are suppose to do if the bank does get robbed.
Very carefully trained, I’m sure. They are required to yell, “STOP! or I’ll yell STOP again!!”
unless said facility has armed security to protect my family, then its a no-go zone….
I just got off the phone with my closest Target store, which I haven’t been to since that confusing statement they put out in response to MDA. The man I talked to told me open carry isn’t allowed in the store by federal law because they carry booze, but they allow concealed carry in the store. I told him because they allow concealed carry, I would start using his store again.
What federal law is he referencing?
I had a similar thing happen to me at a convenience-cum-liquor store here, and I told them there was no such law…but I was thinking at the state level. If there’s a federal law (and, to be honest, I doubt it), it would be good to know.
I have no idea what law that is, and I didn’t push him on it. I haven’t heard of that law.
At least this store is allowing concealed weapons. In the CEO’s statement, he asked customers to keep all guns out of the stores, and that’s why I haven’t been to Target since then, even though I really like shopping there.
No such “federal law.” I carry openly everywhere except the post office.
What makes me laugh is the idea that the presence of booze would make a difference. Are they afraid that openly carried guns might get drunk and shoot up the place all by themselves, but concealed guns are tea totalers?
My guns are not allowed to drink alcohol. Too hard on the finish. 🙂
A lot of states (Colorado and, apparently, Wyoming not among them!) have rules about carrying in a bar, or carrying in a liquor store, or carrying in a restaurant that serves alcohol, or some variation (Texas seems to have a 51% rule, from what I am reading elsewhere on this thread). Crazy stuff, and if travelling interstate it’s probably wise to just stay the heck away from anyplace alcohol is present, unless you want to cram a bunch of useless trivia about other states’ stupid alky-and-guns-in-the-same-locale rules into your head. Unless it’s a square state. 🙂
RMGO (the local hard-line pro-gun organization) claims that states where the NRA had great amounts of input on the carry law tend to have these sorts of rules. I don’t know if that’s true or not, given the source I tend to take it with a grain of salt.
I belong to RMGO, but I take everything Dudley says with a grain of salt. He does some good work, but in the end it’s all about Dudley.
The bad publicity that companies get by allowing publicity hungry individuals to parade with their ARs and AKs in a shopping mall far outweighs any economic consequences that a boycott by gun activists would have.
Personally, if some lone idiot or two walk in with an AK in low-ready in my local Walmart, I’m immediately and unquestionably out of there, even though I conceal carry.
You don’t want guns banned from ‘wherever’? Don’t do stupid stuff like forcing the store to take a stance.
Though there is an element of truth to what you say, a store that says, in response to, shall we say “exubrerant” open carry, requests that no guns whatsoever be brought in is over-reacting and they don’t deserve a single cent of my money.
There were many bars and restaurants here in AZ that had the no gun sign up (but less so now). I doubt they put up the signs because customers were “brandishing” Ar15s or Aks at the low ready.
Yes.
Yes. The Virginia Citizens Defense League has cards to pass out to businesses that ban firearms. I keep a few in my wallet in case I run across a new posted sign.
Texas State Rifle Association does too. I have some cards but haven’t used them.
I haven’t noticed any no gun signs in Richmond VA, but I wouldn’t shop there if I did.
Well money really is the only language companies understand. Makes sense to speak to them in that tongue.
Of course you should boycott. Now whether you tell them or not is a bit murkier. They’ll spend their profits on finding out what is wrong with their business model. Let them!
The other thing I do is boycott companies in states that have anti-gun laws, like CA, MA, MD, VA, CT, NY, RI, PA etc
That punishes those states, politicians and those that voted for them, by forcing them to increase taxes and reduce the services they receive. Their economy hits them in their collective wallets. Maybe they will smarten up, but I doubt it!
The most recent was Consumer Reports in NY. Just cancelled my subscription to them! ( There, I did say why.)
“They’ll spend their profits on finding out what is wrong with their business model. Let them!” I hope that some business owners are innocently ignorant and that with a little education, they might change their minds.
VA? What anti-gun stuff are you referring? For the time being, TMac is being held by our legislature. Geesh, Sunday hunting just went into effect 1 July.
Beat me to it. Virginia is about as gun friendly as you can get until you enter a Constitutional carry state. It’s way better than Texas.
I try to honor the right of the property owner by not giving them my business whenever possible. Product boycotts do work. Just look at what happened to S&W!
It’s more than a boycott; it’s a matter of practicality. I don’t want to have to remove my gun and leave it in the car to be stolen, so it’s just easier to avoid no-guns places–when there’s a choice.
Caution: Unless the state has an exemption like Texas 30.05, a non-compliant “no guns” sign may still be enough to trigger a trespassing violation, which could still be considered as the sign having “…the force of law.” (IANAL)
Dan.
If they post that policy, I figure they are a magnet for mass killers and Islamic terrorists (redundancy alert), so I won’t put myself in that kind of situation by patronizing them. I also see no reason to give them any of my money.
Organized boycott? Not worth the effort.
But avoid? Yes – combined with an attempt to explain to the manager and/or owner the reason why I have chosen not to patronize the establishment.
I have discovered that visiting a store that bans legal carry increases the odds of needing to defend myself or others. I avoid dangerous places even though I carry, and if that means being selective on where I shop, so be it.
Just about every company of any sophistication is going to bar firearms for employees. You’d be hard pressed to find a company with a written employee handbook, which does not contain a prohibition. Everyone’s petrified of legal liability if anything should happen. It’s easier to defend a prohibition with a lack of duty to protect, than it is to allow firearms and defend against negligence.
So if you’re an absolutist, you’re probably going to have to avoid all but small local businesses, out of solidarity. Short of that, it’s a matter of picking your personal degree of indignation at a company for not sharing your views on practical or philosophical grounds. Whatever your stance, there will certainly be compromises intermingled somewhere in the supply chain. So it’s probably not all that valid for one to hold up one’s own arbitrary line as being the most appropriate.
I would boycott simply on the fact of feeling unsafe……shooters will only go where there is no opposition ….i.e. the movie theater shooter, he only went to the place that banned guns..
I would think if there is someone thinking of doing something crazy it will be at a place that banned guns, so the fewer of these places the higher the probability of the banned establishment getting hit.
I don’t see too many signs here in my part of GA. I have never, as an LEO, had to deal with a complaint from one of those businesses. I have thought about my response and if there is no other issue i would attempt to mediate.
Our law allows businesses to ban gun and includes a trespass offense to violating it… but I won’t be citing anyone. My discretion.
Right in the 1st paragraph.
No Guns=None of my money..
That simple.
So yes I would boycott a merchant 100% and do.
The 1st being the USPO. I wont and haven’t been in one in over 30 years.
Same with FedEx. I will pick something up at the main shipping facility, but no satellite offices.
Usually, yes. I do occasionally enter/purchase something at such a store, but when I do I am armed, ignoring their silly sign. I have thought, but not actually tried, “noticing” such a sign while finishing an expensive dinner and asking management if I should leave (before finishing/PAYING/tipping, etc), or if I am welcome to remain. Seems like it would be fun, but I’m just not daring enough, I guess.
I try to avoid “gun free ” zones.
I will go out of my way to shop elsewhere if I see the “no guns” sign.
She’s right about one thing though, “little things can cause big accidents” It looks like her fathers “little thing” cause a big big accident!
Yes, we should boycott those businesses, BUT boycotting and bitching among ourselves won’t do much good. We also should be sending letters to the corporate offices explaining why we’re taking our business elsewhere.
Dear (Job Creator),
I was disappointed to see the no-firearms sign on the entrance to your business. I value your business/product/service, but I choose not to buy from companies that are hostile to my right to keep and bear arms.
Sincerely,
No. Why boycott a business for their beliefs? If they don’t want guns in their business, that’s as fine as if they do want them in their business. You don’t know why they don’t want guns, you shouldn’t punish them (and if they have the best prices and selection, yourself) just for thinking differently.
Caveats: I can carry concealed, I often do not anyway, and I feel safe where I live (it’s a nice place, really).
I’d love to but both regional hospitals have no gun signs, and well, I need surgery…..
Meh. Just makes “our side” seem like pushy jerks.
I have followed your emails for a while, and find myself in agreement with the majority of your opinions (including weapon evaluations). Here comes the “however.” I have a problem with open carry. It should not be banned (can’t anyway really–2nd Amendment and the Supreme Court cases of late). My problem is I can see no justificaton for it, except as one judge said in one the emails, ” for scaring the bejesus” out of unarmed citizens.
It makes police officers nervous, and generally in my opinion serves no purpose other than the person who is doing it to show off.
I carry concealed with permit, and have done so for many years. I believe it is my responsibility to carry, to protect my loved ones, and myself. Okay–I’m done.
I will turn and walk away, and never return to any establishment that posts a no-guns sign. Period.
I will also drive way out of my way to give my business to one that resists tyrrany of a faux entity like Everytown/MDA/MAIG. They are simply progressive agit prop.
More on the funding method by Billionaire Bloomberg, writer Frank Miniter at NRO- here:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386812/anti-gun-billionaires-frank-miniter
(h/t Jeff Soyer at Alphecca, another great citizen gun blog : http://www.alphecca.com/?p=3553 )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_in_the_Soviet_Union
Gun owners need to do more than boycott single business that do not respect 2A rights.
Guns owners need to boycott states and business that support states that do no respect 2A rights.
MDA, Mom Dumb Asses.
Comments are closed.