Stupid Bigot alert: Gun range says it is a ‘Muslim Free Zone’

[cali]

The owner of the gun range who says ‘no Muslims allowed’ says she made the change because of incidents like the shooting at Fort Hood, the Boston Marathon Bombing and now, a beheading at a food processing plant.

Jan Morgan owns The Gun Cave Indoor Firing Range in Hot Springs, Arkansas and has received tons of support since making the change. Morgan posted her reasons for the ban on her website.

Morgan says she’s read the Koran and doesn’t like how it talks about causing harm to those who won’t convert to Islam. She also says she has received threats to her own life after sharing her thoughts on the Koran.

<snip>

She even addresses the religious discrimination problem.

“I view Islam as a theocracy, not a religion.” Morgan added. “The US Constitution does not protect a theocracy.”

<snip>

http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/gun-range-says-it-muslim-free-zone/nhYBC/

Bigotry against Muslims is increasing in this country- as if it weren't bad enough.

[geek tragedy]

1. is that legal? nt

[cali]

3. blatantly and patently no wriggle room illegal

[strawberries]

4. is it private

If so then how could it be illegal?

[geek tragedy]

5. google "civil rights act" nt

[strawberries]

8. I assume you are talking about the civil rights act of 1964

so let me repeat my question, is it private or is it known as "public accommodations"?

that outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.[6] It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (known as "public accommodations&quot .


Curious, we do have black colleges, and then there is our public and private colleges that take folks based on their grades. They take people of all color, religions etc. but within them they have fraternities and sororities, private and some based even based on the color of your skin. Oh my are you ok with this?

[geek tragedy]

10. getting cocky now that you're over 100 posts.

You're defending anti-Muslim discrimination as legal, and then complaining about historically black colleges and fraternities.

Hmmm

[dontshoot]

21. The poster is asking a question Like I am

Is it legal what the shooting range did if it's private members only?

There was or is a gym in my area that was called curves for women. It was a private members only gym

Was it legal to not allow men to join?

[cali]

26. this is not a private club.

Curves is.

[dontshoot]

28. Yup ,I just looked it up

This is not a coffee and donut shop. This is a live fire indoor shooting range. People come here to buy, rent, and shoot lethal weapons
Read more at http://janmorganmedia.com/2014/09/business-muslim-free-zone/#ySJQp8iLKM0BA1Id.99

[cali]

32. you really like fail. What is so hard to grasp here?

this is NOT a private business.

love how you quote that bigoted piece of shit as if the moron had any legal authority. brilliant..

[dontshoot]

37. what?

[strawberries]

39. thank you nt

[ieoeja]

41. Re-read it. He was agreeing with you in that last post. n/t

[strawberries]

40. thanks dontshoot nt

[gollygee]

19. It's a public accommodation

Even the Elk's Club, which is a private club, is still a public accommodation and can't discriminate.

The law allows you to discriminate about who is allowed entry into your home, if you so wish. Places open to the public, whether privately owned or not, are public acccommodations. Gun ranges are included in that.

[Eleanors38]

6. This place sounds like a "public range," as in open to the public.

The ownership can be private, but it is still a public accommodation. In shooting parlance, a "private range" is for members only, and membership is usually achieved by invitation from an existing member in good standing, subject to approval by the general membership. In other words, Jim or Mary cannot go to the Austin Rod & Gun Club and expect to use the range.

[dontshoot]

12. Curves for women , a gym I can't join

Is that legal?

[MohRokTah]

22. Curves is a private membership only club.

The Gun Cave Indoor Shooting Range is a public shooting range according to the owner.

[dontshoot]

25. Then she is going to be sued

[gollygee]

27. I think it depends on what state you're in

You can check about your state specifically, and you can talk to your state representative if it isn't legal in your state and fight it.

I don't know if any men have sued to join curves. Someone would have to be the first. That could be you. I think you might very well win.

[cali]

29. yes men have sued to join curves

they lost.

http://www.seattlepi.com/lifestyle/article/So-far-women-only-gyms-are-allowed-by-the-courts-1133532.php

You're right that it's state by state.

[dontshoot]

31. lol I don't want to join it

I'm okay with women having a gym they can work out at

[gollygee]

34. Then why are you complaining?

You have to have some historical context behind the law. Places that only allowed white men were used historically as places to make business connections, and people who couldn't join were kept from having a great number of opportunities. Women's only places like Curves are not usually focused on because women haven't historically had the power to turn Curves or someplace like it into a place where business connections of that level are made. So not having entry to Curves doesn't mean you're less likely to meet the people you need to know in order to get a job or advance in your job. But it does seem to me that it would likely fit under the same law regardless. I do find myself skeptical about people's motivations when they focus on groups that don't have power when it comes to laws like this.

[dontshoot]

35. I'm not complaining

I just thought of it as an example due to the subject matter in the thread

[Eleanors38]

58. I have no idea. But a public range cannot discriminate

In violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. To the degree this outfit has working/contractual relationships with organizations like the NRA, the range may face sanction from those organizations, as a concealed-carry instructor in Texas did when he said he would not teach Muslims.

[bullwinkle428]

7. You realize there are no more segregated lunch counters anymore, right?

[strawberries]

11. yes I do

thanks, lunch places tend to be public. You can't discriminate

[MohRokTah]

18. This gun range is not a private club, it is a public business. eom

[cali]

20. lol. uh, it's illegal under the civil rights act of 1964 and under the Arkansas

civil rights law of 1993. It couldn't be clearer.

You actually think a private business can refuse to serve blacks or Jews or gays or Pentecostals?

[hobbit709]

2. someone should put up a sign in front

"CAUTION: NO BRAIN ZONE"

[dontshoot]

9. If it's private then I believe it's legal

There are all Jewish clubs , all Polish clubs , all black clubs so if the range is private I believe it's legal
Hell there's an all Black club in congress.....

[MohRokTah]

16. IT's a public business. She's in blatant violation of the law. eom

[dontshoot]

23. agree if it's open to the public

[MohRokTah]

30. It is.

http://www.ontargetfr.com/Range%20Pricing.htm

They have memberships, but they have pricing for non members and conduct conceal carry courses in affiliation with the Arkansas Concealed Carry Association.

[Eleanors38]

59. The ACCA may penalize this range, too.

[MohRokTah]

13. Doesn't matter how she views Islam, she's in violation fo the law. eom

[strawberries]

15. she is the owner

and it sounds private enough said

[MohRokTah]

17. Nope, it's a public business. She says so and expects to lose it.

REligion is a protected class and cannot be discriminated against by a public business:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/09/robert-farago/officially-declare-business-gun-cave-indoor-shooting-range-muslim-free-zone/

[cali]

24. bzzzt. giant fail. but love how you think this is fine and dandy

you're posting on the wrong site.

[dontshoot]

33. It doesn't sound private , I belong to a private club and hers sounds open to the public

People can pay a fee to rent guns

[Lex]

38. WRONG

But why am I not surprised you are.

[strawberries]

45. I don't know

explain it and then we can all know

[gollygee]

48. Private doesn't mean owned by an individual

it means a place that is not open to the public. This is a place that is open to the public. You can google "civil rights act of 1964" for more information.

[strawberries]

56. why

I am not banned from anything. Except maybe a mens club, but from reading here I can go to curves and they can't.

Wouldn't curves be considered a public place?

peace

[gollygee]

57. Read the thread

It's already in here. They can in some states and can probably fight it in the rest of them.

[tritsofme]

42. Based on the story, I'm not so sure.

Had she ever actually denied service to a Muslim on account of his religion, then she would definitely be in violation of law.

However I am less sure if it is illegal to post a sign like that with the intention of discouraging patronage, if you never follow through with denying service. Really more of an academic question than anything, as I'm sure this person would relish the opportunity to deny service to a Muslim.

[gollygee]

43. No

You can't have a "whites only" or "no black people" sign at a restaurant, and you can't do this.

[tritsofme]

44. Why not?

Again, not trying to defend these guys, or suggest this situation is applicable, but I do find it an interesting hypothetical.

If it is just a sign, when does the crime take place and what is it? If you actually did serve people from the group mentioned on the sign, could it not be argued that the right to display such a sign is a free speech issue?

My understanding, possibly mistaken, is that there is no crime until service is denied.

[gollygee]

46. The right to free speech is not absolute

and you can't advertise that you discriminate. This is not the first time this has come up even at DU.

[tritsofme]

49. I'll have to do some research on this

If you had a link I would be interested to read it, but I'm not yet convinced.

When push comes to shove, if the service is actually provided to a member of a protected group that is disparaged in the sign, I'm not sure they would be guilty of much more than being horrible people with the worst customer service imaginable.

What law does the nasty sign break, if it is a "decoration"? It seems like it should be a fairly clear free speech issue to me. I don't believe the law mandates a pleasant customer experience.

[gollygee]

50. The way Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is written

it says you can't deny services, and you also can't coerce people, or try to coerce, or restrict people, or try to restrict, etc. I don't remember the exact wording but what it comes down to is you can't deny services, and you can't intentionally try to lead people to believe you won't provide services as a method of corecring them either.

[tritsofme]

51. That makes sense.

I'll have to do some reading. Thanks.

[pepperbear]

14. ...

And here I was being afraid of 9 year old girls.

[Lex]

36. Nice to know they are such fearful little babies.

[mr blur]

47. She obviously hasn't read the Bible and thought about the bigotry and bloodshed in it.

Then she could say, "No Christians Allowed" and add, "I view Christianity as a personal relationship with a bloodthirsty, misogynistic, homophobic, genocidal lunatic, not a religion"

[MADem]

52. Someone oughta teach those geniuses about taquiyya.

Someone who is Muslim can show up there, see the sign, and claim to be a Christian or a Jew. It is ok in some sects of Islam to conceal one's true faith if one believes one might be in danger by revealing it.

[louis-t]

53. How can a religion be a "theocracy"?

I know, she meant 'theology', but jeez....

[gollygee]

55. Oh she could have meant theocracy

She sounds like someone who listens to Mark Steyn.

[ZombieHorde]

54. This thread is hilarious. nt

[Eleanors38]

61. It is a bit of a gas for pro-2A folks.

[ZombieHorde]

62. I think it's a bit of a gas for just about anyone who steps backs and looks at the thread.

Not just for Bill of Rights fans.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

60. Kinda interesting to see so many suddenly demanding broader access to gun range patronage. nt

[Eleanors38]

63. When the WASP narrative breaks down, no tellin' what happens!

[chrisa]

64. She never read the Bible, I guess.

[KamaAina]

65. I hope she has the Muslo-Detector X2000!

You never know who might slip by.



?

[KentuckyWoman]

66. Haha... was just thinking the same thing. How would she know?

Sometimes the stupid burns.

[JI7]

67. how about incidents like Sandy Hook, Theater Shooting, Sikh Temple shooting

etc ?

[davidthegnome]

68. Interesting thread.

If I had a Gun range... and put up a very public sign that stated "No Christians allowed!" then went on to explain that I saw Christianity as more of a ponzi scheme than an actual religion... think I could get away with it? Me neither. Same thing if I put up a sign forbidding, say, vegetarians, or Jehovah's witnesses, or people who believe in Santa Clause.

Discrimination is discrimination. It is very much illegal to exclude Muslims based on their religion, regardless of whether or nor she "considers" it to be a religion. She can claim whatever reasoning or logic she likes, she can claim God told her to keep them out while she was having tea with Jesus and Elvis. It makes no difference.

That people are doing this shit and that there are other people who are praising them for it just blows my mind. I guess I shouldn't be so surprised, given the average intelligence, human decency, humility or compassion of the average "christian conservative", but I am surprised, nonetheless - surprised and disgusted. Whatever happened to... "Let he who has not sinned...", "Forgive seven times seven...", "love thy enemy..."...

I wonder if she claims to be a Christian. If she does, I wonder how she justifies her bigotry, given the fact that Jesus was basically a fellow who told us to love one another, to not judge one another, to give and to share.

This should not be tolerated in any sane society.

[X_Digger]

69. Well, 'vegetarian' isn't a religion, so feel free to discriminate there.

Protections extend to members of protected classes, and being a vegetarian isn't one of them.

I can even discriminate against people not wearing shoes! *gasp* Or people wearing the color red! *shock*

[davidthegnome]

70. What if their religion forbid them to eat meat?

I'm sure a case could be made for discrimination if I was particularly nasty about it. I could put up signs that said things like, "Vegetarian! An old Indian word for Bad Hunter" (Come to think of it, I've actually seen a sign like this at a neighbor's house...)

There are exceptions to just about everything, in one way or another... but to forbid people based on something so silly strikes me as childish, repugnant, petulant, and really kind of redundant, on top of being bigoted, idiotic, and outright narcissistic. The notion that this sort of philosophy is somehow okay: "Oh, I'm a Christian. I follow a REAL religion and God, not like you guys, nuh uh. How do I know this? Cuz the bible says so. And my mamma said so - and I love my mamma, so there."

These are grown ass adults. They should behave like them.

I suppose not everyone sees religion as silly. Personally (for me) though, it would be like me denying people entry into my store (if I had a store) if they believe in Aliens, or if they thought Elvis was alive and well somewhere (maybe he is) or that the robot apocalypse is already here.

What people believe in private, religiously, scientifically, what have you... it's their own damn business. No business should have the right to reject them based on that. Based on actions, overall cleanliness, or lack of clothing? Sure. But not on internal philosophy, theology, or belief systems.

Sorry, I've had too much caffeine. Going to go watch a movie or something.