General Discussion

beevul

(12,194 posts)

52. Welcome to the crowd.

Mon Jul 23, 2012, 11:54 AM

Jul 2012

"So whether you intended it that way or not, it would penalize businesses for not wanting guns in their business."

Yeah, I get it. Companies that advertise a product as "lead free" should be just given a pass. They don't need to be required by law to follow through with it, right?

"Smoke free" establishments? I'm sure everyone would be willing to give them a pass. They don't need to be required by law to follow through with it, right?

Its really simple - If theyre going to say it, they really should do it.

"It's also a bit insulting to the rest of us to made to feel that the only way we are allowed to be safe is to be surrounded by guns which we see as the source of the problem to begin with."

Insulting?

No, I'll give you insulting:

The shooting in CO, happened at a "gun free zone", just like Columbine, and VT, and a host of others.

And every single time, not so much as a peep about the failure of the "gun free zone". No sir. Instead, you get what we have here today, and have had since last week. Railing against the second amendment. Railing against gun owners. Railing against anyone that doesn't see these so called "reasonable restrictions" as reasonable.

And now when it comes right down to it, and a proposal is made to actually do something to ensure that these so called "gun free zones" actually ARE gun free, the "reasonable restrictions" crowd, and the ones that typically do all the railing I mentioned above...

Well, they just aren't having any.

Thats insulting.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

85 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A proposal to prevent tragedies like what happened in CO. [View all] beevul Jul 2012 OP

So your concern is penalizing businesses that don't want your toy on their property Scootaloo Jul 2012 #1

i think his point if im readingit correctly is that if a business wont let you protect yourself loli phabay Jul 2012 #2

Why not just write a law... Scootaloo Jul 2012 #3

no its saying that if you make a rule that you must be unarmed on this property then you also are re loli phabay Jul 2012 #4

Again, it's a penalty for businesses that don't want your toys on their premises. Scootaloo Jul 2012 #5

Is there a possibility cbrer Jul 2012 #7

When Florida first passed "shall issue" concealed carry ... spin Jul 2012 #12

Or a Zimmerman. Hoyt Jul 2012 #28

Same thing lastlib Jul 2012 #49

dude you r missing the point, its about claiming to be gun free and making it gun free loli phabay Jul 2012 #8

Firstly Reasonable_Argument Jul 2012 #10

Businesses who are prohibiting guns on their site are just doing what the right wing state gubment Hoyt Jul 2012 #29

Wait a minute. beevul Jul 2012 #11

Thats laughable. beevul Jul 2012 #6

i get what you are saying as we had this argument at a local county meeting about making loli phabay Jul 2012 #9

I suggest below that a tax be placed on all gun sales, public and private, to JDPriestly Jul 2012 #54

I don't exactly follow the point, as in I was not aware that the theatre advertised being jp11 Jul 2012 #13

no good post. problem is its not the nor loli phabay Jul 2012 #14

Fine sadbear Jul 2012 #15

Yes, an annual ad valorem tax on guns should cover it nicely.. Fumesucker Jul 2012 #16

Exactly, and a hefty fee on the manufacturers for making the dang things and promoting more guns. Hoyt Jul 2012 #31

Absolutely ridiculous to put the entire burden on theaters, restaurants, supermarkets, bars, Chorophyll Jul 2012 #17

I do leave my gun at home. beevul Jul 2012 #18

Sue them. They made the 'gun free' claim. Edweird Jul 2012 #19

i wonder how that would work i am.sure theres a lawyer somewhere willing to look loli phabay Jul 2012 #23

Isn't there a place for compromise? turtlerescue1 Jul 2012 #20

You and I define "compromise" differently, apparently. beevul Jul 2012 #21

So what would end the insanity Americans face? turtlerescue1 Jul 2012 #30

you realise six tbousands rounds is not a lot to even a semi.seriou shooter. loli phabay Jul 2012 #24

You guys shooting any silhouette targets (human likenesses)? Hoyt Jul 2012 #32

yeah we use the standard ones for the handguns. concentric ones for rifles and with the shotguns we loli phabay Jul 2012 #35

Yeah those gun festivals/parties are so much fun. Hoyt Jul 2012 #39

yjp they are fun. you get some good practice and the family and friends who dont have space loli phabay Jul 2012 #40

I so don't get it. smirkymonkey Jul 2012 #81

Sorry, but 6000 rounds seems like "overkill" to me. turtlerescue1 Jul 2012 #34

no way to guarantee stable prices.... ileus Jul 2012 #71

Well gee, just abolish even more of our civil liberties why don't you. MadHound Jul 2012 #22

Civil liberties? beevul Jul 2012 #25

Sorry, but I consider it to be a civil liberty MadHound Jul 2012 #27

You're forgetting. beevul Jul 2012 #36

So how many businesses do you think would adapt this? MadHound Jul 2012 #38

Then lets stop businesses from declaring themselves "gun free". hack89 Jul 2012 #42

Landmarks, Courts, DMV, some high rise buidlings in NYC, and NYS HockeyMom Jul 2012 #26

Thank you for your patently idiotic suggestion.... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #33

Did you bother to read what I wrote? beevul Jul 2012 #37

OMG Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #41

If they have no way to enforce it then "gun free" is meaningless hack89 Jul 2012 #44

They can enforce it... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #47

I was thinking more about criminals and others that carry illegally hack89 Jul 2012 #50

They are also more likely to circumvent any security measures... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #65

I am just pointing out that "gun free" is a meaningless term hack89 Jul 2012 #66

No, it's not... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #77

And that is enough to stop a determined mass murderer? Really? nt hack89 Jul 2012 #79

There is no security system on earth... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #82

So if gun free zones are not about stopping shootings hack89 Jul 2012 #83

Lol, the tables have turned, I guess. beevul Jul 2012 #45

They only have to provide the security... Mike_Valentine Jul 2012 #43

The next mass shooting would probably be of people waiting in line at a metal detector. Nye Bevan Jul 2012 #46

so your proposal to stop gun fatalities is to grantcart Jul 2012 #48

+1 booley Jul 2012 #70

of course that will be really expensive booley Jul 2012 #51

Welcome to the crowd. beevul Jul 2012 #52

Oh where to begin? booley Jul 2012 #55

By reading what I actually wrote. beevul Jul 2012 #62

I read what you wrote.. did you? booley Jul 2012 #69

And this, is where we disagree. beevul Jul 2012 #72

beevul, great idea, and let's tax the sales of guns to pay for placing these JDPriestly Jul 2012 #53

and for the security guards booley Jul 2012 #56

Ever been to a best buy store? beevul Jul 2012 #58

that's christmas booley Jul 2012 #60

The last time I was at a best buy was in april. beevul Jul 2012 #63

so what do you when your keys set them off? booley Jul 2012 #68

Yes. As I point out, people without guns create no risk, so those who buy JDPriestly Jul 2012 #74

Gun sales are already taxed. beevul Jul 2012 #57

so other people will have to pay for your proposal booley Jul 2012 #61

For the 5th or 6th time in this thread... beevul Jul 2012 #64

still not working booley Jul 2012 #67

I don't want to pay a premium for the right to be in a gun-free environment JDPriestly Jul 2012 #73

Well Reasonable_Argument Jul 2012 #75

That's the most ridiculous idea I've heard... 99Forever Jul 2012 #59

Maybe we should just put the responsibility on the potential victims. We could all SDjack Jul 2012 #76

And if I shoot you... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #78

Yes !!! It will work just like it works now. It's the victims' fault for SDjack Jul 2012 #84

I like the way you think... Jeff In Milwaukee Jul 2012 #85

It's gone as I expected nadinbrzezinski Jul 2012 #80