Yesterday, I spoke about my problem with presumptive “no carry” in businesses. Here is one way I could accept it: acknowledge that choices have consequences.
Adopt a legal path for showing that prohibiting patrons from being armed contributed to the crime that followed. Disarm me through policy, and a business is then legally responsible for providing reasonable protection from crime on that property. That includes lockers for securing my weapon, and some means of protection from armed wolves looking to feed on disarmed sheep.
The legal system of no carry (posted or presumptive) allows a business owner to use the force of law to disarm its patrons while at the same time giving them a pass on legal liability when their policy allowed an armed criminal to prey on the unarmed patrons.
The effect of this allows an end run around my constitutional rights.
3 Comments
Jonathan · July 7, 2022 at 9:47 am
This is basically what the recent Kansas law requires – if a building, even government ones, wants to ban carry, they have to make sure that no one is carrying. This means x-ray machines, metal detectors, and armed guards (which few facilities will actually implement).
Liberals howled when this went into place but of course their predicted problems never occurred.
Alarm Klaxons · July 8, 2022 at 8:41 pm
Local stores say only “open carry” is prohibited and Constitutional Carry passed back in the spring.
Just keep quiet and keep it put up unless something drastic jumps off and never shop somewhere like WOKE Target where you are the target.
Carlos the Jackal · July 9, 2022 at 3:45 pm
Exactly.
More to the point; what I have in my pocket or on my belt is my personal business, not anyone else’s, so mind your own business..
Comments are closed.