Gun Control: Shiny Toy Guns

[Topoliani]

Just say "no guns" instead. Saying "no gun owners" targets the person specifically, and is completely unnecessary.

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

Say goodbye to 32 - 43% of the market if you target the person

Oh, and also, segregation doesn't get you good press. So that's another +10-30%

[Republic of Keshiland]

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

Say goodbye to 32 - 43% of the market if you target the person

Oh, and also, segregation doesn't get you good press. So that's another +10-30%

Only 20% of my state owns guns. The publicity would help get recognition. Plus I would simply say. This is my way of protesting the lack of gun control and the constant mass shootings in this country.

[Len Hyet]

Awesome I can put a sign up saying no gun owners allowed!

Just say "no guns" instead. Saying "no gun owners" targets the person specifically, and is completely unnecessary.

I agree. Adding a third word vastly increases the odds Keshi'll misspell something and make the entire sign illegible.

[Kernen]

Just say "no guns" instead. Saying "no gun owners" targets the person specifically, and is completely unnecessary.

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

You couldn't prove it. There's no penalty for lying about owning a gun to use your business, and even if you didn't run afoul of 42 USC 2000(e) (the US Civil Rights Act), you run afoul of a number of other constitutional concerns, state and federal, as well as any state or local public accommodation law. Frankly, there's a strong argument that you're in violation of the negative commerce clause depending on the nature of your business.

[Thermodolia]

Awesome I can put a sign up saying no gun owners allowed!

You could just post No Firearms, but that's subject to other permissions and easements like the telcom or energy transmission easements I pointed out above. In which case, you really can't say No Guns, because there's a contractual or superseding waiver.

Its even worse if you have waterfront property, because regardless of where your property line goes, anything under the high water mark is generally public access easement, guns and all. So somebody could stand ankle deep in the water on your property waving a rifle.

And since Keshi hates guns I’m not going to get shot

[Telconi]

Just say "no guns" instead. Saying "no gun owners" targets the person specifically, and is completely unnecessary.

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

Why would anyone obey the sign. I walk right past no guns signs all the time without a second thought.

[Republic of Keshiland]

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

You couldn't prove it. There's no penalty for lying about owning a gun to use your business, and even if you didn't run afoul of 42 USC 2000(e) (the US Civil Rights Act), you run afoul of a number of other constitutional concerns, state and federal, as well as any state or local public accommodation law. Frankly, there's a strong argument that you're in violation of the negative commerce clause depending on the nature of your business.

There is objectively no legal difference between saying No guns allowed or saying no guns owners allowed. Just like saying no drinking and no drunks is the same and no smoking or no smokers is the same.

[Thermodolia]

Just say "no guns" instead. Saying "no gun owners" targets the person specifically, and is completely unnecessary.

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

I’m sure the robbers will love your place of business

[Republic of Keshiland]

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

Why would anyone obey the sign. I walk right past no guns signs all the time without a second thought.

Cause the door will have a metal detector that when it goes off will give us legal right to send over the security guard

[Thermodolia]

You couldn't prove it. There's no penalty for lying about owning a gun to use your business, and even if you didn't run afoul of 42 USC 2000(e) (the US Civil Rights Act), you run afoul of a number of other constitutional concerns, state and federal, as well as any state or local public accommodation law. Frankly, there's a strong argument that you're in violation of the negative commerce clause depending on the nature of your business.

There is objectively no legal difference between saying No guns allowed or saying no guns owners allowed. Just like saying no drinking and no drunks is the same and no smoking or no smokers is the same.

Nobody says “no smokers, or no drunks” because, especially in the case of smokers, they might not be smoking or drinking at the time and you just violated a dozen ordinances

[The New California Republic]

Just say "no guns" instead. Saying "no gun owners" targets the person specifically, and is completely unnecessary.

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

So it is acceptable to discriminate against people based on a trait? Time to bring back those signs saying "no blacks" then...

[Thermodolia]

Why would anyone obey the sign. I walk right past no guns signs all the time without a second thought.

Cause the door will have a metal detector that when it goes off will give us legal right to send over the security guard

Anything can set off a metal detector. A damn belt buckle and metal medical implants will do that. I’m sure that you really don’t want the lawsuit from denying a handicap individual

[Republic of Keshiland]

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

So it is acceptable to discriminate against people based on a trait? Time to bring back those signs saying "no blacks" then...

Only if that trait is not chosen or passed down (like religion) If someone chose to have something like (chosing to smoke drink carry) then its fair game

[The New California Republic]

There is objectively no legal difference between saying No guns allowed or saying no guns owners allowed.

Yes. There. Is. One is targeting a person, the other is targeting an object. Surely to God you can see that? Banning the former is discriminatory, but banning objects isn't.

[Thermodolia]

So it is acceptable to discriminate against people based on a trait? Time to bring back those signs saying "no blacks" then...

Only if that trait is not chosen or passed down (like religion) If someone chose to have something like (chosing to smoke drink carry) then its fair game

Um dude people can choose religion. Converts are a thing.

[Kernen]

You couldn't prove it. There's no penalty for lying about owning a gun to use your business, and even if you didn't run afoul of 42 USC 2000(e) (the US Civil Rights Act), you run afoul of a number of other constitutional concerns, state and federal, as well as any state or local public accommodation law. Frankly, there's a strong argument that you're in violation of the negative commerce clause depending on the nature of your business.

There is objectively no legal difference between saying No guns allowed or saying no guns owners allowed. Just like saying no drinking and no drunks is the same and no smoking or no smokers is the same.

That's objectively false. Which is par for the course with you.

No guns bans the carrying of guns. No gun owners prevent people who own guns, whether or not they have the guns. One bans an object, the other a person. A person who owns guns but doesn't have them on their person at that time is permitted to enter, say, airports, courts, and schools.

The same analysis can apply to no alcohol and no smoking. Smokers can be present, they merely cannot smoke on the premise. Same with drinkers.

Do you even think about what you type?

[The New California Republic]

So it is acceptable to discriminate against people based on a trait? Time to bring back those signs saying "no blacks" then...

Only if that trait is not chosen or passed down (like religion) If someone chose to have something like (chosing to smoke drink carry) then its fair game

Nope. Wrong. You are trying to legitimize discrimination. Why are you targeting the person, and not the object? Is it through some misguided or twisted desire to punish?

[Gig em Aggies]

Just say "no guns" instead. Saying "no gun owners" targets the person specifically, and is completely unnecessary.

That's the point I want gun owners to know I or my business does not accept or want them. That way everyone who does not have a gun can feel safe.

no you still don't listen he said just post a sign saying no guns allowed like this

but that's only if your local law codes allow you to post that. besides you cant say no gun owners because then you would be in violation of the constitution and the civil rights act

[Gig em Aggies]

So it is acceptable to discriminate against people based on a trait? Time to bring back those signs saying "no blacks" then...

Only if that trait is not chosen or passed down (like religion) If someone chose to have something like (chosing to smoke drink carry) then its fair game

No no its not you really need to sit down and read local business laws & ordinances as well as federal laws before posting stupid shit like this again.

[Republic of Keshiland]

A good gun law for an anti gun state would be simply this. Have some guns open and some guns conceal carry but have it be completely random so that someone with the same model but a 1 year difference might have different rules as to conceal or open carry. This way you could arrest and jail people for mistakenly doing the wrong one.

Then post a super long list of every gun type make modal and year and have CC or OC next to them. People would stop carrying outside their home because they would simply not want to risk it.

[Telconi]

Why would anyone obey the sign. I walk right past no guns signs all the time without a second thought.

Cause the door will have a metal detector that when it goes off will give us legal right to send over the security guard

Nobody is going to shop at a store with a security checkpoint...

[Washington Resistance Army]

Then post a super long list

Find on page

Gee, took me all of 5 seconds to beat your stupid ass idea.

[Telconi]

So it is acceptable to discriminate against people based on a trait? Time to bring back those signs saying "no blacks" then...

Only if that trait is not chosen or passed down (like religion) If someone chose to have something like (chosing to smoke drink carry) then its fair game

So I can ban married homosexuals?

[Salandriagado]

You couldn't prove it. There's no penalty for lying about owning a gun to use your business, and even if you didn't run afoul of 42 USC 2000(e) (the US Civil Rights Act), you run afoul of a number of other constitutional concerns, state and federal, as well as any state or local public accommodation law. Frankly, there's a strong argument that you're in violation of the negative commerce clause depending on the nature of your business.

There is objectively no legal difference between saying No guns allowed or saying no guns owners allowed. Just like saying no drinking and no drunks is the same and no smoking or no smokers is the same.

There's a massive difference between the two.

[Republic of Keshiland]

Only if that trait is not chosen or passed down (like religion) If someone chose to have something like (chosing to smoke drink carry) then its fair game

So I can ban married homosexuals?

No because Sexuality is not a choice.