Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 by public property do you mean publicly owned or just someplace that is open to anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Publicly owned and not designated to be under someones control as private property. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Publicly owned and not designated to be under someones control as private property.Ok, I made the distinction at Private Personal and Private Public.Your house fineYour public bowling alley, not so muchBut that's my personal opinion, it's easy enough to just avoid criminal protection zones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 That's were you're not understanding. Private public should fall under the same protection as private personal. We have gotten so used to the government interfering with our business that you choose to reinforce the bad behavior. We should be able to post our private property any way we choose regardless if we are trying to conduct business there or not. If someone wants to post a sign that they won't do business with husband beating gay Jews they should be able to. If someone doesn't want to hire black blind conjoined midgets they should be able to have that policy. If someone doesn't want to make their facility accessible to those who are handicapped they should be allowed to do so. The market and the conscience of those people who are exposed to that business will determine its success. We have so many gun laws that people start to think that we should have them. Just like they have grown accustom to the government involved in everything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KTMRIDER Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 If someone doesn't want to hire black blind conjoined midgets they should be able to have that policy. So are you saying you won't let me, my brother Darnell , spot our guide dog and our step stools on your property? Yo man d'ats some cruel shit:cool: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Your language is funny.. the bowling alley isn't 'public' at all. It's a private business that you choose to patronize. That makes it not infringement. If you HAD to use that bowling alley AND your taxes paid for it then it would fall under infringement. The final choice is ultimately yours. Now' date=' if the owner wishes to allow CHL holders into his bowling alley but cannot due to liquor laws then that's another story. That is government telling you where you can and cannot carry. That's infringement on your rights as a gun owner and the rights of the private property owner.[/quote']But I don't think a business should be able to say "whites only", you guys are saying they should have the right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I believe a privately owned business should be able to say' date=' "No fucking Honkies!" if they feel like it. If a business owner is stupid enough to put a sign out front that states, "No Jews Allowed" they should be able to. The market will take care of such idiocy in due time. Government involvement isn't necessary.[/quote']Your principle is correct, you'd THINK the market would take care of it, but I don't think it will.I completely "appreciate" what you guys are saying about private businesses should be able to do whatever they want, and for a long time I had very similar opinions, I just don't feel that way anymore. Hell, I still think there should be movie theaters with "No Children" rules.I think what people forget is that the Whites vs Blacks restaurants bathrooms etc wasn't the issue that they segregated, it was that they had to be EQUAL, separate but EQUAL. So if there are 2 businesses and one says "No Hispanics" and another says "Hispanics Only" if they are the same exact quality it wouldn't be an issue, but what happens is the minority is just that, a minority, so the business doesn't do as well and then quality degrades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 you choose to go where you go... that is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 A business doesn't have the obligation to provide you with equal quality to its competitor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 A business doesn't have the obligation to provide you with equal quality to its competitor.It does when it's segregated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 you choose to go where you go... that is all.+1 that's what it all comes down to ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walther_gsp Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Your principle is correct, you'd THINK the market would take care of it, but I don't think it will.This statement refers to places with signs, not statutory restrictions on places you can't carry.The market has done quite a bit. Money talks, and a lot of businesses that put up those no guns signs took them down due to pressure from consumers. Research it a bit.For what its worth, those signs don't mean a whole lot, concealed means concealed, and its not a criminal offense but civil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 For what its worth, those signs don't mean a whole lot, concealed means concealed, and its not a criminal offense but civil.+1 you have my thinkin... i like it!unless they serve alcohol. then it's a felony, but that another discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) This statement refers to places with signs, not statutory restrictions on places you can't carry.The market has done quite a bit. Money talks, and a lot of businesses that put up those no guns signs took them down due to pressure from consumers. Research it a bit.For what its worth, those signs don't mean a whole lot, concealed means concealed, and its not a criminal offense but civil.My reference was not isolated to CPZsI thought you knew everything walther?(3) (a) Except as provided in division ©(3)(b) of this section, the owner or person in control of private land or premises, and a private person or entity leasing land or premises owned by the state, the United States, or a political subdivision of the state or the United States, may post a sign in a conspicuous location on that land or on those premises prohibiting persons from carrying firearms or concealed firearms on or onto that land or those premises. Except as otherwise provided in this division, a person who knowingly violates a posted prohibition of that nature is guilty of criminal trespass in violation of division (A)(4) of section 2911.21 of the Revised Code and is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If a person knowingly violates a posted prohibition of that nature and the posted land or premises primarily was a parking lot or other parking facility, the person is not guilty of criminal trespass in violation of division (A)(4) of section 2911.21 of the Revised Code and instead is subject only to a civil cause of action for trespass based on the violation. Edited August 28, 2009 by Likwid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 (edited) i believe Walther is right on this one... i must look at some stuff to verify. Edited August 28, 2009 by curby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 i believe Walther is right on this one... i must look at some stuff to verify.The only thing that constitutes a civil action in the ORC section 2923 is for when it's private property but a PARKING lot or PARKING structure, not for the business.But I'd be very interested to see if you find otherwise, would be really good fodder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Just got off the phone with the aid for Representative Mandel.Couple comments most people here have already said. "don't expect to see the bill move anywhere this house session"... "don't expect to see ANY pro-gun legislature move this house session"But also he said "but on the good side, don't expect to see any ANTI gun legislature get passed either"I also asked about state preemption and what can we do for cases where local legislature has passed restricting the sale, transfer and carrying (open or concealed). My exact question was "What can we do? Supreme Court has ruled against it, but unless I want to go challenge it by open carrying, getting arrested, hiring a lawyer, taking it to local court where I'll likely lose, then appealing where I'll win... I know Ohio has said you are to be paid for lawyer fees etc when this happens but this is a lot of a pain in the ass to go through"He said he didn't have an answer for that, but they have a council that researches these issues and he'll talk to them and get back to me early next week (I won't hold my breath).He pointed me towards City of Lima vs Ohio for a Home Rule ruling. I pointed him towards OFCC vs Clyde as just another example.So good news and bad news I guess, like you guys said, don't expect HB203 to pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walther_gsp Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 My reference was not isolated to CPZsI thought you knew everything walther?Nope, not everything, but in terms of firearms, I definitely know more than you. Also, I am not infallible and capable of making mistakes. My understanding was that it was changed from criminal trespass to a civil infraction under the last revision of the law. I did not verify that piece and went by the last revision of the Attorney General's handbook in my possession which inferred it as well. I did not follow my own advice, which is to read the statute for yourself. I checked the latest online and it clears it up to parking lots only. On this issue, I was wrong and you are right. Enjoy it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walther_gsp Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 So good news and bad news I guess, like you guys said, don't expect HB203 to pass.I fully expect it to pass, eventually. Ohio's ccw laws sucked as initially passed and have gotten progressively better as they have refined the nonsense parts put in originally. Restaurant Carry is really the last piece to making it a pretty decent setup. It just won't necessarily be soon. I would continue to pester the critters in the state legislature on the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I fully expect it to pass, eventually. Ohio's ccw laws sucked as initially passed and have gotten progressively better as they have refined the nonsense parts put in originally. Restaurant Carry is really the last piece to making it a pretty decent setup. It just won't necessarily be soon. I would continue to pester the critters in the state legislature on the issue.Maybe it's just personal opinion, but I never really thought writing letters, emails or making calls to legislators would make a difference, but I've never really tried so it's an uneducated assumption.I'd really like to see the restaurant carry pass, it's pretty hard to find a good place to eat that doesn't serve alcohol... granted I don't expect all hell to break loose, but plan for the worst and hope for the best I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 writing letters and emails does make a huge difference... remember, you put them in office and you can take them out. if they get 10,000 letters about changing a certain law or bill, they may just listen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustinsn3485 Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 Maybe it's just personal opinion, but I never really thought writing letters, emails or making calls to legislators would make a difference, but I've never really tried so it's an uneducated assumption.I'd really like to see the restaurant carry pass, it's pretty hard to find a good place to eat that doesn't serve alcohol... granted I don't expect all hell to break loose, but plan for the worst and hope for the best I guess.I'm preaching to the choir probably and I'm a gun rookie by all counts...However I feel like, after some intense research the past couple days, that even CCW is encroaching on gun rights.It seems to me that there should be no question as to when, where, or how we carry. Our other rights aren't restricted so why is this one?Now I'm going to hole up and start writing letters I guess. My intention isn't to start forum drama, just announce a thought...Carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted August 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'm preaching to the choir probably and I'm a gun rookie by all counts...However I feel like, after some intense research the past couple days, that even CCW is encroaching on gun rights.It seems to me that there should be no question as to when, where, or how we carry. Our other rights aren't restricted so why is this one?Now I'm going to hole up and start writing letters I guess. My intention isn't to start forum drama, just announce a thought...Carry on.I see what you did there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.