CC @Pawn/Gun Shops

[rellascout]

We'd do ourselves a lot of favors if we'd drop the cutsie-pie machismo bumper-stickers and hooo-rah signage.

We would also do ourselves a lot of favors by not consistently advocating the trampling of property owners rights. Everytime this subject comes up the vast majority here advocate just that.

One cannot protect their rights by trampling anothers. IMHO

 

[Birch Knoll]

We would also do ourselves a lot of favors by not consistently advocating the trampling of property owners rights.

I don't think anybody is advocating trampling anybody's property rights; at least I hope not. Of course property owners have the right to set the rules for how their property is used; I know I want that right in my own home or business.

The issue is about educating and convincing business owners that it is in their best interest to permit their customers to legally carry firearms on their premises.

 

[Sam1911]

We would also do ourselves a lot of favors by not consistently advocating the trampling of property owners rights.

That again?






Actually, in this thread most of the responses have seemed to center around discussing it with the shop owner to determine his true intent and possibly to change his mind. Or simply not patronizing his business. Neither of those things is disrespectful of his property rights, whatever they may be.

There have been very few "concealed is concealed" repsonses, I think you should acknowledge.

But...yeah, "concealed is concealed" after all...

 

[Shadow 7D]

Most of the shops locally, if they have a sign, simply have one stating
All weapons to be handled must be unloaded, locked open, and inspected

one has an *
if you are bringing a weapon inside in your pants, please respect us and keep it there.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

cutsie-pie machismo bumper-stickers

Hey Sam, know you're a moderator "and all", but I had NO idea good-spirited humor was gonna' be met with such ill-tempered, firm consternation. Heck, the sign the guy HAD in his window wasn't always true either. I was just trying to think of a sign that would remind customers to unload their pawn/sales-related weapons, give CCW folks a pass & cause any robbery-minded bad guys (mentioned in the OP) to stop & reconsider. Sometimes humor catches folks attention faster than rigid fact (It worked...here?).

No, I wouldn't post that sign. Yes, I realize that it's NOT practical or true, as well the liability it would create. But it's certainly no more mindless than the hope the owner was pinning on the one he actually posted.

I apologize & will throttle my humor.

 

[Just One Shot]

It's their right to post no carry if they so desire, it's my right to spend my money elsewhere!

Fortunately we don't have this issue where I live.

 

[rellascout]

That again?

Actually, in this thread most of the responses have seemed to center around discussing it with the shop owner to determine his true intent and possibly to change his mind. Or simply not patronizing his business. Neither of those things is disrespectful of his property rights, whatever they may be.

There have been very few "concealed is concealed" repsonses, I think you should acknowledge.

But...yeah, "concealed is concealed" after all...

Yes Sam that again. :banghead: I agree in this thread there has been more respect for property owners rights than most but before my post there were at least 2 advocates of "concealed is concealed" school of thought. Just as you felt the need to point out the "cutsie-pie machismo bumper-stickers and hooo-rah signage" of one members comments I feel the need to point out the hypocritical nature of the "concealed is concealed" school of thought.

You consistently advocate the trampling of property owners rights when it comes to concealed carry. You consistently advocate if I keep it on my hip and no one sees it I am in the right. We do not need to rehash it again but I do not need a mod title critique and criticize another member's, including those with a mod title, statements and positions.

 

[Sam1911]

Hey Sam, know you're a moderator "and all", but I had NO idea good-spirited humor was gonna' be met with such ill-tempered, firm consternation.

Ok. I wasn't trying to be overly harsh, and I apologize. But there are lots of places & folks who do post that kind of thing. "Trespassers will bs SHOT -- Survivors will be SHOT AGAIN!" "If you're found here tonight, you'll be found here tomorrow!" "I don't dial 911!" etc.

I guess it's a pet peeve of mine. It makes us look like a bunch of homicidal children.

But you weren't serious and I apologize.

 

[Sam1911]

I agree in this thread there has been more respect for property owners rights than most but before my post there were at least 2 advocates of "concealed is concealed"

Yes. Which is pretty good for your side of the voting, I'd say. Usually the percentages run higher.

hypocracy.

Ahhh, hypocracy. A word to be defined as narrowly as suits, eh?

If you value A right, you must equally respect whatever anyone else chooses to believe is a right or you are a hypocrite? It is not legitimate to say, this concern is more important to me than that concern? Ah well, ça ne fait rien.

You consistently advocate the trampling of property owners rights when it comes to concealed carry. You consistently advocate if I keep it on my hip and no one sees it I am in the right.

Ok, personally yes, that is what I believe. Though I hadn't made any issue of it until you brought it up again, once more.

We do not need to rehash it again but I do not need a mod title critique and critise another member's, including those with a mod title, statements and positions.

Certainly not. Just don't get so personally offended by other's views. Agree to disagree, right?

 

[rellascout]

Certainly not. Just don't get so personally offended by other's views. Agree to disagree, right?

Believe me there is nothing personal about it. You seem to mistake strong believe for something person.

If you read the thread again I am not the first to bring up "concealed is concealed" in this thread.

As for the measuring of rights that is exactly what we have in these examples. We agree on that what we disagree on is whose rights trump whose. As for the word "hypocrisy" I personally feel that it fits the actions and mentality of too many of the pro-gun community. We too often advocate for our right to own & carry any gun we choose anywhere without reguard for the the conflicting rights at play.

When we consider this right to be absolute and above all others we do ourselves a disservice. Too often and view it in a vaccum instead of the world of conflicting rights which we live. When we do this I cannot think of a word that better suits us than hypocracy.

And with that we will agree to disagree....

 

[Ghost Tracker]

Sam, I understand pet peeves entirely. And I don't like those cutsie-pie signs either (come to think of it, I don't like anything "cutsie pie", including the phrase!). Thank you for your gracious, gentlemanly response.

Now, where were we? Oh yeah!
Okay, no pawn shop WANTS to get robbed. And no felon is going to be stopped by a sign! So what does the pawnshop owner REALLY want? His "loosely enforced" comment means I don't think he's against legal concealed carry. Sounds to me like he; (1.) Hasn't thought his sign or his tactics completely through. (2.) Perhaps he is reminding customers to double-check that their "business-related" firearms are clear & safe (re: accidental or negligent discharges)?

I have to agree with the observations of some previous posters. In today's Pawn Shop climate, I would want EVERY employee (and EVERY sane, responsible customer) to be in open carry. After all "An Armed Society is a Polite Society"

As for my decision to "trample on the owners rights", you've got me there. But if it (WHATEVER "it" is) is hidden on my person, then it's NOBODY'S business but my own. The owner is open to the public for business. I'm the public. He has the right to deny me service. He has the right to ask me to leave. IMHO, he does NOT, however, have the right to dictate his choice toward matters on my body & out of his sight. To me, it's like him saying "No Fruit of the Loom Boxer Briefs Allowed".

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

What is funny about that though, is that the guy behind the counter OCs. Personally, I wouldn't shop at a gun store that wants people to not have guns on them.

Usually, that's there to stop idiots from bringing in loaded guns to sell. My LGS has a sign on his door and when I asked him he said that CCW is okay and so is OC and he put that sign there to try and prevent idiots from bringing in loaded guns as it has happened to him a lot in the past. Do you boycott gunshows because they post the same signs?

 

[GoWolfpack]

We have one here that has a sign saying "No handling of loaded guns in the shop."

What is funny about that though, is that the guy behind the counter OCs.

What's funny about that? Makes perfect sense to me. You shouldn't be handling your carry piece in public unless it's to be used to defend yourself. Guns you do plan to handle in public should be unloaded.

 

[Navarre]

+1
In a LGS here, about 6 months ago, a gentleman brought what he thought was an unloaded weapon to sell or trade and ended up having it discharge in the store because it was loaded! Luckily, no one was hurt. However, I was in the store a week later and the owner put up signs stating if you were trading or selling, do not bring your weapon loaded in the store. While I was there an older gentleman brought in a weapon he wanted to sell. Owner told him to please take out the magazine and clear the action. The gentleman said not to worry, the weapon was unloaded, but complied with the request. The owner was pretty upset when the gentleman released the magazine and it was full & the weapon had one in the chamber. Needless to say, the owner was pretty pissed and no business was transacted with that person. I think this type of situation is the reason for the signs in most shops.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

I'm feelin' your pain Navarre. It reached the point at a friend's LGS that he posted a sign telling potential gun selling & repair customers to wait just inside shop door until an EMPLOYEE cleared, checked & safety-flagged all incoming firearms. I also like, when being handed a firearm to inspect for purchase, that the counter-help clear & lock the gun if front of me before handing it over. And I'll DO IT AGAIN so I'm sure. I've lived through wayyy toooo much to be shot accidentally in a Gun Shop!

 

[mljdeckard]

It does make me roll my eyes when I see a sign asking us to keep them concealed or not to handle them, but the staff of the store are all taking turns breaking the four rules. (Yes, I do complain to the management.)

 

[Lex Luthier]

We have a Mom and Pop pawn shop here in Minneapolis that does a lot of gun business and has a sign that requests no loaded firearms, and no hands in pockets. I have ignored both of those requests many times.

 

[Ringolevio]

Fun (?) with words

Ahhh, hypocracy. A word to be defined as narrowly as suits, eh?

Ahhh, but what about hypocrisy, eh?

Dr. Conrad Murray, recently convicted of killing Michael Jackson, was apparently a hypocrite about following the Hippocratic Oath.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

Sorry, I can't say what I just said! Moderator please!

 

[drsfmd]

Witness a couple of ADs from morons who are trying holsters with a loaded gun and you'd put a sign on the door too.

Before you say that someone should be helping them, it's a busy shop that often has 30-40 customers.... you do your best to keep an eye on all of them, but you can't see everything all the time.

 

[Ghost Tracker]

...couple of ADs from morons who are trying holsters with a loaded gun

Simple, I'd have the holsters behind the counter & ask to see a cleared handgun before I would hand them one! It would take only ONE A.D. for me to take steps to SOLVE that concern.

 

[drsfmd]

Over 80 wall feet of holsters and mag pouches... simply not enough available real estate behind the counter to make it feasible.

 

[almherdfan]

I have no problem with a "No Loaded" policy for guns in for trade, sale or service. That makes sense.

What doesn't make sense is selling guns designed for CC, but not allowing CC in the store. Every other store around here promotes CC, most of the guys either OC or openly CC. They all offer or advertise CC classes. I generally encourage people to use products I sell them.

Also thought it was odd that the Jewelry lady thought CC was banned at Wal-Mart.

 

[royal barnes]

The store where I work has no signs. OC and CC are fine. If you are bringing a gun in to trade, sell, or have repaired we ask that you bring it to the checkout counter where it will be cleared by an employee. If you are planning on trying a holster for fit then I will, when possible, get a like model out of the counter so a loaded firearm need not be handled. If a duplicate is not available I prefer to unload the customer's gun myself. When I hand a customer a gun it will be checked prior to handing it over and I appreciate a customer who checks behind me. Some of our employees OC. I do not and am asked regularly by customers why I am not carrying. I usually just tell them that there is no need since so many others are. Good customers never address the subject since they know I'm cc'ing. Most of those do not realize that I also carry a BUG. Old habits are hard to break for a retired LEO.

 

[Sam1911]

As for my decision to "trample on the owners rights", you've got me there. But if it (WHATEVER "it" is) is hidden on my person, then it's NOBODY'S business but my own.

You're missing an important historical fact.

It is not well known but Madison's original text was laid in a chair shortly after completion where aging Benjamin Franklin inadvertently sat on it, creasing the page right between Amendments 2 and 3. Not noticing the crease, Madison went on to make and distribute the requisite photocopies and history marched on.

However, if you do manage to get your hands on the original document, and with greatest care can unfold that crease, you'll see the original text of the missing Amendment 2-1/2!

"The right of the people, who own property, to compel others of the people NOT to bear arms in their presence or on their wholly owned, leased, mortgaged, rented, borrowed, or squatted upon property, with or without their knowledge, consent, or any reasonable means of enforcement, shall be inviolate. Further, those members of the people who do bear arms secreted about their persons, when and where a property-owning (renting, leasing, borrowing, or squatting) other member of the people would rather that they didn't, shall be henceforth judeged and declared to be Constitutionally naughty."

Now, you've got to look real hard to find good ol' Amendment 2.5, the RNKBAOMP (Right to NOT Keep and Bear Arms On My Property), but it's there, I swear, right next to a sweat stain off old Ben's chubby butt.