“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#99895 Aug 19, 2014

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99896 Aug 19, 2014
http://mynews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/new...

Now I know the resident gun nut, Race, is not this nutty, but this is the kinda person that gives peeps like Race a bad name.

Question for you, Race. If you were out with friends, and it was discovered that you were carrying and they would not let you in, would you

a) go lock it in the car then head into the bar
b) convince your friends to go somewhere else (and hope that somewhere else does not notice you're carrying)
c) move on(or go home) without your friends (either because you don't want to make them go somewhere else or because they don't want to leave just cause of you and your gun)

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#99897 Aug 19, 2014
I hope they take this woman's gun away. IMNSHO, she's way too skittish to be in possession of a firearm.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/19/us-...

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99898 Aug 19, 2014
Toj wrote:
I hope they take this woman's gun away. IMNSHO, she's way too skittish to be in possession of a firearm.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/19/us-...
wtf? She had a chair under the door? So what's the message? Grandsons are fair game for any intruders, but don't even think of getting in MY room?

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#99899 Aug 19, 2014
First off, you cannot take your weapon into a bar(in FL), so If I knew I was going to a bar, I would not have my weapon on my person.
But you can bring your weapon into a restaurant, even if it has a bar as long as you do not sit at the bar. In this case I doubt their wold be bouncers, but if there were, and I was told I could not enter with my weapon, I would put it in my vehicle. The business has a right to refuse you entry, even if you have the right to carry.

Most malls have a sign stipulating no weapons. It's a CYA thing for them. I ignore these signs because I never see them, and if challenged, I can only be asked to leave, which I would fully comply with.
Mister Tonka wrote:
http://mynews13.com/content/ne ws/cfnews13/news/article.html/ content/news/articles/cfn/2014 /8/19/orlando_officer_shoo.htm l?cmpid=breaking
Now I know the resident gun nut, Race, is not this nutty, but this is the kinda person that gives peeps like Race a bad name.
Question for you, Race. If you were out with friends, and it was discovered that you were carrying and they would not let you in, would you
a) go lock it in the car then head into the bar
b) convince your friends to go somewhere else (and hope that somewhere else does not notice you're carrying)
c) move on(or go home) without your friends (either because you don't want to make them go somewhere else or because they don't want to leave just cause of you and your gun)
Toj unlogged in

Chicago, IL

#99900 Aug 19, 2014
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text>wtf? She had a chair under the door? So what's the message? Grandsons are fair game for any intruders, but don't even think of getting in MY room?
Ha! I was thinking that the grandsons were in the room with her and were suppose to be taking a nap, too. It doesn't say that, but I assumed.(I know, I know about assuming.)
In any event, you have locked doors AND you put a hair on the door AND you have a gun within reach with young boys nearby?
Not smart and very paranoid. Those boys could have gotten their hands on that gun while she was sleeping.
Although, heh, probably not -- they were more apt to be shot dead.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99901 Aug 19, 2014
RACE wrote:
First off, you cannot take your weapon into a bar(in FL), so If I knew I was going to a bar, I would not have my weapon on my person.
But you can bring your weapon into a restaurant, even if it has a bar as long as you do not sit at the bar. In this case I doubt their wold be bouncers, but if there were, and I was told I could not enter with my weapon, I would put it in my vehicle. The business has a right to refuse you entry, even if you have the right to carry.
Most malls have a sign stipulating no weapons. It's a CYA thing for them. I ignore these signs because I never see them, and if challenged, I can only be asked to leave, which I would fully comply with.
<quoted text>
I know you would comply as you've stated before. I just was not sure if you meant that you would stow the gun away in your car or that being without it would be so uncomfortable for you that you would just choose not to go in at all. You ARE the guy who walks around his own house strapped.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

United States

#99902 Aug 19, 2014
RACE wrote:
First off, you cannot take your weapon into a bar(in FL), so If I knew I was going to a bar, I would not have my weapon on my person.
But you can bring your weapon into a restaurant, even if it has a bar as long as you do not sit at the bar. In this case I doubt their wold be bouncers, but if there were, and I was told I could not enter with my weapon, I would put it in my vehicle. The business has a right to refuse you entry, even if you have the right to carry.
Most malls have a sign stipulating no weapons. It's a CYA thing for them. I ignore these signs because I never see them, and if challenged, I can only be asked to leave, which I would fully comply with.
<quoted text>
I don't think a business should be allowed to deny you your right to carry. They're not allowed to deny service to gays, why are they allowed to deny service to cc-ers?

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#99903 Aug 19, 2014
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think a business should be allowed to deny you your right to carry. They're not allowed to deny service to gays, why are they allowed to deny service to cc-ers?
Public safety.

If a gay woman gets in a fight with her GF and tempers fly, I may be at risk of being hit with a glass of water or a flying plate.

If a cc guy gets in a fight with his friend and tempers fly, I am at risk of a stray bullet. the scope of potential harm an is balanced against eh minimal inconvenience of putting the weapon back in the car.

There is no law that says a person without a shirt or shoes cannot be allowed in a restaurant but there are "No shoes, no shirt, no service" signs everywhere which is enforced.

The rationale is public health.

Sometime when you live in a society- an aggregation of people with competing interests- you can't fully exercise all your rights all the time.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#99904 Aug 19, 2014
What P said.

There is no compelling reason to deny service to gay people. Prejudice is not a compelling reason.

There are good grounds why some businesses may not want armed people in their place of business. I think this is especially true when the place serves alcohol. I don't think it is a good idea for people to be drinking in public and be armed.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

United States

#99905 Aug 19, 2014
PEllen wrote:
<quoted text>
Public safety.
If a gay woman gets in a fight with her GF and tempers fly, I may be at risk of being hit with a glass of water or a flying plate.
If a cc guy gets in a fight with his friend and tempers fly, I am at risk of a stray bullet. the scope of potential harm an is balanced against eh minimal inconvenience of putting the weapon back in the car.
There is no law that says a person without a shirt or shoes cannot be allowed in a restaurant but there are "No shoes, no shirt, no service" signs everywhere which is enforced.
The rationale is public health.
Sometime when you live in a society- an aggregation of people with competing interests- you can't fully exercise all your rights all the time.
Not buying it. It's prejudice against something you don't like, plain and simple, no different than being prejudiced against gays

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#99906 Aug 19, 2014
I don't like being unarmed, but I accept that there are places where I cant carry. I am not going to skip out on my friends because they want to go to a bar (but that is rare nowadays anyway), so I would leave it secured in the car.
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text>
I know you would comply as you've stated before. I just was not sure if you meant that you would stow the gun away in your car or that being without it would be so uncomfortable for you that you would just choose not to go in at all. You ARE the guy who walks around his own house strapped.

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#99907 Aug 19, 2014
If you drink responsibly you are no more a danger to someone else as a tea drinker.
Just because I drink wine with my dinner should not preclude me from carrying, but I agree that it is not wise when wine becomes my dinner.

I don't like the idea of a bunch of drunks carrying, but I dont support the law disallowing it, I just comply with it.
Sublime1 wrote:
What P said.
There are good grounds why some businesses may not want armed people in their place of business. I think this is especially true when the place serves alcohol. I don't think it is a good idea for people to be drinking in public and be armed.

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#99908 Aug 19, 2014
Disagree, you are implying that because there is the potential for serious harm from a firearm it should be disallowed. But why stop there? Disallow Knives, and pointy sticks too. No Steak knives, unbreakable plates and glasses because any of those things can be used to cause serious harm if someone looses their temper.

Fact is, its not about safety, its about hysteria.

How are you any safer sitting at a sidewalk cafe that disallows guns while the cafe next door allows them?
PEllen wrote:
<quoted text>
Public safety.
If a gay woman gets in a fight with her GF and tempers fly, I may be at risk of being hit with a glass of water or a flying plate.
If a cc guy gets in a fight with his friend and tempers fly, I am at risk of a stray bullet. the scope of potential harm an is balanced against eh minimal inconvenience of putting the weapon back in the car.
There is no law that says a person without a shirt or shoes cannot be allowed in a restaurant but there are "No shoes, no shirt, no service" signs everywhere which is enforced.
The rationale is public health.
Sometime when you live in a society- an aggregation of people with competing interests- you can't fully exercise all your rights all the time.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#99909 Aug 19, 2014
RACE wrote:
If you drink responsibly you are no more a danger to someone else as a tea drinker.
Just because I drink wine with my dinner should not preclude me from carrying, but I agree that it is not wise when wine becomes my dinner.
I don't like the idea of a bunch of drunks carrying, but I dont support the law disallowing it, I just comply with it.
<quoted text>
But people who don't drink responsibly are not uncommon, so the likelihood of a drunk with a gun is very real in a place that serves booze. Either way, the property owner has rights too. Property owner should not be forced to allow guns on his property. Not allowing you in with your gun does not infringe upon your right to carry. You just gotta carry your ass someplace else.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#99910 Aug 19, 2014
RACE wrote:
If you drink responsibly you are no more a danger to someone else as a tea drinker.
Just because I drink wine with my dinner should not preclude me from carrying, but I agree that it is not wise when wine becomes my dinner.
I don't like the idea of a bunch of drunks carrying, but I dont support the law disallowing it, I just comply with it.
<quoted text>
You don't always know when wine is going to become your dinner. I met my college roommate and a buddy for drinks on Sunday afternoon. We ended up at the strip club into Monday morning. It all started with a text, lol. I had no clue that was what was in store. I was dying yesterday. I had to come to work to get something out.

I just think it's good public policy. I think it's best for everyone, the public and people who carry. If you are going to be drinking, you shouldn't be armed, IMO.

Sometimes it's just easier to have a bright line rule. It's sort of how commercial drivers have a zero tolerance policy when they are on the clock. Are they really dangerous if they have one beer; no, but why mess around with it? I think the same should be true for people who are armed. It's just too much risk, and the person always has the choice ... if they don't want to go without their gun on their person, then don't drink in public.

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#99911 Aug 19, 2014
RACE wrote:
Disagree, you are implying that because there is the potential for serious harm from a firearm it should be disallowed. But why stop there? Disallow Knives, and pointy sticks too. No Steak knives, unbreakable plates and glasses because any of those things can be used to cause serious harm if someone looses their temper.
Fact is, its not about safety, its about hysteria.
How are you any safer sitting at a sidewalk cafe that disallows guns while the cafe next door allows them?
<quoted text>
It is a matter of intensity of usage and exposure to risk.

Using your example, let's say I am sitting in teh window seat at Cafe Y which is next door to Cafe X.

. If this Cafe X allows cc guns , that is 3000sq feet which hypothetically exposes me to the risk of being shot.. If the one next door does not allow guns, open or cc , Cafe Y, that is 2800 sq feet which does not. The intensity my exposure to the harmful element is lowered by 50% in the immediate vicinity

This is a necessarily absurd example. People can walk down the street and shoot. Someone a block over with a high velocity piece can shoot, etc.I can't change that. I can avoid an area with a history of that happening. But within my immediate area, there is controlled risk.

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#99912 Aug 19, 2014
And I do not disagree that the owner has rights, but if you have the right to exclude people who carry, then cant you also exclude people who don't? Or people who don't worship your deity, or people who are attracted to their own sex?

If you want to focus on the issue of the owners rights, then let the owners decide who they can exclude completely. Otherwise it's hypocritical.
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text>
But people who don't drink responsibly are not uncommon, so the likelihood of a drunk with a gun is very real in a place that serves booze. Either way, the property owner has rights too. Property owner should not be forced to allow guns on his property. Not allowing you in with your gun does not infringe upon your right to carry. You just gotta carry your ass someplace else.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#99913 Aug 19, 2014
I agree that guns should not be allowed in bars, drinking and guns don't mix, just like drinking and driving doesn't.

But who the hell is the Subway or Wendy's owner to tell me I can't carry in his restaurant? CC is legal, I went through all the necessary requirements for it, the state says I am allowed to carry. I say the restaurant owner should get over his hysteria and deal.

When Illinois banned smoking in public establishments, EVERYONE had to comply whether they agreed with it or not. I say the same should hold true for cc

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#99914 Aug 19, 2014
Just because you cant realize when its time to put your weapon securely away does not mean everyone else cant.
There are millions of drunk cops in this country right now, and only a few are stupid enough to pull their weapon when their drunk. Cops are not smarter than the average joe, dispite what they would like you to believe.

And I disagree about "good" public policy. Your saying I cant be trusted to be an adult, and I think I can be.
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't always know when wine is going to become your dinner. I met my college roommate and a buddy for drinks on Sunday afternoon. We ended up at the strip club into Monday morning. It all started with a text, lol. I had no clue that was what was in store. I was dying yesterday. I had to come to work to get something out.
I just think it's good public policy. I think it's best for everyone, the public and people who carry. If you are going to be drinking, you shouldn't be armed, IMO.
Sometimes it's just easier to have a bright line rule. It's sort of how commercial drivers have a zero tolerance policy when they are on the clock. Are they really dangerous if they have one beer; no, but why mess around with it? I think the same should be true for people who are armed. It's just too much risk, and the person always has the choice ... if they don't want to go without their gun on their person, then don't drink in public.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min Nostrilis Waxman 1,232,520
Amy 5-24-15 32 min tiredofit 4
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 36 min positronium 189,805
News 17 shot-2 fatally-in bloody start to Memorial D... 1 hr reality is a crutch 1
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 6 hr TRD 70,017
Poll What is your favorite furniture store in Chicago? 6 hr Jana Ravens 0
Word (Dec '08) 7 hr boundary painter 5,240
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]