Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This just seems silly. I don't oppose private citizens owning guns or even carrying them if there is a reason to do so. For example, if you're a *law abiding* citizen in a bad neighborhood in Detroit then I completely understand and would want a gun myself.
However, carrying a gun into a restaurant in an area that is relatively safe and brandishing it comes off as childish to the general public--and I think stories like this tend to do more harm than good to the gun rights movement.
Well, there's a problem there.
Long story short, when it comes to CHL, there's this saying, "Now that you can carry a gun, don't go anywhere you wouldn't if you couldn't carry a gun."
One wants to avoid the situation of the shootee's lawyer saying, "So, Ms. Cassandra, on the morning of the incident, you felt afraid of my client, so you strapped on your gun with the intention of shooting him."
It may not have quite come down like that, but the opposing lawyer will try to show premeditation.
So the defense to this is to carry one's gun as much as they can, everywhere they can, everyday. So if it comes down to having to shoot, that day when you got up in the morning was no different than any other day.
For, as a civilian, if you have to go someplace where you believe you need to carry a gun on that day.............you should avoid going to that place.
Tell that to Suzanna Hupp. Or the two police officers that were murdered at a restaurant here in Las Vegas just last June.
Their guns did not save them did they
I am not familiar with the case in Las Vegas, but in the case of Suzanna Hupp, her gun didn't save her because she had left it in the glove compartment of her car, in accordance with state law at the time. Following the incident, she lobbied for a concealed carry system, which the state legislature passed, and then-Gov George W Bush signed into law.
Long story short, when it comes to CHL, there's this saying, "Now that you can carry a gun, don't go anywhere you wouldn't if you couldn't carry a gun."
One wants to avoid the situation of the shootee's lawyer saying, "So, Ms. Cassandra, on the morning of the incident, you felt afraid of my client, so you strapped on your gun with the intention of shooting him."
It may not have quite come down like that, but the opposing lawyer will try to show premeditation.
So the defense to this is to carry one's gun as much as they can, everywhere they can, everyday. So if it comes down to having to shoot, that day when you got up in the morning was no different than any other day.
For, as a civilian, if you have to go someplace where you believe you need to carry a gun on that day.............you should avoid going to that place.
an easy answer to that would be, assuming a civil trial and not a criminal one, is mr lawyer, i had no idea what you client was going to do that day, but i have to constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and i choose to exercise that right that day. and according to state laws i have the right to defend myself with the necessary force to stop an unprovoked attack, which i did. your client committed a criminal act and was the one that was driving the events of that day, i just defended myself and others from his viciousness.
So, I guess if I pray AND carry arms into a restaurant, I can eat for next to nothing!
Probably not. Most businesses limit each customer to only ONE discount.
I have, however, been in one fast food place in Great Falls that gave me both the senior and military discount. That is the ONLY place it has ever happened.
While this might seem bizarre to liberals, I think it is actually an astute and innovative strategy. In my experience, gun owners tend to be hard-working, salt-of-the-earth types, with the resultant disposable income that flows from that. There are some stats out there to confirm it.
If I'm a business owner, that is a prime demographic to go after. It is both smart and innovative for an entrepreneur like Sharma Floyd to do so. As an added bonus, she is highly unlikely to be a target of armed robbers.
I find this very sad. Why don't restaurants give discounts to those families that can't really afford it. How about they help the homeless who need to eat. I guess it's all about the money with them.
As a gun owner I rather like this, but would decline the discount on principle (most independent restaurants have a razor thin profit margin).
actually profit margins are not as thin as you think they are.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
