in Musings, Politics

Your gun rights end at my property line

Let me preface this post to say that I support all the rights we Americans enjoy through the Constitution’s Bill of Rights. I put on a uniform and faced down America’s enemies in order to uphold those rights, so I take them very seriously.

Thus my support of our rights includes Americans’ right to bear arms. I’ve fired weapons many times during my military service and stood countless watches as my ship’s roving patrol, armed with a .45. Like it or not, guns are a reality in our country and I fully support the right to protect oneself and one’s property with whatever means are necessary.

That said, I don’t choose to own guns. I choose not to take on the responsibility of taking another person’s life. That’s bad karma, God said not to do it, and there is no excuse for killing when there are other options available. If others choose to own guns, though, I’m fine with it. Several of my friends and neighbors are gun owners and I’m happy for them.

Now,it is one thing to protect yourself or your property with guns and it is an entirely different thing to go out pretending to protect everyone else with your gun. It seems to me that there are quite a few gun owners who are deluded into thinking that simply packing heat somehow turns them into Rambo, able to defuse any violent situation.

Uh, no. There’s nothing more dangerous than a gun in the hands of someone put in situation that goes beyond her training. It was emphasized in my CERT emergency training that during a crisis there’s no time to think: one can only rely on one’s training. If you’re law enforcement or ex-law enforcement, military police, or have some other up-to-date, specialized training in how to deal with attackers, then by all means carry your weapon anywhere you’d like. If on the other hand you think that that picking up a gun at Wal-Mart somehow makes you an expert marksman, keep that damn thing locked up and away from me! You have no business strutting around with it when you are likely to get yourself or someone else killed.

On Facebook today, the owner of a popular Raleigh bar, the Player’s Retreat, bemoaned the new gun legislation being pushed by the North Carolina General Assembly. He chooses not to allow guns in his bar. I was surprised at the number of indignant gun owners who gleefully announced they would no longer be frequenting that establishment. Well, tough shit. It’s a free country, it’s the guy’s bar, it’s private property, and he can decide whom he serves and whom he doesn’t. Bringing a bunch of guns into a drinking establishment is an asinine idea, period. It’s just asking for trouble.

A bar owner’s decision not to allow gun’s in his bar does not infringe on your rights in any way, folks. He chooses to protect his property from guns the same way you choose to protect your property with guns. If you value rights and want your rights respected you must show respect for the rights of others, too.

It’s a free country. You can always open your own bar and call it a saloon.

  1. Under current law he does NOT allowed to make that choice. Instead the goverment decided for him that anybody entering his business with a gun was breaking the law. He’s complaining about the bill which will (unless vetoed) actually allow him to make that decision.

    Once that bill takes effect, he will have the right to make that decision. People who carry guns have the right to not go there because of that decision and to let him know that his decision has caused that.

    But his statements that this bill will make it more likely that people with guns will be drinking at his establishment are nonsensical. The sign that he has up stating that he prohibits guns on the property will still carry the force of law. It will still be illegal for people to carry concealed handguns while they have ANY amount of alcohol in their system. So that’s still two reasons that is illegal. The only reason going away is the blanket prohibition on concealed carry at any restaurant which serves alcohol. Anybody who chooses to ignore the two remaining reasons would be just as likely to ignore the third reason which will be going away.

Comments are closed.