HuffPo article: logic wins?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

PS - that article from the NYT is right in the middle of the current Opinions page. Oh, my God!

However, the Times will say ban them all as a general policy.

[Dave J]

Hmmm, you don't suppose there's an effort to make Gun Control "not an issue" for the upcoming midterms?

(Not that I'm inherently suspicious or anything...)

[CompressionIgnition]

HuffPo surprises sometimes. They have actually covered the Leland Yee case several times. while USA Today had all of ONE mention of it and CNN didn't cover it at all, responding with a pretty blatant lie when first called out on it*

*http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blu...hen-challenged

[Drang]

This worries me, because it seems like the antis have finally realized their current tactics aren't working. I'm worried about what they'll go after next.

The 1% are currently busily spending big bux in WA financing Initiative 594, which establishes universal background checks for all gun transfers.
Take your girlfriend to the range? Better have the FFL run a background check on her. And, if you want her to give the gun back, have him do one on you, too.
Your kid home from college or the Army and needs to borrow a gun for deer season? BZZZT! Background checks!
Wanna run a Home Firearm Safety class in the public library or at a gun show? Ha!
For that matter, the dealer at the gun show has to run the NICS check before you can coon-finger the gun!

THAT's what their next tactic is.

They're gonna buy your Constitutional rights.

[RoyGBiv]

Note that the WF signs are not compliant.

The letters did appear to be less than the required 1" in height, but..
1. I didn't bring a ruler.
2. They were close. As close as I've ever seen a possibly non-compliant sign.
3. The sign was sufficient indication of their desires
4. Sign posted = safety diminished. Ask HufPo.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

There are a fair amount of non-complaint 30.06's around. Does one want to tell them - no. They might fix it. Also, if you ask and are told we want no CHL - then you have personally been banned, independent of the sign.

[Tamara]

There are a fair amount of non-complaint 30.06's around. Does one want to tell them - no. They might fix it. Also, if you ask and are told we want no CHL - then you have personally been banned, independent of the sign.

So if you can pass for a non-gun-carrier, you'll reward their bigotry with your patronage?

[LSP552]

I don't give money to people who don't like me if I can help it. Continuing to patronize these companies is simply telling the Moms Demand and their financial puppeteer that their strategy works. Other companies look around and say "Huh. I can put up 'No Guns' signs and there's no financial downside!"

^ This is how you fight it. But we need to follow up with a letter telling corporate management why you, your family, and everyone you can influence, will never spend another dollar in their store. They need to know there is a financial cost to their decision.

Ken

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The idea of compliant vs. noncompliant signs was thought of as a defense against the ghostbuster sign. As originally passed into the law, the ghostbuster sign would suffice. Businesses would and did post them everywhere. The idea was to explicitly make the CHL useless as you couldn't carry in most of the places of everyday life. It is easy to say don't patronage a business but you wouldn't be able to go most anywhere. It was a great idea!

Boycotts - all well and good but with a 1 to 4% CHL population figure, they wouldn't have much impact. By making the 30.06 obnoxious it was hoped that most businesses wouldn't ban and in fact, that is true.

The return of noncompliant 30.06 signs is due to the OC morons. I do choose to patronize the hospital that has a compliant sign as passing away seems not a good defensive strategy.

As far as the noncompliant joints - I avoid them if I have a choice. I choose to work at job that forbids carry. It is a life's work that started before CHL came to be. If someone wants to support my family at my current salary level - send checks. I have vigorously protested the work carry rule in public, legistlatively and been on TV. It is more that some of the other gun folk at work have done.

A boycott threat by a few that goes nowhere is incredibly stupid as it just convinces a business that the CHL population is not an economic threat to them.

80% of the TX CHL population doesn't even carry most of the time. So WF won't notice 1 guy or gal a day not buying a chunk of organic buffalo milk cheese. Better strategies are needed. The quite insertion of concealed carry into the normal life style was working. Deliverance role players with EBRs - in Target or Chipolte - not a good strategy.

[TR675]

I cannot tell you how far back those morons set the movement.