Posted on 07/20/2012 6:35:08 PM PDT by SUSSA
Good grief.
No it's not. It's against the law.
You are right. They are creating unsafe conditions for the customers.
Ignore the “private business” whinners. Liberal CEO’s take their marching orders from liberals in creating these kind of fascist, p.c. policies and they and the public should see some kick back.
Sometimes you just have to get their attention by targeting a big one. Every journey starts with a single step.
And why is it against the Law? Could it be against the law because it causes a less safe environment?
As long as you’re not breeding, I wish you all the best.
If you don’t think liberal activists work these corporations to make such p.c. policies, you are nuts. The Brady bunch hit up all buinesses, backed by DNC and legal threats, to ban guns.
Conservatives need to push back. Few of their customers are liberals. We need to let them know. Don’t you remember when Clinton was pushing Smith and Wesson to obey his demands and they backed off when gun rights people kicked them in where the sun don’t shine.
As folks say here in Texas, "You're plumb eat up with the dumb@$$!"
With their anti-gun rules, criminal accomplice, Cinemark, guaranteed that the gunman (primary culprit -- I agree) could proceed unopposed until he ran out of ammo or got tired -- whichever came first.
Granted, the madman was armored and helmeted. However, the shock of a round striking a helmet is a BIG, disorienting distraction. And civilian body armor transmits sufficient force to cause intense pain and injury. (Google "backface trauma" and "backface signature injury" for verification.)
Even with nothing more than a 9mm, a competent shooter could have drastically shortened that madman's murderous rampage. But that option was denied by the criminal Cinemark policy...
Cinemark and its "no guns" policy simply concentrated the law-abiding as a mass victim target -- and did nothing to impede the lawless monster from wreaking havoc.
miss that within reason thing? its all or nothing for tards like you - anarchist?
you are the justification for homeland security to have the right on watch lists
i hope napolitano is watching you
If Cinemark is not displaying fully 30.06-compliant signs in Texas, their prohibition is powerless, and CHL holders can -- and SHOULD -- carry legally on their premises.
If Cinemark does display valid 30.06 signs in Texas, they will never get any business from anyone in my family!
~~~~~~~~~
Wish I could join you in Plano!
P.S. Meant to copy you on #48...
LOL You can’t refute the fact that creating a gun free zone makes that place less safe so all you can do is rant and call names.
You’re too funny.
LOL You can’t refute the fact that creating a gun free zone makes that place less safe so all you can do is rant and call names.
You’re too funny.
I’m going out in the morning to check out their signs.
It was not against state law (according to my sources - I am not a lawyer) for anyone to carry in this theater. Although the theater management requests patrons no carry weapons, it is not illegal for patrons to do so.
It is only illegal (trespassing) once the business owner requests the armed patron to leave and the patron chooses not to.
The company can have all the policy they want, but in Colorado the People have a right to carry. Open or concealed.
I DO think liberal activists encourage anti-gun policies, but in this case there was really nothing stopping anyone from packing.
Let’s encourage the attitude of responsibility and protection. People need to stop laying under cover expecting the ‘Government’ to save them (not directed at you, just in general).
I wasn’t aware that was Colorado’s law. It is much better than the Texas law.
you must be one of those paultardz - that all gather on the net and try to out wackjob each other - desperate to matter
let us know how many show up at your statist temper tantrum
LOL Keep posting. You’re too funny.
It is, indeed, -- BUT... "freedom to restrict guns from [your] private business" is also assumption of full liability for providing me and mine the protection of which you deprive me on your premises. If you deprive me of self-protection, then you da*ned well better provide competent armed guards.
Yes, it is your right as a private citizen to make that choice -- and to bear the consequences.
LOL!!! Get yourself a Funk & Wagnalls...
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/ameritopia-mark-r-levin/1110788840?ean=9781439173244
though i suppose you paultardz would not know who mark levin is
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.