[KrisKrinkle]

“I think the stores should allow people to go armed on their property, but I don't think that the government should force them to allow it.”

If firearms carry is allowed in the only local grocery  in line with community standards in a small town 50 miles from the nearest larger town and another grocery, and Mayor Bloomberg of New York or Mayor Dailey of Chicago buy the grocery and forbid firearms on the grocery property, why should the citizens of the community not use their government to force the new and absentee owners to allow it?  Why would  Bloomberg or Dailey have the right to interfere with the community, from a location possibly hundreds of miles away, simply because they are absentee property owners with no personal stake in the community?

[marktwain]

“If firearms carry is allowed in the only local grocery in line with community standards in a small town 50 miles from the nearest larger town and another grocery, and Mayor Bloomberg of New York or Mayor Dailey of Chicago buy the grocery and forbid firearms on the grocery property, why should the citizens of the community not use their government to force the new and absentee owners to allow it? Why would Bloomberg or Dailey have the right to interfere with the community, from a location possibly hundreds of miles away, simply because they are absentee property owners with no personal stake in the community?”

---

The could do as my parents and grandparents did when no stores in the local community would carry the supplies they needed: Gather together the like mined people and create a coop. My father was on the board for many years, and it still is a going concern, even with Walmart and Pamaida in town.

[marktwain]

“If firearms carry is allowed in the only local grocery in line with community standards in a small town 50 miles from the nearest larger town and another grocery, and Mayor Bloomberg of New York or Mayor Dailey of Chicago buy the grocery and forbid firearms on the grocery property, why should the citizens of the community not use their government to force the new and absentee owners to allow it? Why would Bloomberg or Dailey have the right to interfere with the community, from a location possibly hundreds of miles away, simply because they are absentee property owners with no personal stake in the community?”

---

Because they are private property owners with as much right as other private property owners, whether they are absentee or not.

If I give the government that much power over someone else's property, I run the risk of it being abused on my property rights. We are way too far down that road already.