Politically correct discrimination is ok?

[Dave Workman]

Are ‘gun-free zones’ an acceptable form of discrimination?


A furor that erupted over the weekend and continues today over Indiana’s new “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” provided Seattle Mayor Ed Murray an opportunity to condemn discrimination, noting that people cannot refuse service based on their religious beliefs.

http://www.examiner.com/article/are-gun ... rimination

[ANZAC]

You're splitting the wrong hair Dave. Those signs don't discriminate against gun owners, they ask people not to bring guns on to their property.
Discriminating against gun owners would be not serving anyone who said they owned a gun.

It is the same as no shirt, no shoes, no service. A private business has a right to set rules about what people bring into their property.

Can I bring a meth lab with me? A lawn mower? A running chainsaw?
Clearly property owners have a right to say what is allowed and not allowed on their property.

But discrimination is about discriminating against people and denying service based on WHO THEY ARE. (black, white, gay, straight, Mormon, Muslim, etc.)

From a prior discussion here, I leave you with this:

http://www.barefooters.org/key-works/Ba ... ights.html

[H2obouget]

Well if someone actually knew what a RIGHT was versus a policy or a law....then they might get somewhere.

2A says ..."to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Yes it is discrimination.

Put up any of the following signs and see what happens.
"No Berkas Allowed."
"No Yamakas Allowed."
"No Crosses Allowed."

Those signs don't discriminate against religious practitioners, they ask people not to bring those items on to their property.

Let's see how fast the lawsuits get filed, shall we?

[RENCORP]

Rights is rights.

Any minority has the right to protest against perceived discrimination.

Even if you don't agree with said protest, the First Amendment protects the right of freedom of speech for that minority group to speak their minds about said discrimination.

Even if it is gun owners using their First Amendment rights to protest infringement of the Second Amendment.

Gun owners have equal rights in this regard as do Muslims, African Americans, GLBTG' s, Latino immigrants, Christians, and others.

[Benja455]

Well if someone actually knew what a RIGHT was versus a policy or a law....then they might get somewhere.

2A says ..."to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Yes it is discrimination.

Put up any of the following signs and see what happens.
"No Berkas Allowed."
"No Yamakas Allowed."
"No Crosses Allowed."

Those signs don't discriminate against religious practitioners, they ask people not to bring those items on to their property.

Let's see how fast the lawsuits get filed, shall we?

Nicely said.

[Dave Workman]

You're splitting the wrong hair Dave. Those signs don't discriminate against gun owners, they ask people not to bring guns on to their property.
Discriminating against gun owners would be not serving anyone who said they owned a gun.

Well, what they're saying is that they refuse service to anyone carrying a gun.
You will, of course, disagree.

[DSynger]

Rights is rights.

Any minority has the right to protest against perceived discrimination.

Even if you don't agree with said protest, the First Amendment protects the right of freedom of speech for that minority group to speak their minds about said discrimination.

Even if it is gun owners using their First Amendment rights to protest infringement of the Second Amendment.

Gun owners have equal rights in this regard as do Muslims, African Americans, GLBTG' s, Latino immigrants, Christians, and others.

Where some can argue people can't choose to be GLBTG or what color they are, religion is clearly a choice and protected against discrimination.

[RENCORP]

Sorry, should have been more clear - I am not talking about whether or not one belongs to a minority group out of choice or out of DNA reality - not in the least bit an issue.

All i was referring to is the right of any minority group to protest any perceived discrimination thanks to the First Amendment.

[H2obouget]

These are Rights: (AKA you are innately entitled to these by your existence....as acknowledged in the Constitution and as interpreted by SCotUS.)
1st Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
2 Amendment - A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is a legal right: (AKA you get it from a law)
It is illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age or sex - Per American Civil Rights Act (several of them), and EEOC

For someone to violate your Rights, you must pick from the list of Constitutional issues. But not from a list of laws.
The use of the words: Right(s) and right(s)...are physically different in law.
Can we please use them?
Hence, protection against discrimination is not a Right, but it is a right.

Under this train of thought... You have a Right to the 2nd Amendment.
This language includes "..to bear, shall not be infringed."
Bear synonyms: carry, bring, transport, move, convey, take, fetch, deliver, tote, lug, or to have or display as a visible mark or feature.
Infringed synonyms: to stop, bar, refuse interaction, restrict, limit, curb, check, encroach on; undermine, erode, diminish, weaken, impair, damage, or compromise.

Telling me I can not carry a gun into a given location, or in general, is a violation of my Right as a citizen of these United States of America.

The only difference between 1A and 2A in this respect is that 1A has hundreds of support cases.
2A only has a handful.
And until 2A supporters start pushing back against the Anti-2A signs ("No Triggers")... We're just "Triggers" doing what the boss man says.

(yeh I went there. )

[DSynger]

Sorry, should have been more clear - I am not talking about whether or not one belongs to a minority group out of choice or out of DNA reality - not in the least bit an issue.

All i was referring to is the right of any minority group to protest any perceived discrimination thanks to the First Amendment.

You were clear. I was just chiming in. Someone can always argue a gun owner is defined by a choice, where skin color is beyond someone's control.

[zombie66]

These are Rights: (AKA you are innately entitled to these by your existence....as acknowledged in the Constitution and as interpreted by SCotUS.)
1st Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
2 Amendment - A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is a legal right: (AKA you get it from a law)
It is illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age or sex - Per American Civil Rights Act (several of them), and EEOC

For someone to violate your Rights, you must pick from the list of Constitutional issues. But not from a list of laws.
The use of the words: Right(s) and right(s)...are physically different in law.
Can we please use them?
Hence, protection against discrimination is not a Right, but it is a right.

Under this train of thought... You have a Right to the 2nd Amendment.
This language includes "..to bear, shall not be infringed."
Bear synonyms: carry, bring, transport, move, convey, take, fetch, deliver, tote, lug, or to have or display as a visible mark or feature.
Infringed synonyms: to stop, bar, refuse interaction, restrict, limit, curb, check, encroach on; undermine, erode, diminish, weaken, impair, damage, or compromise.

Telling me I can not carry a gun into a given location, or in general, is a violation of my Right as a citizen of these United States of America.

The only difference between 1A and 2A in this respect is that 1A has hundreds of support cases.
2A only has a handful.
And until 2A supporters start pushing back against the Anti-2A signs ("No Triggers")... We're just "Triggers" doing what the boss man says.

(yeh I went there. )

The simple definitions you give make way tooooooo much sense........................Just saying



Well Said, You get a Cookie.

[DSynger]

These are Rights: (AKA you are innately entitled to these by your existence....as acknowledged in the Constitution and as interpreted by SCotUS.)
1st Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
2 Amendment - A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is a legal right: (AKA you get it from a law)
It is illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age or sex - Per American Civil Rights Act (several of them), and EEOC

For someone to violate your Rights, you must pick from the list of Constitutional issues. But not from a list of laws.
The use of the words: Right(s) and right(s)...are physically different in law.
Can we please use them?
Hence, protection against discrimination is not a Right, but it is a right.

Under this train of thought... You have a Right to the 2nd Amendment.
This language includes "..to bear, shall not be infringed."
Bear synonyms: carry, bring, transport, move, convey, take, fetch, deliver, tote, lug, or to have or display as a visible mark or feature.
Infringed synonyms: to stop, bar, refuse interaction, restrict, limit, curb, check, encroach on; undermine, erode, diminish, weaken, impair, damage, or compromise.

Telling me I can not carry a gun into a given location, or in general, is a violation of my Right as a citizen of these United States of America.

The only difference between 1A and 2A in this respect is that 1A has hundreds of support cases.
2A only has a handful.
And until 2A supporters start pushing back against the Anti-2A signs ("No Triggers")... We're just "Triggers" doing what the boss man says.

(yeh I went there. )

If companies and organizations donating money is considered protected speech, why isn't carrying a firearm?

[Dave Workman]

If companies and organizations donating money is considered protected speech, why isn't carrying a firearm?

I'm not sure that it's not, but you'll get a fair argument over the use of a firearm as a political statement.
I always encourage people to buy an ad or rent a billboard to make a political statement.

[ANZAC]

You're splitting the wrong hair Dave. Those signs don't discriminate against gun owners, they ask people not to bring guns on to their property.
Discriminating against gun owners would be not serving anyone who said they owned a gun.

Well, what they're saying is that they refuse service to anyone carrying a gun.
You will, of course, disagree.

I agree with that version.

Again, refusing you service based on what you are carrying or what you are doing vs "who you are" has long been considered ok.

That's why a bar can have someone ejected who is causing a ruckus, or because they are wearing no shirt, but can't deny them entry/service because they're Irish (or whatever).

Our own state laws are really clear: "race, creed, color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability"

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=49.60.030

[ANZAC]

Telling me I can not carry a gun into a given location, or in general, is a violation of my Right as a citizen of these United States of America.

When you are on my property, my Rights as a property owner to have you trespassed trump yours as a gun owner.