Carrying while on your own property?

[Michiana]

there is no other view on private property rights

Actually they dont, dependant on ones view of the word "right" "a right cannot be granted, nor can it be taken away"
-Jeff Cooper

If you are coming to my house and I tell you that you cannot bring a firearm on my property the dumbest thing you would ever do in your life is show up with one. Your "right" to carry a firearm does not extend to personal property where the owner specifically says no firearms allowed. If you believe anything different you are way out in left field

 

[Michiana]

You are probably right

If the subject of OC hadn't come up you wouldn't have said a word

The only posts I read on here that advocate trampling on the rights of other individuals are by a few vocal OC people. I have no issue with OC, never had, I do disagree with the people who like to brag that they OC in places where they are requested not to. If respecting the rights of others is a sin, I plead guilty as charged.

 

[jsgolfman]

Climb down off that pedestal before you fall and get hurt.

There are literally dozens of posts on this forum everyday whereby others rights are "trampled", I don't see you posting there. And, yes, you do have issue with those who OC as you see it as not respecting someones rights if I OC because it might offend them. You can classify your sins anyway you want, makes no difference to me, but don't attempt to play "holier than thou".

If you want to show respect, why not try being truthful about how you feel towards OC instead of couching it as "respect for others rights". You don't like OC and think those that do are either stupid, immature, cowboys, rights tramplers or a combination of all those. Spare me the platitudes.

 

[dburkhead]

Actually they dont, dependant on ones view of the word "right" "a right cannot be granted, nor can it be taken away"
-Jeff Cooper

If you are coming to my house and I tell you that you cannot bring a firearm on my property the dumbest thing you would ever do in your life is show up with one. Your "right" to carry a firearm does not extend to personal property where the owner specifically says no firearms allowed. If you believe anything different you are way out in left field

Actually, it's a bit of a subtle distinction there. It's not that their right to carry a firearm ends, but that they don't have a right to be on your property. Since they don't have a right to be on your property, you can set whatever conditions you wish to that.

Now, in places where a person does have a right (an actual bona-fide right) to be, that's a different story.

 

[Mike Elzinga]

again, it kinda depends on your view of the word "right".

I always have found it interesting that people feel they can supersede state and federal laws because it is "their property" which is in all reality most often owned or liened against by some lending agency.

not an attack at anyone, just some food for thought. We might all be better off if we treated others rights with the same wieght and authority that we do our own. I would never suggest putting anothers safety ahead of our own, but if we want to keep these rights, we may want to respect the rights of others as well.

also, dont ever tell me what the dumbest thing i could ever do is, because that just sets the bar higher next time im looking for something dumb to do.

 

[jsgolfman]

I am 100% for protecting and respecting everyone's rights. However, no one has a right to not be offended. No one has a right to not be insulted. No one has a right to not be afraid (whether unfounded or not). I wouldn't go out of my way to try to offend or frighten someone, but if the simple act of wearing a firearm offends/frightens someone where do I stop at my offense? Should I never OC? What if I print? Should I just not leave the house?

 

[Soundslikejosh]

We started out with 1) respecting the neighbors by not OCing and went to 2) How is OCing disrespectful, then ended up at 3) private property rights.

I think that the private property rights issue is not unimportant, but rather unrelated to this topic. As a parting shot before I ignore this, let me say that its not a issue restricted to OCers. In fact, probably more CC people ignore private property signs because they won't be confronted on the issue.

I return to my original 3 questions centered on why Capshot thought it was more respectful of his neighbors to CC.

1) How is carrying in his yard disrespectful to the school across the street?
2) If I OC while mowing my grass, and the neighbor has a coronary, did I not show enough respect?
3) Does this reflect their lack of heritage and generally thin skin?



I apologize for the thread drift but this was hard to ignore. And, I am sorry Dick, but I can't believe that your statement wasn't said to jab at OCers. We can agree to disagree, but let's not kid ourselves. Further, I think the private property issue is important, but not intrinsicly related.

 

[haldir]

If you want to show respect, why not try being truthful about how you feel towards OC instead of couching it as "respect for others rights". You don't like OC and think those that do are either stupid, immature, cowboys, rights tramplers or a combination of all those. Spare me the platitudes.

Actually if you go back and read his posts Michiana has never couched or tried to hide his feelings on the subject. One thing you have to say, you know exactly where he stands on the topic

 

[bwframe]

IANAL but, if you are renting a property and all provisions of the lease are met, it is in effect your property.

 

[jsgolfman]

Actually if you go back and read his posts Michiana has never couched or tried to hide his feelings on the subject. One thing you have to say, you know exactly where he stands on the topic

Thats my point, he's trying to play coy in this thread by stating "he has no issue with OC, never has". I was simply calling BS.

 

[Bluehazemay]

1) How is carrying in his yard disrespectful to the school across the street?
2) If I OC while mowing my grass, and the neighbor has a coronary, did I not show enough respect?
3) Does this reflect their lack of heritage and generally thin skin?

--------------------

To answer these:

1. It may not be disrespectfull but I do look at it that it would be possible for the school to be concerned or could cause a disturbence in the class as the side of the school with open windows has a full view of my house, I do not wish to cause a disturbence, and the class was willing to help push my car out the snow I look at it that to show the same respect and thoughtfullness I would not disturbe the class or cause the famous ( Look guys that dude has a gun!)

2. If my neighbor ever brought to my attention that is bothered him/her I would explain my reason in a respectful mannor, if after that they explained they were still uncomfortable and asked respectfully that I would not open carry while Mowing my Lawn I would respect there wishs. To me thats not much to ask.

3. Not sure on this question lol

 

[Michiana]

My point exactly

Actually, it's a bit of a subtle distinction there. It's not that their right to carry a firearm ends, but that they don't have a right to be on your property. Since they don't have a right to be on your property, you can set whatever conditions you wish to that.

Now, in places where a person does have a right (an actual bona-fide right) to be, that's a different story.

For the umpteen times here is my position on outside carry. If a licensed individual in Indiana want to strap a legal firearm on their body and parade around the state with it go right ahead. Where I differ from the hard core OC people is I believe that if a private entity such as a business or private residence specifically says no firearms allowed on their premises remove your firearm before entering or don’t enter. If you have a concealed carry gun and decide to ignore the request no one will know so it is a moot issue as no one knows a gun is present but even the CC people should honor the wishes of the property owner.

The hard core individuals who believe their right to carry a weapon supersedes the rights of all others will disagree with me and that is their prerogative to do so. Because you are not “breaking a law” per say does not relieve you from the obligation to respect the property rights of others. Don’t like the rule, don’t go in. To flaunt a gun on your hip in a “no firearms allowed” situation shows immaturity on the part of the perpetrator and a complete lack of respect of other individuals you are intruding upon. You don’t have to go any where’s with a gun, it is a decision you made for your own reasons and that is not enough to trample the rights of others to “exercise your perceived right”.

I am not anti OC, I am anti inconsiderate people in this world.

 

[Bluehazemay]

For the umpteen times here is my position on outside carry. If a licensed individual in Indiana want to strap a legal firearm on their body and parade around the state with it go right ahead. Where I differ from the hard core OC people is I believe that if a private entity such as a business or private residence specifically says no firearms allowed on their premises remove your firearm before entering or don’t enter. If you have a concealed carry gun and decide to ignore the request no one will know so it is a moot issue as no one knows a gun is present but even the CC people should honor the wishes of the property owner.

The hard core individuals who believe their right to carry a weapon supersedes the rights of all others will disagree with me and that is their prerogative to do so. Because you are not “breaking a law” per say does not relieve you from the obligation to respect the property rights of others. Don’t like the rule, don’t go in. To flaunt a gun on your hip in a “no firearms allowed” situation shows immaturity on the part of the perpetrator and a complete lack of respect of other individuals you are intruding upon. You don’t have to go any where’s with a gun, it is a decision you made for your own reasons and that is not enough to trample the rights of others to “exercise your perceived right”.

I am not anti OC, I am anti inconsiderate people in this world.

Very well put and agree! There is a point of excersing the right you have and a point of disrespect. If you want respect you have to normally provide it first. It sucks but thats life.

 

[Michiana]

Sorry you are way off base on this one

Thats my point, he's trying to play coy in this thread by stating "he has no issue with OC, never has". I was simply calling BS.

Read this post very carefully and try really hard to comprehend what I have written. I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE LEGALLY WALKING AROUND WITH A GUN STRAPPED TO THEIR BELTS IF THAT MAKES THEM FEEL GOOD ABOUT THEMSELVES. I DO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH PEOPLE BRAGGING THAT THEY GO INTO BUSINESSES THAT HAVE A “NO GUNS ALLOWED” POLICY BECAUSE THEY PRECEIVE IT IS THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT TO DO SO AND THAT SUPERCEEDS THE PROPERTY OWNERS RIGHT TO REGULATE HOW THEIR PROPERTY IS TO BE USED.

Personally I would not walk around in commercial buildings with an exposed handgun as I have nothing to prove to myself or anyone else. If doing so makes other people feel happy by all means do so as much as you want, just show some respect to your fellow citizens that are not into guns like you are. I believe in being able to decide for myself if I want to get involved in a situation, not be drawn into one because people have seen me with a gun leaving that option out of my decision making.

It is all about respecting the rights of others as you want them to respect your right to carry. Hope this clarifies my position on OC once and for all. Trust me, there is nothing coy about me stating my opinion.

 

[schwaky18]

This has been discussed before but I think we all need a re-education.

The constitution ONLY applies to the federal gov. and 1-10 (with exceptions aka 2nd) apply to states through the 14A. This constitution says what the federal government and what the states can and cannot do. It does not say what citizens can and cannot do

You do not have a right to carry because of the 2A because the constitution does not govern you, it only governs the federal gov. and the states. What the 2A says is that the government can not say you can’t carry or bear arms. What you have is a right that the GOV. cannot take away.

However, the constitution does not govern me nor my property so the 2A means nothing to me on my property. My property rights govern my land.

Now if you want to get into the issue of inalienable rights then this is a different situation. Personal, I think the right to SD is an inalienable right. But the 2A doesn’t grant you inalienable rights it just tells the government not to infringe upon these inalienable rights.

Furthermore, don’t give a guy **** because he wants to show other people respect maybe that’s what this country needs a little more respect for people with different views (aka “gun nuts” “tree huggers” alike) The constitution was suppose to protect people with different opinions from government discrimination this applies to my views on firearm ownership and SD along with the person that has socialist views.

I personally would tell the school and neighbor to screw off but that’s because I don’t feel the need to show anyone more respect than they are showing me while on my property.

 

[bowhunter_1978]

Man, I have got to get in on this one . It seems to me that the only actual "right" that is being discussed here is the right ot own a firearm. Those people that may be offended by OC would more than likely be offended by CC if they knew the firearm was there. While owning a firearm I believe is a right, the act of carrying a firearm on one's person is a privilege, and that can be taken away for any number of reasons. Has anyone stopped to think that while it may offend or worry someone that I carry a firearm, that it may worry or offend the person carrying when those people stare, point, whisper to others or call the police when they see the print or the actual weapon? I mean people can be offended by alot of things and that is human nature and their belief system, so I guess we should all just stay home and not talk, wear plain clothes with no logos or anything on them and basically try to keep from bothering someone else? Offended as they may be, like I have said in other posts that, the offended ones and the "gun grabbing" types are the ones that will be clinging on to OUR pantlegs when the shtf, and those people, whether I agree with them or not, would be defended by me and many others like us without regard to their views. I just felt the need to add my cheap .01 cent, because with the economic situation I can't afford 2 cents.

 

[Michiana]

I agree with you on your point.

Man, I have got to get in on this one . It seems to me that the only actual "right" that is being discussed here is the right ot own a firearm. Those people that may be offended by OC would more than likely be offended by CC if they knew the firearm was there. While owning a firearm I believe is a right, the act of carrying a firearm on one's person is a privilege, and that can be taken away for any number of reasons. I just felt the need to add my cheap .01 cent, because with the economic situation I can't afford 2 cents.

My recent statements relate back to previous discussions we had on here where I read posts from a couple members bragging that they should march right into businesses with "no firearms allowed" signs while they OC to exercise their rights and educate the public to carry laws. They say there is no law to prevent them from doing so, only company policy and if they are asked to leave and refuse they can then be charged with tresspassing, otherwise they are within their rights. My question is what about the rights of the property owner to decide what goes on within their private property? No one is trying to take any persons rights away except the small minority of "I can OC anywhere I want" advocates.

 

[cce1302]

Man, I have got to get in on this one . It seems to me that the only actual "right" that is being discussed here is the right ot own a firearm. Those people that may be offended by OC would more than likely be offended by CC if they knew the firearm was there. While owning a firearm I believe is a right, the act of carrying a firearm on one's person is a privilege, and that can be taken away for any number of reasons. Has anyone stopped to think that while it may offend or worry someone that I carry a firearm, that it may worry or offend the person carrying when those people stare, point, whisper to others or call the police when they see the print or the actual weapon? I mean people can be offended by alot of things and that is human nature and their belief system, so I guess we should all just stay home and not talk, wear plain clothes with no logos or anything on them and basically try to keep from bothering someone else? Offended as they may be, like I have said in other posts that, the offended ones and the "gun grabbing" types are the ones that will be clinging on to OUR pantlegs when the shtf, and those people, whether I agree with them or not, would be defended by me and many others like us without regard to their views. I just felt the need to add my cheap .01 cent, because with the economic situation I can't afford 2 cents.

Bowhunter- can you explain what the "and bear" part of "keep and bear arms" means, if carrying arms is not a right, but owning arms is?

Michiana-The tone you use while saying "IF THAT MAKES THEM FEEL GOOD ABOUT THEMSELVES" makes your point of view and your feelings about open carry and those who exercise that right abundantly clear.

Rep added to JSGolfman for all his posts on this thread.

 

[bowhunter_1978]

I guess that I am confused about what rights are trying to be taken away by OC. I do agree that if there are a no guns sign posted then that request should be honored. But I don't believe that carrying either openly or concealed in a place that allows it, takes away any rights from anyone regardless if they are offended or not.

 

[cce1302]

I guess that I am confused. . .

Can't argue with that one. Try reading the thread from the top.