Evansville Sued for Violating Gun Owner's Rights

[minx]

A reason to carry at the zoo. 2 yrs. old dead cause guardians have no brain.
Linky
Stupid people at zoos are not the ones with firearms. Prayers for the family, as foolish as they may be.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

How sad and tragic.

 

[AndersonIN]

The ignorance of the American public never stops amazing me!

How tragic and sad that someone can be that stupid!

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

A reason to carry at the zoo. 2 yrs. old dead cause guardians have no brain.
Linky
Stupid people at zoos are not the ones with firearms. Prayers for the family, as foolish as they may be.

What a terrible shame this child paid dearly for his mother's stupidity.

 

[daddymikey1975]

From the article
Walmart gets squashed like a stepped-on ant, while one brave gentleman fights for gun rights for us all. I hope Mr. Magenheimer wins!

I was playing email tag with WalMart's attorney and the City Council VP that was strong-arming WalMart back when this all shook down. There is a thread about it in the General forum. (too lazy to find the link LOL)

I tried to create a ruckus and WalMart still wasn't interested.

 

[Hammerhead]

I was playing email tag with WalMart's attorney and the City Council VP that was strong-arming WalMart back when this all shook down. There is a thread about it in the General forum. (too lazy to find the link LOL)

I tried to create a ruckus and WalMart still wasn't interested.

I think I'm adversely affected by the policies that SB foisted upon WM. I don't think it matters that WM complied willingly, because of the council's edicts, I can't go to SB Wally World and buy a "tactical" firearm.

Hey, Guy, wanna go to South Bend?

 

[daddymikey1975]

I think I'm adversely affected by the policies that SB foisted upon WM. I don't think it matters that WM complied willingly, because of the council's edicts, I can't go to SB Wally World and buy a "tactical" firearm.

Hey, Guy, wanna go to South Bend?

...or ammo after 9pm. They have a sign up now that limits ammo sales from 8am to 9pm.

I thought about seeing if Guy wanted to get involved but WalMart would be the injured party I think and would have to be a party to the lawsuit.

 

[Hammerhead]

Sure, WM is also being deprived of their right to sell certain firearms by this council edict, but I'm being deprived of my ability to go to the SB Wally World and purchase these firearms because the SB government won't allow their sale.

It doesn't matter that WM doesn't care to follow through on their injury. I might want to follow through on mine.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Wm is the only injured party if they choose to feel injured. They do not have to sell any firearms they don't want too, or coffee makers, etc...

 

[Hammerhead]

But the city can't put out any ordinances or "agreements" that say that WM can or can't sell certain firearms. By doing so, they're limiting where I can buy those firearms that they don't want sold. That adversely affects me as a consumer.

WM has chosen not to be injured by the council's edict. That doesn't mean that I'm not.

 

[Bunnykid68]

But the city can't put out any ordinances or "agreements" that say that WM can or can't sell certain firearms. By doing so, they're limiting where I can buy those firearms that they don't want sold. That adversely affects me as a consumer.

WM has chosen not to be injured by the council's edict. That doesn't mean that I'm not.

Did you contact Guy and ask him about it?

 

[stephen87]

But the city can't put out any ordinances or "agreements" that say that WM can or can't sell certain firearms. By doing so, they're limiting where I can buy those firearms that they don't want sold. That adversely affects me as a consumer.

WM has chosen not to be injured by the council's edict. That doesn't mean that I'm not.

Agreed that they cannot do that, however unless you were actually affected you can't be an injured party. If you had bought a gun from Walmart, then they told them they can no longer sell guns, your's messed up and they wouldn't take it back because of the rule, then you'd be an injured party. Since you we're not actually affected though, I would think you have no dog in the fight.

 

[Hammerhead]

We'll see.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

56 days until the trial, hearing this Thursday and they are sending out Juror notifications. My Father in law received a juror notification last week

I don't think he'll make the jury.

 

[stephen87]

You mean he knows you?

 

[jeremy]

You mean he knows you?

Shouldn't this have been...
"You mean he claims to know you?"

 

[recon72]

We was probably removed for failing to secure the weapon. Any facility has the right to limit possession of weapons on their property. No diiferent than a homeowner limiting a person from carrying a weapon in their home. It's a right to carry unless posted. And then it's not a weapons charge, it's usually an overbearing individual that ends up arrested for disorderly conduct. My question would be how they knew he was carrying?

 

[jeremy]

We was probably removed for failing to secure the weapon. Any facility has the right to limit possession of weapons on their property. No diiferent than a homeowner limiting a person from carrying a weapon in their home. It's a right to carry unless posted. And then it's not a weapons charge, it's usually an overbearing individual that ends up arrested for disorderly conduct. My question would be how they knew he was carrying?

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Much Fail with this post...

 

[atvdave]

We was probably removed for failing to secure the weapon. Any facility has the right to limit possession of weapons on their property. No diiferent than a homeowner limiting a person from carrying a weapon in their home. It's a right to carry unless posted. And then it's not a weapons charge, it's usually an overbearing individual that ends up arrested for disorderly conduct. My question would be how they knew he was carrying?

You need to go back and re-read all that went down.. TF had every right to OC at the zoo. The zoo is owned by the city which is a government facility.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

We was probably removed for failing to secure the weapon. Any facility has the right to limit possession of weapons on their property. No diiferent than a homeowner limiting a person from carrying a weapon in their home. It's a right to carry unless posted. And then it's not a weapons charge, it's usually an overbearing individual that ends up arrested for disorderly conduct. My question would be how they knew he was carrying?