Support your 2nd amendment rights!

The Disneyland issue is in regards to liability and insurance because both are amusement venues with facing similar issue. Have you ever been to Disneyland? It's the happiest place on earth and you don't need guns there. But the more important reason I bring up Disneyland, is that they, like this pumpkin patch are not public venues, they are (essentially) privately owned companies, run on private property, and they get to decide what liability they want to take on. That is what makes the USA great, the freedom to choose, for the most part, to run your home, your business or other private ventures as you see fit, providing you don't violate someone else's rights. It is not a violation of a custormer's rights to tell them that weapons are not permitted, that photographs are not permitted, that outside food is not permitted, that shoes are required for service, that hard hat's must be worn underground, that bicycles are not permitted, or whatever....

"An employer may not prohibit any individual from possessing a concealed weapon if the weapon is in a vehicle driven into or parked in a parking facility even if the vehicle is used for company business. A business may, however, prohibit individuals from carrying or possessing a concealed weapon in the parking lot of the business outside of his/her vehicle. However, an individual cannot be charged with trespass merely for possessing a firearm in a vehicle driven or parked in the parking facility."

Oh, and how about this? Liability and insurance issues.... True it's a school so technically not private, but what catches my eye is the issue of insurance not covering liability when guns are permitted: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/kansas-school-gun-insurance_n_3562271.html

Do you think the states where teachers are allowed to carry don't have insurance ? They don't have insurance from that company, but I'm sure there's other companies that cover them.
 
Do you think the states where teachers are allowed to carry don't have insurance ? They don't have insurance from that company, but I'm sure there's other companies that cover them.

I don't see how you could construe my thoughts as a belief that schools in states where teachers are allowed to carry don't have insurance... I guess I should expect that kind of misconstruation from you, however, since it is your MO.
wink.png


Do you think that insurers that do cover schools with teachers who carry firearms at work are cheaper or more expensive? My point, which apparently you totally missed is that some insurers don't want to deal with the costs and liabilities of firearms in the workplace, which in fact supports the desire on the part of some businesses to ban firearms. If insurance companies don't want the liability, it makes sense that some small business owners want to avoid liability also.
 
I know nothing about disneyland. I know disneyworld is fort knox compared to a punkin patch in Ga. They have armed guards everywhere in that place an still have some of the highest crime rates in the state. There are also lots of privately owned guns being carried in that park every day. Disney spends untold amounts of money every year on liability claims.



Walmart on the other hand probably has way more visitors a day than disney an the only gun policy they have is to ask that people keep them covered if they can. Why? That puts them under the least liability..


But as I said in the fist post on the farm.

Disneyland, in California sounds very civilized compared to Disneyworld. There is security at the gates, but it is not all that hard to get around if you really wanted to. There are security gaurds, but the presence is minimal and not obvious. Disneyland does not allow you to bring a gun or any other weapon into the park. As for Wal-Mart.... All kinds of crime going on in those from meth making to fashion crimes. Anyone entering Wal-Mart IMO is taking a risk in general..... Mostly that they will touch something someone else did and come away with some sort of disease..... Gun's not going to save you from that!
lau.gif


By the way, I still think you are off. I am PRO CHICKEN, but no way are you bringing one of yours onto my property. Just because I have banned outside chickens, doesn't make me anti-chicken. I have chickens, my chickens are allowed. I have guns, but if you come here, I request that you respect my wishes and don't bring either your gun or your chickens to my home. If you are too uncomfortable to visit my home without your chickens or your guns, I respect and understand that, but it does not mean I have to change my rules for you. My house, my rules.
 
Last edited:
Quote: They are open to the public.
You don't have to be a private member to enter

Quote: None of the things you named besides carrying a gun are legal LICENSED activities
They don't compare in any way.

Nor does an amusement park, where people tend to spend a large part of the day, compare to a pumpkin patch in which you'd generally measure the duration in minutes

Neither policy would stop a criminal from doing anything they want
 
Last edited:
Disneyland, in California sounds very civilized compared to Disneyworld. There is security at the gates, but it is not all that hard to get around if you really wanted to. There are security gaurds, but the presence is minimal and not obvious. Disneyland does not allow you to bring a gun or any other weapon into the park. As for Wal-Mart.... All kinds of crime going on in those from meth making to fashion crimes. Anyone entering Wal-Mart IMO is taking a risk in general..... Mostly that they will touch something someone else did and come away with some sort of disease..... Gun's not going to save you from that!
lau.gif


By the way, I still think you are off. I am PRO CHICKEN, but no way are you bringing one of yours onto my property. Just because I have banned outside chickens, doesn't make me anti-chicken. I have chickens, my chickens are allowed. I have guns, but if you come here, I request that you respect my wishes and don't bring either your gun or your chickens to my home. If you are too uncomfortable to visit my home without your chickens or your guns, I respect and understand that, but it does not mean I have to change my rules for you. My house, my rules.
Which Walmarts are making meth? Now that's interesting...
 
They are open to the public.
You don't have to be a private member to enter

None of the things you named besides carrying a gun are legal LICENSED activities

They don't compare in any way

They are open to the public, but they may refuse service for a variety of reasons, that is their right. Bicycles, outside food, photography are all LEGAL activities in this country, just as licensed carrying of a gun is, so I am sorry but they are comparable. There are plenty of legal licensed things (like fishing or driving a car), that can be restricted on private property or private enterprise. Restriction of these things is not based on their licensing, but on the rights of property owners to restrict activity on their premises. It matters not if you are licensed, if I don't want you doing it on my property, you cannot do it.

Oh, and you keep saying something about crime prevention... I couldn't care less if crime goes up or down, that is irrelevant to me in this situation, as the issue for me is only: 1. Should private owners be considered anti-gun if they don't allow firearms on their property? I say no, that you can be both.

I must add that I find it disheartening that so many of you are not supportive of the rights of private landowners or business-owners.
 
Last edited:
They are open to the public, but they may refuse service for a variety of reasons, that is their right. Bicycles, outside food, photography are all LEGAL activities in this country, just as licensed carrying of a gun is, so I am sorry but they are comparable. There are plenty of legal licensed things (like fishing or driving a car), that can be restricted on private property or private enterprise. Restriction of these things is not based on their licensing, but on the rights of property owners to restrict activity on their premises. It matters not if you are licensed, if I don't want you doing it on my property, you cannot do it.
Generally businesses can only prohibit the carrying of LEGAL firearms by posting approved signs beforehand.

Most of your arguments are just grasping at straws

It's STILL hypocritical to claim to be "pro- gun" and yet not allow LEGAL licensed carry on your property.
 
Hummm...
Quote:
Downtown Disney opened up to the public in the early 2000s. The area opened with several restaurants, gift shops, and even a movie theater. However, businesses are pulling out due to the high crime rate in this part of the Disneyland Resort. Over the past few years, Downtown Disney has had an increase in crime and poverty. Business are worrying about their shops, and are deciding to pack up and leave. “This is a big eye opener for this area,” says Disney. “Downtown Disney was once a clean and wholesome community, and we will do anything to make sure it becomes that way again.” Disney has decided to put out more law enforcement in Downtown Disney and and to clean up crime. Disney also says they will ban loitering, making sure homeless people in front of shops will leave. Once this is done, they will clean up the messes that have been made on the property, such as gang tags and graffiti. “We’re really hoping our plan works. We hope to see Downtown Disney return to its old ways and have less crime like our other areas of the resort.” This project is said to cost several million dollars for cleaning materials and extra police force. Disney plans on getting back that money by converting Downtown Disney once it is clean and turning into a theme park based on the Tron franchise.
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom