Shooting in movie theater in Lafayette on Johnston street

[geoney]

im protected by hr218, but chp holders have a real decision to make there. this forum doesn't appreciate the conversation so I'll leave it be or take it to pm if anyone desires.

You are still held to CHP standards edit- (for the most part) when outside your jurisdiction with HR218. It gives you no other allowances. All it does is essentially grant you a "permit" for those other states, but you still have to follow their CHP laws. In LA, don't confuse what you would generally get away with due to professional courtesy and what is actually legal.

Edit - In regards to this thread, not on official duty does not grant you additional rights to carry onto private property when prohibited by the property owner.

 

[madwabbit]

You are still held to CHP standards when outside your jurisdiction with HR218. It gives you no other allowances. All it does is essentially grant you a "permit" for those other states, but you still have to follow their CHP laws. In LA, don't confuse what you would generally get away with due to professional courtesy and what is actually legal.

im familiar with the restrictions. not launching the thread into hijack orbit, but I've got a crystal clear understanding of what it is and how it works - thanks though. In this situation, I'd have been protected. If youd like the education on details, feel free to pm.

 

[geoney]

Thank goodness, that consciously deciding to secretly carry in a private business that has asked that you not, is only a misdemeanor trespassing charge if they were to push the issue past asking you to leave.

But seriously, I am undecided on whether or not I would defy a private request to keep guns away from a business or just never enter. To date, I haven't had to make that choice. Hypothetically, I tend to lean towards honoring a business' request; as silly and nonsensical as that would be to request that in the first place.

I am with you. I recognize that the private property owner actually has private property rights and I have no second amendment protection from him. Therefore, since I have no legal or moral "right" to partake of the service he offers, I choose to take my money elsewhere. With rare occasion, if it is a place I "have" to go, I generally do so quietly while knowing I am morally violating his rights but choosing to accept whatever those consequences might be instead of the consequences of being caught without it.

It always baffles me the people who stand on their pedestal thinking they have the moral high ground screaming "My second amendment rights!" while not understanding that the private property owner has rights too. A lot of people have misconceptions about who the Constitution applies to and for.

 

[madwabbit]

Why does that apply regarding weapons but not anything else? As a business owner with a store front that is open to the public, if I have a right to deny service to a gun carrier, why not anyone else I choose. I've never liked this argument, its too hypocritical.

I'm sure you would agree to that decision being universal, but its not the mainstream argument.

you absolutely do have the right to deny service to anyone you choose. whats the hangup?

Since the bayoushooter legal team is fully steamed up this morning, I'll go ahead and note that you cant say "no service if you're black/gay/fat". You just say "im refusing service, please leave."

 

[geoney]

OK, your post would seem otherwise.

im familiar with the restrictions. not launching the thread into hijack orbit, but I've got a crystal clear understanding of what it is and how it works - thanks though. I don't base my knowledge of it off wikipedia - I've seen it work. Thanks for the concern though. In this situation, I'd have been protected. If youd like the education on details, feel free to pm.

 

[madwabbit]

OK, your post would seem otherwise.

edited my response. if youd like to know more about the incorrect information you are parroting from google, feel free to pm.

 

[Emperor]

Why does that apply regarding weapons but not anything else? As a business owner with a store front that is open to the public, if I have a right to deny service to a gun carrier, why not anyone else I choose. I've never liked this argument, its too hypocritical.

I'm sure you would agree to that decision being universal, but its not the mainstream argument.

I do!

 

[Emperor]

you absolutely do have the right to deny service to anyone you choose. whats the hangup?

Since the bayoushooter legal team is fully steamed up this morning, I'll go ahead and note that you cant say "no service if you're black/gay/fat". You just say "im refusing service, please leave."

Yep!

Until the thought police can read minds (they are working on that too), you keep your inner thoughts to yourself and just run your business within the law that affects the here and now; not the abstract!

Just remind yourself of this iconic phrase that has stood the test of time: "No shoes, no shirt? No service!" Just don't replace the words; shoes and shirt with the now infamous trigger words.

 

[geoney]

edited my response. if youd like to know more about the incorrect information you are parroting from google, feel free to pm.

Not parroting sir. I am well aware also. Feel free to PM me where you seem to have the misunderstanding.

Edited my post as well for clarity.

 

[sliguns]

It's being said this murderer was denied a conceal carry permit....is this true?

If it is true, this is direct evidence that completely discredits the conceal carry permission slip requirement!

 

[Emperor]

It's being said this murderer was denied a conceal carry permit....is this true?

If it is true, this is direct evidence that completely discredits the conceal carry permission slip requirement!

I think that everyone in the inner circle of the process knows the process is about generating revenues, and not about protecting the citizenry. By now it's probably the running inside joke at LSP.

 

[madwabbit]

nvm ill pm it. im on a short leash here and dont want feelings hurt.

 

[Jmfox3]

...Now, when it comes to government owned (ours), properties like post offices, police stations, polling places, etc. No law abiding person should be barred from protecting themselves...

A little different spin, there are many government agencies that you have to go into because of the service they offer. If they said, "we have armed guards so please keep your personal weapons in a safe place" and step through our firearm screening process; I'm all in. If they wish to declare a location a gun free zone then it shouldn't be a place that I am forced to go into.

 

[I Love Grits]

im protected by hr218, but chp holders have a real decision to make there. this forum doesn't appreciate the conversation so I'll leave it be or take it to pm if anyone desires.

Deleted post. Saw that you didn't want to talk about it.

 

[Emperor]

nvm ill pm it. im on a short leash here and dont want feelings hurt.

Yep! Don't push your luck or you'll get the stick!

 

[madwabbit]

Deleted post. Saw that you didn't want to talk about it.

not publicly. more than welcome to pm or email.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep! Don't push your luck or you'll get the stick!

lol you dont know the half of it

 

[Emperor]

A little different spin, there are many government agencies that you have to go into because of the service they offer. If they said, "we have armed guards so please keep your personal weapons in a safe place" and step through our firearm screening process; I'm all in. If they wish to declare a location a gun free zone then it shouldn't be a place that I am forced to go into.

That was my point entirely. But remember, not all of the listed places are places you MUST go. I haven't had to go to a government building for some time now unless I chose to. But I will say, that physical DMV, should no longer exist! What a joke!

And on that note, people who choose not to carry or have no clue, would never know what it feels like to sit in there defenseless.

 

[madwabbit]

That was my point entirely. But remember, not all of the listed places are places you MUST go. I haven't had to go to a government building for some time now unless I chose to. But I will say, that physical DMV, should no longer exist! What a joke!

And on that note, people who choose not to carry or have no clue, would never know what it feels like to sit in there defenseless.

yeah, they would. they just find out too late. a family friend (a brit) that was largely anti gun changed her tune after her home was broken into while she was home alone. I suspect that many of them just figure out how wrong they are too late for it to matter.

 

[Emperor]

Back on track, the Advocate is saying the shooter/murderer was a chronic alcoholic and was denied a permit in 2006 in his hometown due to mental illness issues. The laundry list pointing to mental illness is mounting.

 

[oleheat]

yeah, they would. they just find out too late. a family friend (a brit) that was largely anti gun changed her tune after her home was broken into while she was home alone. I suspect that many of them just figure out how wrong they are too late for it to matter.

I have family in the New Orleans area who learned the same lesson in a similar fashion. It changed their lives. (Edit: For the better.)