Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 12:04 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 Yet another one more reason> 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:08 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:28 pm
Posts: 273
Location: Rosemount, MN
kecker wrote:
Lenny7 wrote:
She gets it.


The downside is she doesn't vote for another six years.


At least there is a future!

_________________
"Ours was the first revolution in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of goverment with three little words 'We The People'. We the people tell the government what to do, It doesn't tell us."
The Late Great Ronald Reagan

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

Campus Leader-IHCC
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
www.concealedcampus.org


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:18 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:09 am
Posts: 983
Location: Brewster
SultanOfBrunei wrote:
gaygoalie wrote:
Granted, he could've decided against going to valleyfair, but they are, basically, a monopoly on amusement parks, so you don't have as much of an option to tell them with your money as you do, say, a grocery store.

I won't begrudge anyone's right to prevent any sort of activity on their own private property. If there was strong enough opposition to it then they would change their rules or someone else would open up an amusement park.

Apparently too many of our 56k permit holders disarm or disobey signs. Or 56,000 wallets aren't enough to convince some businesses.


I am all for private property right but, if I have a rule that would not allow anyone to wear shoes on my property and someone stepped on a rusty nail and got hurt wouldn't I be to blame some what for not allowing them to wear shoes? If they had shoe on the nail still might have gone through a shoe but may not have been as bad of a foot and rusty nail injury. :?:


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:09 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:13 pm
Posts: 1743
Location: Lakeville
jaysong wrote:
I am all for private property right but, if I have a rule that would not allow anyone to wear shoes on my property and someone stepped on a rusty nail and got hurt wouldn't I be to blame some what for not allowing them to wear shoes? If they had shoe on the nail still might have gone through a shoe but may not have been as bad of a foot and rusty nail injury.

In today's world, yea you'd have your pants sued off.

In my fantasy world, nope. No one forced you to go there, take off your shoes and walk around. Now, if they held you at gunpoint and literally forced you to patronize their establishment, that'd be different.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:16 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:09 am
Posts: 983
Location: Brewster
SultanOfBrunei wrote:
jaysong wrote:
I am all for private property right but, if I have a rule that would not allow anyone to wear shoes on my property and someone stepped on a rusty nail and got hurt wouldn't I be to blame some what for not allowing them to wear shoes? If they had shoe on the nail still might have gone through a shoe but may not have been as bad of a foot and rusty nail injury.

In today's world, yea you'd have your pants sued off.

In my fantasy world, nope. No one forced you to go there, take off your shoes and walk around. Now, if they held you at gunpoint and literally forced you to patronize their establishment, that'd be different.


You are starting to make too much sense. I will stop now before you have me totally agreeing with you. :P I just think we should not have one without the other. If I am responsible for the rusty nails then VF is responsible for every disarmed victim. We need to change it all to make me happy not just do what is PC and banned guns and not allow banning shoes.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:19 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:13 pm
Posts: 1743
Location: Lakeville
The problem is, I don't really know how far I go with this.

If they have a faulty escalator that eats a kid, should they be liable? Maybe...
If a company hires a guy to use a saw and he cuts his hand, should they be liable? Not really, i guess...

It starts to get fuzzy for me. I feel pretty strongly about permits to carry and the responsibilty of places that are posted.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:41 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 9:55 pm
Posts: 598
Location: Dundas, Minnesota
Property rights get fuzzy for me, too. However, I think VF has a high degree of responsibility in this case, for a couple of reasons:

1) They denied a man his lawful means of self-defense
2) They hired people to act as "security"

i.e. they knew the place could be dangerous (see 2), told paying customers they'd take care of things (see 1 & 2), and failed to protect this man and his daughter (see handprint on her ass and her dad's x-rays).

_________________
I say I'm cleaning guns... My wife says I'm petting them.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:35 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:44 pm
Posts: 1525
Location: Isanti, MN
kimberman wrote:
Lady Glock wrote:
Bail was set at $40,000 - $60,000 per defendant


That's way too low. PC "racism" at work.

If the victim had successfully defended himself and not been released OR, his bail for assault 2d would have been 10 times this.


That's the nail hit on the head :cry: At 10% bond that's only $4K to $6K apiece. :evil:

I'm curious, what was Tretow's bond for defending himself against another THUG :?: :evil: :evil:

_________________
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
- Winston Churchill -


WITHOUT LIBERTY THERE IS NO FREEDOM


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:48 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:28 pm
Posts: 273
Location: Rosemount, MN
The way i see it is, IF you want to be open to the PUBLIC, not a private club and you don't want to let them protect themselves, you'd BETTER protect them!! ValleyFair will dish out millions for this one. I'm not for everyone suing everybody for everything, which unfortunately happens in this country far too often but this one is justifiable in my opinion.

_________________
"Ours was the first revolution in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of goverment with three little words 'We The People'. We the people tell the government what to do, It doesn't tell us."
The Late Great Ronald Reagan

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

Campus Leader-IHCC
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
www.concealedcampus.org


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:09 am 
Journeyman Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 10:29 pm
Posts: 53
Location: Have Gun Will Travel
Guess I'll have to start carring the 15 clip instead of the 10 if rats are roaming in packs or 7 or 8.

_________________
Never leave home without it!


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 1:28 am 
Junior Member

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 8:22 pm
Posts: 14
In this situation I would have to intervene in some way. 1) Not carrying somewhere posted, which is very rare, I would have used whatever I had on me...usually a hidden fixed blade and at the very least a folding pocket knife to help this man. 2) The times I do carry where posted not to (see 1) I would have drawn and told them to back off and that the cops were on their way. If that wasn't enough to scare them off, then I feel alright with my actions to defend this person with any means necessary. I can't believe that there weren't enough people around to really help this guy, let alone security guards at the exit gate.
I don't really go places alone, no kids, and I know that my friends and I would have done what we could to help this guy. Seems all of us on this forum would.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:06 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 12:04 pm
Posts: 1682
Location: Wright County
EAGSMN wrote:
Guess I'll have to start carring the 15 clip instead of the 10 if rats are roaming in packs or 7 or 8.



Any reason you're not allready? And what about a spare mag?

"One is none and two is one." -The Late Great Jeff Cooper

_________________
Get Off My Lawn.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 63 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group