This appears to be correct. Cite.
And apparently there are recent changes regarding carrying in a post office, to what end I don’t yet know. Cite.
Not to mention that in many places, such signs have no force of law, and if somebody carries anyway, they’re not in violation of the law unless they are asked to leave and refuse. Which, of course, will not happen if the firearm is effectively concealed.
But I think whether the belief itself is irrational depends on who you ask - certainly, I don’t feel uncomfortable around people who are carrying weapons on their person, concealed or openly, and I’m not sure why anybody would (barring other circumstances besides the mere presence of firearms). I think the reason for feeling that way about concealed carry would be needed before judging the belief rational or irrational.
I didn’t mean to pick on ascenray, and I’ll respect the (stated) desire not to participate in the discussion any further. I’m just assuming (right or wrong) that there’s not a valid reason, reason being the same thing as rational. Kind of like a phobia, which is irrational by definition. Saying you don’t want customers packing because you don’t want to be near guns is a cause, but it’s not reason. Maybe I’m just scared of guns, but that, too, is irrational.
Where the law gets really interesting is when you look at concealed vs. open carry for other weapons (other than firearms). It’s my understanding that in some places, it’s illegal to brandish (i.e., carry openly) a gun (but legal to carry it concealed, with a permit), but at the same time, it’s illegal to conceal any other weapon (but legal to wear them openly).
A sign like that would still reduce the shopowner’s (or other customers’) risk of being shot by the “law abiding” person.
How do you figure? :dubious:
Carrying openly and brandishing aren’t the same thing - to my understanding, brandishing involves showing and handling a weapon in a manner that suggests that it might be used. A handgun in an exposed, plainly visible holster is not being brandished.
Well, it seems obvious to me. If the shopkeeper has a sign that says, “No guns allowed in this establishment”, then at least some people will obey the sign and not bring their guns in the establishment. There’s therefore no risk that those people will shoot anyone. Admittedly, the risk that they would shoot anyone if they brought the gun into the store is probably minimal, but there’s at least some risk that the gun might go off accidentally, or someone might get the gun from them and use it, or the person might impulsively use the gun, or whatever. That risk disappears if they don’t have the gun.
A business that posts such a sign is called a Criminal Protection Zone (CPZ). Many CPZs in Ohio are listed here.
Which is irrational, of course. Because a concealed weapon is concealed. Since no one knows I am carrying one, no one has a reason to get nervous in the first place.
If I were a business owner, I would give a discount to CCW license holders. 
The risk of a CCW license holder murdering the shop owner or a customer is almost 0%. The odds are much greater that a CCW holder (who happens to be in the establishment) will save the life of the shop owner or a customer if their life is threatened by a bad guy.
Technically you’re correct. But as I mentioned in my previous post, there is the added risk that the sign eliminates any chance of a CCW license holder coming to the aid of a shop owner or customer who’s life is being threatened by a bad guy.
I have read of many accounts of CCW holders who have come to the aid of people in trouble. In most of these cases, the simple display of their gun is enough to make the bad guy run. In some cases, the CCW holder had to stop the bad guy. By contrast I am not aware of any case where a licensed CCW holder has murdered a customer or shop keeper. Just something to think about when you’re posting your CPZ sign. (Not to mention the fact that you’ll also be losing a lot of business.)
If you live in a place that allows the carrying of concealed weapons, I can say with confidence that you deal with several such individuals on a regular basis.
Sweet dreams.
Believe me, I never, EVER carry a handgun in my pants. That’s asking to be “Stumpy” instead of “Lumpy”.
About the signs on businesses: they have those here in Minnesota ever since we became a shall issue state a few years ago. They’re a balance between property owners and permit holders. People who are adamantly against having guns on their private property have every right to forbid them, but they have to give gun carriers fair notice. The signs have to follow a certain wording, and about a year ago the whole law had to go back to the legislature because of some nitpick about the precise wording.
This is specious reasoning at best - it disregards, among other things, the fact that responsible, conscientious people are more likely to obey polite requests. (Or the law, if you live in a place where “no guns” signs carry force of law.)
And in any case, most of those risks are completely negligible unless you’re comparing them to, say, the risk of being spontaneously flattened by a meteorite. Guns do not just “go off” accidentally - a direct, specific action is required in order for a gun to fire, and anybody handling their gun in public in such a manner that they might perform that action without intending to is being criminally negligent. It’s true that there are plenty of negligent people out there (you expose yourself to their senselessly destructive powers every time you walk down the street or drive on the highway), but do you really think somebody ignorant or irresponsible enough to take their gun out of its holster and fondle the trigger in public would pay much attention to your sign? And once you start talking about the likelihood of a sane, sensible person randomly snapping and “impulsively” deciding to shoot everyone nearby, you have left the realm of risk analysis and entered the realm of fantasy.
For the record, I have carried a gun into a retail establishment probably hundreds of times, and so far I have never flipped out and shot anybody, not even after looking at the price of a pair of designer underpants at the mall.
No it isn’t, if it reduces the probability of somehow being shot by a law-abiding CCW-ite through some bizarre set of circumstances from e.g. 0.0000012 to 0.0000011 - however I’d certainly agree that it’s not a very cost-effective sign to erect. It’s akin to putting up a sign saying “No people infected with Rabies” - it can’t hurt but the chances of it having any effect at all are effectively zero.
Personally I’d suspect insurance and lawyers - one or the other or a combination seem to cause a good proportion of all nonsensical signage and paperwork.
In Ohio, business owners are completely immune from any lawsuits that may arise resulting from the actions of a CCW license holder who uses their weapon for defenses purposes.
No matter how you look at it, posting a CPZ sign is an irrational act.
And that is the only possible scenario in which a concealed weapon may crop up, is it? What about the possibility of the faint smell of gun oil triggering a psychotic episode in someone who experienced a traumatic gun-related episode at the age of 3? How about if a customer banged their fragile post-rhinoplasty nose against the unyelding steel of a concealed .500 S&W? What if the CCW holder came in, saw their husband banging a waitress in the middle of the salad buffet and shot them both in a fit of rage? How about if Bruce Lee wasn’t actually dead, but working as a busboy, and he saw a tell-tale bulge, thought the Triad hitmen had finally tracked him down, and flipped out and killed everyone in the place using just his earlobes? You never know.
It’s not irrational, just silly. Signage OCD.
Holders of a FFL can ship handguns via USPS. My local dealer does it all the time. He did take them a copy of his FFL so there would be no problems. PS1508 is required.
Yes, FFL holders only. And only to other FFL holders.
Joe Citizen cannot legally mail a handgun to any person or company. Not even a non-functional weapon to be repaired. He must use a private carrier like UPS or Fedex.
No argument from me!
He can however mail all the parts but one.
Are you saying that a non-FFL holder cannot send a ‘gun’ (i.e. a whole one, or the part with the s/n such as the frame or receiver)? Or just that he can’t send it by US Postal Service? Because several dealers have told me that a non-FFL holder can send firearms to an FFL-holder.
A rational person could decide that he wants to eliminate that chance. Reasonable people can disagree on whether they want a total stranger to pull out a gun and try to stop a robbery in progress at their place of business.
Most of the “no gun” signs I’ve seen are just printed up on a piece of paper, or else are simple stickers on the door. The cost of such a sign is nearly zero.