Say you’re driving across the U.S. While going through a small town you realise you are absolutely ravenous; you pull up and to your delight spot two delicatessen type sandwich places, mom’n’pop type establishments - not big franchises.
They both look about the same, same level of custom, same look, same menu. *A’s Sandwich Shop *has this sign next to the door proclaiming that firearms are prohibited. On *B’s Sandwich Shop *across the road you spot this “firearms welcome” sign next to the door.
You’re totally famished and haven’t got time to mess about. Which one gets your custom? Assume you are not packing a piece.
(Inspired by Quartz’s thread on an armed store and grude’s on the Second Amendment)
I’d pick B. “Gun-Free Zone” means only bangers and thugs are likely to have guns. I’d rather be in a store where a conscientious legal-carry gun might be present. Even if you dismiss the miniscule chance that any violence would occur in either deli, I’d rather give my money to a store owner who supports gun rights.
I chose B because I usually carry a concealed pistol. If the shops are in a state that honors my Ohio CCW permit, I would most likely have a pistol in my waistband or my pocket. If I’m in state that doesn’t honor my permit, my gun would be in a safe in my car, but I would prefer to patronize the store that allows weapons.
A. Who’s going to rob a deli next to one where everybody’s armed? Plus, if somebody in deli B has an accident, the wall between the stores will probably stop the bullet.
This. But after i voted I thought of a caveat. If B meant the there was less chance of children being there I might go there. I wish more restaurants had “child-free” signs, I’d go there. And don’t get on my case about being anti child, please. I just would like to have a break from them. Forget the gun debate!
I don’t carry a firearm, so I’d pick the deli where the people would be most like me. My brother would not be allowed in deli A, so if he was in the party it would have to be B.
B - I’m not a fan of open carry, but I am in favor of concealed carry. If A had only stated no open carry instead of trying to prohibit concealed carry guns, it probably would have been a tie and I would have gone to whichever one looked like I would get served first.
That makes no sense. If a robber is looking at the two stores, which one is he more apt to try to rob? A, where he will likely receive little or no armed resistance, or B, where there will likely be several people who might send him to an early grave? The whole idea of “gun-free” zones is a completely idiotic and illogical fantasy. You can persuade many law-abiding citizens to comply, and you can make air-headed twits feel safer, but you are not convincing robbers and homicidal maniacs to go elsewhere. Quite the opposite, in fact.
I will go to the place that has the best sandwiches. In the event of a tie, the placethat has big-titted waitress/cashier eye candy gets the nod. I will do as I please WRT my handgun, regardless.
How often does any restaurant get robbed during business hours?
Also, the problem with establishment B is that you don’t know you have a robber in there until he actually starts firing his gun. Whereas in establishment A, if I do see someone walk in with a gun, I at least have a chance to walk away and call the police.
