I don’t know what is wrong with people. Firstly, a Muslim free zone? How are they going to tell? How are they going to enforce this?
Secondly, the (unnamed) judge who chose to rule that such a concept fails to harm Muslims… oh Florida. You never disappoint.
(I would have put this in the pit but couldn’t work up enough outrage.)
The article makes this point: Apparently no Muslim has actually tried to purchase anything there, and thus no Muslim has yet been refused. Thus, no harm to any Muslim. Yet. Thus CAIR (which initiated the suit) was found to have no standing.
So it may be that any shop owner can put up a sign like that, but maybe he’s not violating any law until some Muslim tries to buy a gun there and is turned away. Then they’ll be back with the lawsuits again.
I’m shocked! Who would ever have thought that a Florida gun shop owner would turn out to be a racist bigot who can’t spell?
It’s a pretty neat sign, though. The first part seems to be an admonition to everyone to stay the hell out of his store – which I trust everyone will do – and the “Muslin free zone” seems like tacked-on afterthought on a separate piece of paper. The message is clear: “No one come in here, because I’m crazy and illiterate – and also, there are no Muslims here!”. The American flag at the bottom is the perfect touch to remind the whole world – not to mention radical Muslims everywhere – what country this idiot is in. This guy deserves some sort of national medal for promoting goodwill towards America. And the Nobel Peace Prize, too.
He is violating a law in an abstract sense, in the same way someone who goes out with an old newspaper looking for a fight is violating the law against assault and battery in an abstract sense: They intend to, but they haven’t actually done it yet.
The thing is, courts aren’t allowed to hear abstract cases. Courts are only allowed to hear real cases, with real people who have been wronged in a real way. It’s a way of balancing powers: Courts have a lot of power to make people do things, so to balance that they’re not allowed to go looking for trouble. They have to wait for trouble to find them.
The usual response to this limitation is a test case, which is probably forthcoming if CAIR already thinks this is a big enough deal they’d try to get a judge to shut this down preemptively.
It sounds illegal, but to violate the letter of the law, I think the owner of the shop would actually have to kick out a Muslim, or actively prevent a Muslim from being there.
For example: from my understanding, it’d be perfectly legal for a restaurant owner to post a sign that says “NO [insert racial/religious slur here] ALLOWED”, as long as he doesn’t actually bar or eject people for their race or religion.
Well, subsets of those killings were conducted by males. Are you for banning males? Subsets of those killings were conducted by left-handed people. Are you for banning left-handed people?
Expanding to include all the killings that have occurred recently, some were conducted by Christians. Are you for banning Christians? Some were conducted for religious reasons. Are you for banning religions?
Why do you choose this particular circle on the Venn diagram of various mass killings to make your stand?
The only thing they ALL have in common is that ALL the killers were armed. Why not make your stand there?
Please don’t respond “Second Amendment,” as being Muslim is protected by the First, and you’re ready to toss that aside.
Civil rights statutes (not the First Amendment or any other part of the Constitution) prohibit businesses from discriminating on the basis of religion.
I have a hard time believing that it’s really legal to advertise a store as off-limits to members of a particular faith. Commercial speech is pretty heavily regulated. If a restaurant in Florida put up a sign saying “No Hindus Allowed”, would that be legally OK as long as they didn’t actually try to enforce it?
IIRC, the case is not “ripe” for legal action until it is actually harming someone. Until a Muslim is prevented from patronizing the store based on his religion, it hasn’t harmed anyone. Keep in mind that our outrage and offense at the mans racism is not “harmful” to us and therefore not ripe for litigation.
Everybody – re-read Derleth’s explanation in Post #4. IANAL, but that seems like the best and most plausible explanation – specifically, the distinction between the crime in the abstract versus for-reals.
Also: Among all the pointing and laughing at the idiot in the above posts – Didja all miss the fact that his All-American Patriotic True-Blue Red-White-and-Blue-Blooded American Flag has only 48 stars? I infer that he’s anticipating the glorious day when Florida and Texas have seceded from the Union to form their own independent Caliphates.
In the meantime, why is he giving away Muslims for free at his store? Is he having a clearance sale?