[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by John41

Originally Posted by jmintzer5 View Post
Costco is the first that comes to mind. They prohibit concealed or open carry...

Now, I agree, if they can't see it, there's not much they'll do, but if you're printing, they can and will ask you to leave.
————————————————†”—————

Then if I get killed in Costco because they provided inadequate security I should be able to sue them.

I hope you intended the irony of your post. (In case you missed it - you just implied that you would sue someone after you're dead. Because dead people can call lawyers or file claims in a courthouse somehow?)

Look at it the other way: if you get killed in Costco because you showed up carrying a firearm and they felt you were a threat to themselves or the customers, and they shoot you, they could sue your estate for the traumatic incident.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

No, it works if you BELIEVE your life to be in danger. Read the actual law.

If "any reasonable person" would believe their life was in danger...

Not just that you believe it...

I have read the law... I've taken the training...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I hope you intended the irony of your post. (In case you missed it - you just implied that you would sue someone after you're dead. Because dead people can call lawyers or file claims in a courthouse somehow?)

Look at it the other way: if you get killed in Costco because you showed up carrying a firearm and they felt you were a threat to themselves or the customers, and they shoot you, they could sue your estate for the traumatic incident.

And if you're simply carrying a holstered firearm, they have no cause to shoot you. There is no "perceived threat".

The castle doctrine would not protect that action...

[Tmarkwald]

Originally Posted by jmintzer5

And if you're simply carrying a holstered firearm, they have no cause to shoot you. There is no "perceived threat".

The castle doctrine would not protect that action...

Yeah, just because I walk around with a baseball bat doesn't mean I'm going to actually HIT someone with it.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by John41

Originally Posted by jmintzer5 View Post
Costco is the first that comes to mind. They prohibit concealed or open carry...

Now, I agree, if they can't see it, there's not much they'll do, but if you're printing, they can and will ask you to leave.
————————————————†”—————

Then if I get killed in Costco because they provided inadequate security I should be able to sue them.

Nope. Just like the Police, Costco has no responsibility to protect you...

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Tmarkwald

Yeah, just because I walk around with a baseball bat doesn't mean I'm going to actually HIT someone with it.

Yeah, but if you "brandish" that baseball bat, in a threatening manner, all bets are off...

Same with a holstered weapon...

[Dilligas]

Originally Posted by Dotneko

Seems to me, when I applied for my passport 40 years ago, I was not required to show anything save proof of citizenship. I can present my passport and fly to the Caribbean or Europe if the borders to that country are open. I am not required to show proof of any immunizations. I can fly anywhere within THIS country without proof of immunization.
Vaccine passports are an absurd overreaction to covid19.

You are incorrect in your statement. There are other countries (as in Africa & South America) in the world that require visas and vaccinations for entry. The vaccinations may be for other deseases that are a problem in their country (such as Yellow Fever). You can count on the fact that to travel internationally, you will be required proof of vaccination or desease recovery from Covid-19. Simply testing negative (usually within a 3-7 day period) is not a sufficient indication of your being desease free.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by jmintzer5

Yeah, but if you "brandish" that baseball bat, in a threatening manner, all bets are off...

Same with a holstered weapon...

How are you holstering an AR-15, or a shotgun? Those are LEGAL to carry in some states.

Not that it has anything to do with vaccine passports but...

A business does not have to give up ITS rights in order to protect yours.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

How are you holstering an AR-15, or a shotgun? Those are LEGAL to carry in some states.

Not that it has anything to do with vaccine passports but...

A business does not have to give up ITS rights in order to protect yours.

I never mentioned either of those, now did I?

But nice attempt at diversion...

I also never said that a business can't ask you not to carry in their store.

I simply said that refusal to comply will only result in a "trespassing" charge, at most...

Reading is fundamental...

[Davidgroupx]

Because they could give it to other people who have not yet been vaccinated, or the 10% who have been but are unfortunately the few who are not really protected.

[Nazz300]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I hope you intended the irony of your post. (In case you missed it - you just implied that you would sue someone after you're dead. Because dead people can call lawyers or file claims in a courthouse somehow?

Well, after your dead, I know you are able to vote. So why wouldn't you be able to file a claim?

[Tmarkwald]

Originally Posted by Davidgroupx

Because they could give it to other people who have not yet been vaccinated, or the 10% who have been but are unfortunately the few who are not really protected.

Without a quote, there is no idea what you are referring to.

[Chi-Town]

I have noticed that people are getting vaccinated because they see that the future will close doors on them if they're not. Not necessarily because they want to.

[tvbound]

Almost everyone has accepted that a private business and/or public venues can institute and enforce a "no shirt, no shoes, no service" policy. Why should a "no Covid passport, no service" - be any different?

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by tvbound

Almost everyone has accepted that a private business and/or public venues can institute and enforce a "no shirt, no shoes, no service" policy. Why should a "no Covid passport, no service" - be any different?

As others have pointed out, you don't need a foreign substance injected into your body to wear a shirt or shoes

I'd like to see how quickly the far left switches positions if there was a proposal to force inmates to get the vaccine or no conjugal visits? The ACLU would take a supersonic transport to the courthouse to get an injunction.