ACTION ITEM - Call/email Costco about banning concealed carry in stores

Discussion
1

Starchild,

I agree with Steve Dekorte on the politics of it.

I don't see how it's a libertarian issue. However as a vulnerable
citizen, I would love stores to encourage their clientele to carry
weapons.

You wrote:

When businesses
do not respect those rights, it further weakens them,

When a business says "no guns inside" they are not failing to respect
RKBA. They may be merely saying, "on my property you may not exercise this right."

Starchild, if you were to visit me in my home, I would prohibit you
from reciting from memory (if you could) _War and Peace_. However, by
my edict I'm neither disrespecting your right to freedom of speech nor
weakening this right.

Best, Michael

2

Exactly. If the national LP can put out a press release announcing it's support of the right of the Boy Scouts of America to ban gay members (on the basis of the rights of private organizations), shouldn't we expect a similar press release supporting the right of Costco to ban entrance to people carrying firearms?

If not, where lies the difference?

-- Steve

3

Michael,

  We are not fighting for liberty in a vacuum! What individuals and
businesses do voluntarily has a direct impact on our ability to
successfully defend our rights. When a major chain prohibits guns, it
provides a psychological and material boost to the anti-gun movement,
and thus represents an indirect threat to life, liberty and property.
Costco is not "merely" saying anything -- there is no "merely" in this
picture; they have taken a controversial political position that is
detrimental to our cause. As long as we're not saying stores should be
legally required to allow customers to carry weapons, I fail to see
what the problem is with applying a little counter-pressure.

  Would you argue that when a media outlet refuses to cover the LP, they
are "merely" exercising their rights, and that it is "not a libertarian
issue" to publicly take them to task for it? How about someone giving
money to Sarah Brady's gun control group? Are you also going to argue
that this person is also "not failing to respect RKBA" but "merely"
exercising his or her right to free speech by making a political
contribution?

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

Starchild,

I agree with Steve Dekorte on the politics of it.

I don't see how it's a libertarian issue. However as a vulnerable
citizen, I would love stores to encourage their clientele to carry
weapons.

You wrote:

When businesses
do not respect those rights, it further weakens them,

When a business says "no guns inside" they are not failing to respect
RKBA. They may be merely saying, "on my property you may not exercise
this right."

Starchild, if you were to visit me in my home, I would prohibit you
from reciting from memory (if you could) _War and Peace_. However, by
my edict I'm neither disrespecting your right to freedom of speech nor
weakening this right.

Best, Michael

From: "Starchild" <sfdreamer@earthlink.net>
To: <lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] ACTION ITEM - Call/email Costco about
banning concealed carry in stores

Steve,

Nightclubs are a bit different, because people drink and take drugs
there more than they do in warehouse stores. But I am definitely
against them searching people. It is not a question of whether
establishments have a right to make these rules. Obviously they are
privately owned, and we support the owners' legal right to run their
businesses as they choose. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't voice
our
views as consumers. The right to keep and bear arms, like the right
to
put what you want into your own body, is in jeopardy. When
businesses
do not respect those rights, it further weakens them, because
business
rules influence the social climate, and the social climate
influences
the political climate and the law.

Yours in liberty,
<<< Starchild >>>

Need another assist folks!

We took on MicroCenter - we got them to reverse their
discriminatory
policy (to ban legal carry of firearms in their stores). Then
Kroger
got uppity, we spanked them too. Now Costco is apparently getting
out
of line.

How about all the night clubs that ban firearms? Should we be
protesting them too?

Shouldn't private property owners be free to place whatever
restrictions they like on who is allowed to enter their property? I
guess I don't see how this is a libertarian issue.

-- Steve

Yahoo! Groups Links

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups

Yahoo! Groups Links

Yahoo! Groups Links

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/69cplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos

4

Michael,

  We are not fighting for liberty in a vacuum! What individuals and businesses do voluntarily has a direct impact on our ability to successfully defend our rights. When a major chain prohibits guns, it provides a psychological and material boost to the anti-gun movement, and thus represents an indirect threat to life, liberty and property. Costco is not "merely" saying anything -- there is no "merely" in this picture; they have taken a controversial political position that is detrimental to our cause. As long as we're not saying stores should be legally required to allow customers to carry weapons, I fail to see what the problem is with applying a little counter-pressure.

  Would you argue that when a media outlet refuses to cover the LP, they are "merely" exercising their rights, and that it is "not a libertarian issue" to publicly take them to task for it? How about someone giving money to Sarah Brady's gun control group? Are you also going to argue that this person is also "not failing to respect RKBA" but "merely" exercising his or her right to free speech by making a political contribution?

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

5

Steve,

  The difference is that the *legal right* of Costco to prohibit people from carrying firearms is not under attack, while the legal right of the Boy Scouts to ban gays *is* under attack. We should stand up for the *legal right* of both organizations to discriminate under the principle of freedom of association, but that does not mean we should condone bad rules themselves. And when the anti-libertarian rules of an NGO are *not* in legal jeopardy, there is no reason why we should not act pragmatically in the interests of our cause. Even Voltaire did not go so far as to say, "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it even when that right is not in question."

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

6

Fair enough. But, if I understand you correctly, you are asking for the party to condemn Costo's legal, but unwanted behavior. So I have to ask, what did the party do to condemn the Boy Scout's legal, but homophobic behavior?

-- Steve

7

Actually I wasn't asking for the LP as an organization to condemn Costco anti-firearms policy. I don't think it really rises to that level. I do think that we as individual libertarians should pressure Costco to rescind their policy. In the case of the Boy Scouts, I think that any statements from the party supporting their freedom of association should have made it clear that we disapprove of their anti-gay discrimination at the same time.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

8

  Actually I wasn't asking for the LP as an organization to

condemn

Costco anti-firearms policy. I don't think it really rises to that
level. I do think that we as individual libertarians should

pressure

Costco to rescind their policy. In the case of the Boy Scouts, I

think

that any statements from the party supporting their freedom of
association should have made it clear that we disapprove of their
anti-gay discrimination at the same time.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

Just for the record, I completely agree with the principle that
private intolerance sows the seeds for state coercion, and that the
libertarian spirit should encourage a culture that respects openness
and individualism as a corollary to a politics of liberty.

But I'll not say more now.

Jeanine )( )(