One big area of discussion and even sometimes dissension within the gunnie community is around so-called "binding signage". For those that don't know, in some states and localities where the carriage of weapons is allowed (whether open or concealed), businesses are legally authorized to post signage banning weapons on their premises. Frequently, the formatting and textual content of the signs are regulated by statute.
 |
| Ohio Binding Signage |
There are some gunnies that maintain that binding signage should be illegal, contending that it's an infringement on their right to keep and bear arms. I have heard others say something along the lines of "I don't care if they post or not. My gun's concealed, and they won't know if I'm carrying or not."
As much as I support the 2A and gun rights, I can't support this particular stance. What we're running into here is a collision or conflict of rights. I personally feel that a business owner should be able to set reasonable restrictions on his patrons, whether they are on attire, behavior or almost anything else. Freedom of Association and Freedom of Contract come into play here.
As gunnies, we absolutely have the right to protest, to send letters, to refuse to do business, and to encourage businesses to change their policies. What we don't have the right to do is ignore
lawfully posted signage. We cannot, in good faith, argue that our rights should be respected while at the same time ignoring the rights of others.
Now, I think governmental entities should NOT be allowed to post binding signage. The Second Amendment, and similar state statutory and constitutional guarantees, are supposed to be checks on governmental overreach. Based on that, I don't think the government should be able to restrict the lawful carry of weapons on its properties.
The stickier proposition for me has to do with non-binding signage. They do not have legal force, but they are obviously expressing the proprietor's intentions. For example, in Kentucky the binding signage laws apply to concealed carry only. Theoretically, even if signage is posted, open carry is still permissible (the Commonwealth has constitutionally-protected open carry with full state preemption). That being said, if you open carry in there, you should be fully prepared to leave when asked. If you refuse to leave, you are now subject to criminal trespass statutes.
Here is my personal position on non-binding signage. I think gunnies should respect those signs. A business should be free to do business with whomever they desire, and should not have to do business with those they'd rather not. Obviously, if "no guns allowed" signs are actively proscribed by law, then that's a whole different scenario. But where the law is silent, we should be respectful of one another's positions.
Advocate for a business to change? Absolutely.
Completely ignore their wishes? Not so much.
We have other battles we should be fighting instead.
