American Legion Bans Guns

S

steve4102

New member
The American Legion post 71 in Duluth MN banned guns.

Legiongunban_zpsd61d945d.jpg


Is it just me or is this about as Hypocritical as it can get??

A Veterans Organization that does not support the 2nd Amendment? I find that appalling.

Before you guys go off on the serving "Alcohol" deal, it is legal in MN to carry both open or concealed in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol and there is no State statute that requires the Legion or any other bar to "Ban" firearms.
 
If it's like every other legion watering hole I've ever seen they've got a far larger problem with drunks than guns by a long shot...............and FYI.....I AM an AL member!

If that was my post I'd be raising hell with the poster!
 
Did you bother to go in and ask why they banned guns?

The assumption that they are against the 2nd Amendment is as assinine as saying I am against the 1st Amendment because I don't wish to have any Justin Bieber albums in my home.
 
What veterans fought (fight) for is freedom. Freedom includes being able to deny access to private property for any reason not specifically part of a "protected class".

Freedom also includes the right to disagree with those choices and to refuse to patronize the establishments which make those choices.

I love freedom.
 
I've done a fair bit of work for a state Judge Advocate and a number of posts.

Like any other organisation, an AL post will have plenty of stupidity to go around, but this may not be an example of it.

Most lucrative posts have a liquor license. If state liquor department regs prohibit guns in the licensed area of the post, then they have to keep them out or give up the license. I had a liquor license threatened because there was a report that someone had smoked on the licensed portion of the premises.
 
Ok, I give, how do we make freedom loving Americans exercising their unalienable right to bear arms a protected class? BTW, I'm feeling "infringed."
 
My Grandfather-in-law's legion hall in NE Ohio also bans firearms, even though they no longer serve beer there...must be a legion thing
 
Most lucrative posts have a liquor license. If state liquor department regs prohibit guns in the licensed area of the post, then they have to keep them out or give up the license.
Click to expand...
Zukiphile -- go back and read post number 1, the part below the photo.
 
Vanya said:
Their insurance company, on the other hand, can make them do anything it wants.
Click to expand...

Not really. Could they require a sign saying "No Blacks" allowed, or "No Gays" Allowed, even "No Women" allowed? I think Not.
 
spacemanspiff said:
Did you bother to go in and ask why they banned guns?
Click to expand...

This sign was brought to my attention by the host of our Local Morning Talk Radio show. He is a Veteran and organizes fund raiser and the like for Veterans and the less fortunate.

Last week he was organizing another fund raiser Spaghetti feed at the Legion when he bumped into this sign for the first time. The following Monday the topic was brought up on his talk show by a concerned caller. He voiced his concerns as well and ask if any "Board" members would like to call in and comment on the reasons for the sign.

It didn't take long for a Board member to call in and explain the reason for the sign. According to this board member the Legion is "Required" by Law to post the sign as it is Illegal in MN to carry a firearm in a business that serves Alcohol.

This is of course not true as it is legal to carry in bars and restaurants with a permit in the State of MN.



Yeah, I know that liquor and gun's don't mix, but to tell members they cannot carry with a big A sign just open's them up to be robbed or the patron's to be assaulted/mugged in the parking lot. This Legion is also located in one of the worst neighborhoods in town. I personally would not be in that parking lot alone and unarmed at night, Especially with a Billboard telling every low-life in the area that I am a Sitting Duck.

I didn't work for movie goers and it didn't work for Teachers and students, what makes them think it will work for Old Retired Veterans.
 
Last edited:
Really angers me to see that.
I am an American Legion member and support the Constitution.
However, I can understand that almost any kind of idiotic motion can get passed at a meeting. At my post most, and I do mean "most", of the members are very elderly. I am 74 and one of the 'kids'. They'll raise their hand without understanding what the issue is.
 
steve4102 said:
Not really. Could they require a sign saying "No Blacks" allowed, or "No Gays" Allowed, even "No Women" allowed? I think Not.
Click to expand...

Actually, there's a good chance they could do those things, depending on their legal business type or organizational charter.

That's not really the point though, as there are such things as Protected Classes and gun owners aren't on the list.
 
steve4102 said:
Vanya said:
Their insurance company, on the other hand, can make them do anything it wants.
Click to expand...
Not really. Could they require a sign saying "No Blacks" allowed, or "No Gays" Allowed, even "No Women" allowed? I think Not.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but this is a false analogy. It should go without saying that an insurance company can't force a client to do something illegal. Those groups are protected classes under Minnesota law; concealed carry permit holders are not, and in any case, the sign is a ban on a class of inanimate objects, not a class of people. Businesses may, for example, require people to wear shirts or shoes; they have the option of conforming to the requirement if they really want to enter the premises -- or not.

None of this is to say that I approve; it seems very odd that a veterans' group wouldn't support gun rights, and I'm suggesting a possible explanation.

ETA: Brian, Minnesota has a strong civil rights law, and it would be very hard to justify any such discrimination in premises that are open to the public.
 
Last edited:
That's why I say "depending on their business type or organizational charter.";)

In the context, the insurance company couldn't require it but certain organizational types kind ban anyone they want.

I'm not really sure what rules apply to the AL. They're almost "semi-public".
 
Their insurance company, on the other hand, can make them do anything it wants.
Click to expand...
Insurance carriers do not set specific criteria for each state when writing business. For example, they won't take into consideration that one state bans firearms on premises where alcohol is sold for consumption on premise, versus a state that does not ban such. All that typically matters to an insurance company is that the question is asked "Do you have firearms on premises?" And that question is not directly pointed to actions of the insureds customers, its about the insured and their employees.

I attended an OSHA conference some years back and was able to ask the speaker about businesses that post signs like the one shown at this AL. His response was that its only a 'feel good measure' that makes the company more comfortable. He likened it to the signs at a carnival stating 'you must be xxxx tall to ride'. That doesn't mean that someone who is shorter than the height recommended will be denied coverage in the event of a loss. And it doesn't necessarily mean someone who is armed will be denied coverage in the event of a loss on a premise where signs indicate possession of a firearm is prohibited.
 
All that typically matters to an insurance company is that the question is asked "Do you have firearms on premises?" And that question is not directly pointed to actions of the insureds customers, its about the insured and their employees.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And they base their rates on the answers to such questions. An insurance company may not require a business to have sprinklers... but if it makes a major difference to the premium, it can come to the same thing. If a "no guns" sign lowered the rate for liability insurance, a business, or other organization, might need to post one, especially if it were struggling in the current economy.

Mileage varies. The new Wisconsin concealed carry law immunizes businesses that don't prohibit guns from civil liability claims, but not those that do. That's not the case in Minnesota.
 
Last edited:
Rifleman1776, that sounds about right. Most of the time, the people involved mean well and are pretty generous with their time, but that doesn't always produce a well run post.

Zukiphile -- go back and read post number 1, the part below the photo.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I missed that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top