BW3's "no gun" signs: Are they enforcible?

[lcpiper]

Myself, I don't eat there, but if I did I wouldn't carry there because the owner doesn't want me to.

Well, his right, is in posting the sign and I respect that.

If you respected it then you wouldn't carry on his property against his wishes.

If you do decide to go into the business, you must lock your gun in your car which opens you up to theft.

You are already open to theft whether you leave your gun in your car or not, it's just that you have added your gun to the items that can be stolen. It's not like leaving your gun in your car makes the car glow in the dark and only criminals can see it.

For me I just wouldn't go, I just don't hold that someone is an enemy and that I have to go out of my way to oppose them because they don't want me to bring a gun on their property. That is a choice they have made and I would not want to take that choice away from them. I just won't eat there because I don't want to be unarmed.

 

[Tom Servo]

The OP's question was answered factually in post #39. Everyone seems to have ignored that in favor of arguing whether the right to self-protection trumps private property rights. While that's a valid discussion, it's not the point of this thread.