Costco official statement - they are anti-gun, anti-CCW

Status
Not open for further replies.
Don...

"As for dishonesty I don't feel it's dishonest to legally carry a legal weapon into a legal business."

And I don't feel it's dishonest to walk in to a legal bank and rob them of their legal tender. I guess that means it's ok right?:rolleyes:
 
"As for dishonesty I don't feel it's dishonest to legally carry a legal weapon into a legal business."

Nor do I. I think with the current way of thinking, and the way we are being legislated to death, especially with firearms, people will be forced to disregard more and more stupid firearms laws. I highly doubt this will result in anarchy. If Costco, or anywhere else, can produce a valid reason as to why people can't carry when the constitituion and the law says we can, I might then abide by their "law". But seeing as my personal safety is involved, and they can't produce a good reason, I'll choose to simply ignore it. Bill T.
 
"As for dishonesty I don't feel it's dishonest to legally carry a legal weapon into a legal business."
Click to expand...

And I don't feel it's dishonest to walk in to a legal bank and rob them of their legal tender. I guess that means it's ok right?
Click to expand...

The difference between my scenario and your scenario is that in mine I have broken no laws, in your scenario you committed a felony. You seem to be hung up somehow that because a sign is posted somewhere it has some force of law.
As I said in a previous post the sign at Costco would mean absolutely nothing in Florida. If they discovered somehow that you were carrying all they could do is ask you to leave. If you refused to leave they could have a tresspassing citation issued by law enforcement. Also in Florida once a tresspassing citation is issued you don't go to jail unless you return to place the citation was issued. Incidently that is the same procedure they use for anyone who refuses to leave once asked it's not just limited to CCW. If they don't like your attitude and ask you to leave it's no different as far as the law is concerned.
Can you explain how doing something perfectly legal is dishonest? Just because some corporate executive doesn't like it doesn't make it dishonest.
 
I never said it was illegal.

I think it is dishonest though. It is their property and if they say no guns then it would be against their rules and dishonest to take a gun in the store. I don't agree with the sign either, but that doesn't make it right of me to just waltz in the store carrying a firearm. As you said, it's your choice. If you really carry concealed then it shouldn't be a problem. Although, how would you feel if you had a "No Trespassing" sign on your property and someone didn't think it would be dishonest to come on to your property and proceeded to do so uninvited? We don't have to agree and I can sorta see where you are coming from so lets continue to have a civilized discussion.
 
I think it is dishonest though. It is their property and if they say no guns then it would be against their rules and dishonest to take a gun in the store. I don't agree with the sign either, but that doesn't make it right of me to just waltz in the store carrying a firearm. As you said, it's your choice. If you really carry concealed then it shouldn't be a problem. Although, how would you feel if you had a "No Trespassing" sign on your property and someone didn't think it would be dishonest to come on to your property and proceeded to do so uninvited? We don't have to agree and I can sorta see where you are coming from so lets continue to have a civilized discussion.
Click to expand...

The example you used was an illegal act vs. mine which was a legal act. Once again your example is flawed. A no tresspassing sign has the force of law in FL and most if not all other states. There are laws governing tresspassing and there are laws governing CCW. The tresspassing laws say you can't go somewhere has posted "no tresspassing". The laws in FL governing CCW say you can't go into a school, bar (unless you're in an area setup primarily for dining), courthouse, police station, polling place, government building or any other place excluded by federal law. Unlike Texas with there 30.06 signs, Ohio with their signs and other states, Florida made no provision for signs in the law.

I think a better example for you to use would be to compare swearing in public. There is nothing illegal about saying GD in public, but it wouldn't be courteous especially if someone posted a sign asking you not to do it. It also might be seen as incourteous(sp) to CCW in a business if they posted a sign.

I see the point your trying to make. I just don't believe it's dishonest to exercise a legal and protected right. Even if I don't like the fact that they make you get a permit to exercise it. The real question here should be why do we need to get a permit to exercise our 2A rights, but not our 1A rights or any of the others?
As far as the signs go, I would advise do what your conscience tells you based on the laws in your state.


Edit: All for a civil debate. Please take no offense.
 
I don't see what the problem is with what Costco wants on their own property. They have rights as do any other Americans, or people in America. Under the Constitution specifically the amendments to it in the Bill of Rights, your right to keep an bear arms is a meant as a protection from the government infringing on said right. There is no law, statutory or otherwise, of which i am aware, that allows you to infringe on the right of someone to run there priivate property the way they see fit. Of course businesses have to follow civil rights regulations and such, but this is not such an issue - though I think it should be viewed as just that. Private property, is after all - just that private property. If a state has laws that say otherwise, fine, but if this is not a question of law regarding concealed carry statutes, then forget about infringing on Costco's rights. What is good for the goose is good for the gander so to speak. As you have rights so to do they.

My advice if you do not like the policy is to start a grass roots boycot. It may do more than you might think to support the cause if you stick with it.
 
I don't see what the problem is with what Costco wants on their own property. They have rights as do any other Americans, or people in America. Under the Constitution specifically the amendments to it in the Bill of Rights, your right to keep an bear arms is a meant as a protection from the government infringing on said right. There is no law, statutory or otherwise, of which i am aware, that allows you to infringe on the right of someone to run there priivate property the way they see fit.
Click to expand...


You're correct it's their property and my money. Maybe they should have a dress code also to make the shopping experience better. Me carrying a concealed gun on my person in no way infringes on them unless I show them my gun.
 
Costco (or any business) does not have to follow the principles laid down by the US Constitution, but they have to follow federal regulations, which are NOT in the Constitution. Arrrrrrhhh!!!!!!
It's time for a constitutional amendment to make the bill of rights universally applicable. Maybe during the next disaster, Blackwater USA can house their personnel in someone's house, or the national guard can search your home without a warrant (oh wait)!
 
We have no signs at the local Costco. Concealed is concealed, nobody knows but me. I went there last week and noticed a squished .223 casing in the parking lot on my way in. I think it would be amusing to scatter random peices of brass in the parking lots of anti-gun businesses.:D
 
All this is about is what Costco "wants". Who cares? If you feel the need to carry concealed at Costco then do so. Whats going to happen if your found out? My guess is nothing. Why piss off a membership paying customer? All this is about is responding to what some dickhead white shirt exec. wants. I worry more about the weather. Bill T.
 
The problem that I have with the "private property rights" crowd is this:

How can you claim that you have the right to remove my best means of defending myself from criminals, yet accept no responsibility for my safety? If I am robbed or injured by a violent criminal on your property AFTER being disarmed by your policy, you should be responsible for my damages.

Instead, the businesses who post "no weapons" signs hide behind "third party intervention" and claim not to be responsible for the acts of criminals, even though the signs they posted made the criminal more brazen AND took away my main means of self defense. I bet the owners of those large businesses travel with armed guards. I bet the money belonging to those businesses travels with armed guards. Guns are bad, unless they are guarding your stuff, I guess.

I will carry anyway. My right to be alive after defending myself from attack trumps your right to save money on your insurance by posting silly signs that accomplish nothing.
 
Last edited:
When I do go...

Haven't been there in a while so I don't know if they have signage at the COSTCO here. However, I carry, concealed means concealed, if made I'd leave the cart and say have a nice "re-stocking day".

However, the most fun is leaving on your way out. They make you do the check your cart and reciept thing. Like they'ed know that small item in the bottom of your cart covered by a ton of other things. When I take my retired mom I usually send her ahead of me to the car because the following experience doesn't do much for her.

So... I've paid for my items, checker checked, another person loads paid for items in cart and away I go after paying. Get to the "line" to get my reciept "checked" and I just go around the line to the exit. I get the "hey just a minute I need to check your reciept/cart". I say, I just had a checker ring the items up, another put them in my cart and I paid for them them. If you want to check my reciept/cart, follow me to my vehicle and check it out as I load it into my vehicle :)

Mean while the sheeple just look on totally amazed :eek:
 
Lets see, I quit em 'bout ten years ago, so what have I saved? $450 or so, and now I don't have to deal the carry problem or the city traffic to shop there either. I dislike heavy traffic and enjoy saving, so I'd say it's a win win situation.
 
As for dishonesty I don't feel it's dishonest to legally carry a legal weapon into a legal business.
Click to expand...
I don't either, but many here are not suggesting that. They are suggesting/saying that they advocate illegally carrying.
 
I think with the current way of thinking, and the way we are being legislated to death, especially with firearms, people will be forced to disregard more and more stupid firearms laws.
Click to expand...
and according to NAMBLA laws that prohibit sex between men and young boys are stupid. So it would be OK for them to disregard a law that they felt was stupid??
 
My problem with the socalled private propetry mantra is that if bad things happen to said store owner, they call the police - paid for by my tax dollars.

Why should my tax dollars go to protect someone who wants to take away my right to defend myself on their private property. Let them hire their own private police and firearm to deal with trouble on their private property.

If they open themselves to the public - the private property mantra is BS.
 
How can you claim that you have the right to remove my best means of defending myself from criminals, yet accept no responsibility for my safety? If I am robbed or injured by a violent criminal on your property AFTER being disarmed by your policy, you should be responsible for my damages.
Click to expand...
The business is not removing anything from you. The business is entering into an agreement with you---"we will allow you to shop with us if you will follow our rules." If you don't want to follow the rules, you don't have to. Nobody is forcing you to utilize that business and/or go on that property.
 
Why should my tax dollars go to protect someone who wants to take away my right to defend myself on their private property.
Click to expand...
If it will make you feel better, Glenn, they are probably providing far more tax dollars than you are, assuming the same abyssmal level of academic pay we have<G>! But don't you expect people that visit your private property to follow your rules, and not do anything you specifically object to?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top