I'm with you there. Except for the pony...!

The carry law is just another gun control law. It is sort of ironic that we like it so much.

We don't like the "carry law."

We prefer the REFORMED version of the carry law over the police-discretionary system that existed previously. Alaska has the "perfect" system.

Reasonable accommodations. These businesses are forced to be handicapped accessable, forced to tolerate seeing eye dogs in the grocery, must purchase acceptable aids in their bathrooms. . . . . . but we are no debating something suggested as a joke.

On to other portions of the topic, all joking aside, I am inclined to agree with someone1980 Make mine a Morgan-Quarter I had one of those years ago and he was a great jumper

I think a courtroom (not courthouse) restriction is reasonable given the purpose and scope of human drama that occurs there.

In all honesty I think current tresspass laws are adequate to insure property owners rights and there is no real need for bans guns signs or the lock boxes I jokingly suggested. If you don't want somebody on your property because they are carrying, there is no reason an individual can't ask them to leave and have it enforced by 609.605 subd. 1 (3)

Call me cold-hearted, but I don't think private business should be required by the government to do any of that. I also think a private business should be able to ban straight people, asians, women, children, Lutherans, people over 6 foot, carnies, etc.

I see visiting an establishment as a sort of private contract between me and the proprietor. The gov't should keep its nose out of it unless someone claims fraud.

Cold-Hearted, I agree!

+1

By golly, we have discussed this far enough to get around to where I agree with Sultan.

I was part of a push in my home church to make the old building handicapped accessible. I made that push because we genuinely want people with disabilities to be able to come in. The building was old enough to be grandfathered (not required to make changes to become handicapped accessible) but we chose to raise and spend money on that endeavor. I fully understand the flip side of not wanting the government to force the issue. I like the idea even though I am straight and over 6' tall. If someone doesn't want my business I'd rather know and shop elsewhere than get crappy customer service . . . just skating the edge of what would be illegal under current laws. I imagine the free market system could clean this up. If we are talking handicapped accessability, the handicapped have to shop somewhere . . . that is money and somebody is gonna want that money & handicapped people have friends (like me) and I may want to do my shopping and spend my money with my friend and that is money and somebody is gonna want that money. So a store wanting our money will make it accessible and stores that don't want our money . . . obviously can afford that choice. No reason that can't be just as true with guns & no reason that existing tresspass laws couldn't be perfectly adequate to do the job. Albeit, we might also need to loosen discrimination laws. . .

+1 But you CAN ban people over 6 foot and carnies. They are not "protected" classes.