Florida gun shop a 'Muslim-free zone.' Is that legal?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://news.yahoo.com/florida-gun-shop-muslim-free-zone-legal-171417861.html

Florida gun shop a 'Muslim-free zone.' Is that legal?
In a video posted by Florida Gun Supply, the owner announces that his shop will be a 'Muslim-free' zone – a response, he says, to 'political correctness.'

A Florida gun store is in the social-media spotlight this week after making a video announcing a new policy banning Muslims from the premises.

The owner of Florida Gun Supply, located in Inverness, Fla., Andy Hallinan begins the video by defending the Confederate battle flag's historical significance and cultural importance, and closes the video by introducing three new changes: concealed carry classes at the shop will be free, the shooting range will be free and open to the public, and the shop will now be a "Muslim-free zone." He says, "I will not arm and train those who wish to harm my fellow patriots."

The video was created after a gunman attacked two military installations in Chattanooga, Tenn., on July 16, leaving five US military servicemen dead. The shooter has since been identified as Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez. Since the attack, there has been widespread media speculation surrounding his Muslim faith and its possible connection to the crime.

The video has several hundred comments on Facebook. Many are expressions of support: "I commend you on standing up for our rights & freedom! We need more like you!" said one. But another said, "Not when you violate the US Constitution fella."

Is the store's Muslim ban legal?

The Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it a crime for any place of "public accommodation" to deny service to anyone based on religion, race, color, or national origin.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations responded to the incident with a news release calling for a Department of Justice review of Florida Gun Supply and Granite State Guns, which responded to the video by announcing, "I stand beside you 100% We too are a Muslim free zone!!!"

"These bigoted declarations are no different than ‘whites only’ signs posted in businesses during a period of our nation’s history that we hoped was over," said Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR's national communications director.

Mr. Hallinan told local news that he has not yet turned away a customer for being Muslim and understands it’s a difficult policy to enforce: "I'm not gong to say to him, 'Hey, are you a Muslim?' "

Hallinan "knows very little about Islam and Muslims," said Hassan Shibly, executive director of CAIR in Tampa, Fla., to Fox 13. "I hope we can use this an opportunity. I think we'll change some minds and hearts through conversation and not allow our enemies to divide us," he said.

Many American Muslims have already begun a dialogue. As Public Radio International reported in...

Bullcrap. Any store owner should have the right to refuse to sell guns to these stinking , murdering American hating religious vermin..
Their religion demands that they uttering destroy us so why should we show even an ounce of tolerance?
To hell with the law when it demands that we aid in our own destruction!
Hasn't the stinking obama government been living and crying out that same thing for 6 years now?
Why let it be a one -way street aiding only our enemies??
FF-THAT.. -TYR

[red state]

Bullcrap. Any store owner should have the right to refuse to sell guns to these stinking , murdering American hating religious vermin..
Their religion demands that they uttering destroy us so why should we show even an ounce of tolerance?
To hell with the law when it demands that we aid in our own destruction!
Hasn't the stinking obama government been living and crying out that same thing for 6 years now?
Why let in be a one -way street aiding only our enemies??
FF-THAT.. -TYR

Come on, Tyr, the muSLUMS shouldn't be treated any differently than anyone else. As Bush Jr. claimed (and I'm sure Jebby thinks much the same) we all worship the same god.....only under a different name. Besides, as Bush Jr. claimed right after 911 (with muSLUMS celebrating all around the globe) iSLUM is a religion of peace.

I'm sure the Chattanooga gun range felt much the same way OR simply feared being another target of the left if they didn't comply. And, changing the topic a bit......has anyone heard if that sob who killed Chris Kyle had, indeed, converted to iSLUM? And what of the largest loss of Navy S.E.A.L.S due to a last minute change in the flight manifest? Was that another terrible trade-off of our dear leader after WE killed OBL?

Tyr, we need to let by-gones be by-gones and face facts.........we were wrong and everyone else was right (here at DP and other forums). I just hope what we've been saying for almost 8 years doesn't come true.....

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Come on, Tyr, the muSLUMS shouldn't be treated any differently than anyone else. As Bush Jr. claimed (and I'm sure Jebby thinks much the same) we all worship the same god.....only under a different name. Besides, as Bush Jr. claimed right after 911 (with muSLUMS celebrating all around the globe) iSLUM is a religion of peace.

I'm sure the Chattanooga gun range felt much the same way OR simply feared being another target of the left if they didn't comply. And, changing the topic a bit......has anyone heard if that sob who killed Chris Kyle had, indeed, converted to iSLUM? And what of the largest loss of Navy S.E.A.L.S due to a last minute change in the flight manifest? Was that another terrible trade-off of our dear leader after WE killed OBL?

Tyr, we need to let by-gones be by-gones and face facts.........we were wrong and everyone else was right (here at DP and other forums). I just hope what we've been saying for almost 8 years doesn't come true.....
Sarcasm duly noted.
I too believe that the traitor obama was in on the S.E.A.L.S getting killed.
Obama, the most corrupt Presidency in this nation's history- I defy any person to post proof of one that was more corrupt than his is now and its not even over yet! Tyr

[Perianne]

Sarcasm duly noted.
I too believe that the traitor obama was in on the S.E.A.L.S getting killed.
Obama, the most corrupt Presidency in this nation's history- I defy any person to post proof of one that was more corrupt than his is now and its not even over yet! Tyr

I would say Lincoln. Those two are in a category by themselves.

[fj1200]

The Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it a crime for any place of "public accommodation" to deny service to anyone based on religion, race, color, or national origin.

Any store owner should have the right to refuse...

So you weren't really interested in the answer?

[jimnyc]

So you weren't really interested in the answer?

What if the denial is because the owner fears they may use the weapon in a future crime? Boom, end of story. A gun store doesn't need to sell guns to everyone. Instead of stating he doesn't want to sell to "muslims", he can state he doesn't want to sell to anyone he feels could be a potential radical. Or like I said, simply close up shop and tell the "customer" to fuck off, we are now closing.

A muslim walks in and says he would like to purchase a gun. The owner simply would need to state "no thanks, have a nice day". The video was dumb, for notoriety... but he can easily, very easily, deny potential scumbag terrorists from getting their hands on guns from his store.

[fj1200]

What if the denial is because the owner fears they may use the weapon in a future crime? Boom, end of story.

That would be quite the legal defense. I imagine that there would be statistics to prove that out.

[jimnyc]

That would be quite the legal defense. I imagine that there would be statistics to prove that out.

Don't need any of that crap. There's no law that FORCES him to sell guns to everyone and anyone. And if he feels someone may potentially be a danger, he has that right. Do you have anything that states someone MUST sell guns without good cause or such? Because otherwise, he really doesn't need a reason. Hell, the gun store can simply state the person looking to buy seemed suspicious to him, or a risk. He doesn't "have to" give a reason to satisfy the customer, and the customer is free to go try and buy a gun in another shop. It's actually common practice to deny guns to someone they feel is suspicious.

[jimnyc]

Let's remember, outside of the civil rights act - the MOMENT someone walks through his door - he can say "please leave, don't wanna do business" - so long as he doesn't state that it's based on a protected reason. Simply, LEAVE! is all they would need to no sell a weapon to them. There was a place that stopped selling guns to Obama voters too! LOL

But the signs stating "we reserve the right to refuse service..." is still 100% accurate. "Take a hike, beat it, you're on private property.."

[fj1200]

Don't need any of that crap.

Like I said. Have at it.

[Rat]

It wrong to discriminate and hope store owner no go through with plan. If does he should be held responsible and pay fine or whatever penalty is. People sometimes overreact. Only small percent Muslim population extremist. These people take teachings of Quran and misinterpret meaning. They are violent and look for excuse to hurt others. No need view all Muslims bad and discriminate based on actions of a few. No one want to see signs that say no whites, blacks, women, Mexicans, Asians, Jews, Christians, or gays. Muslims no different. They have same rights in this country as everyone else. Banning certain races is no what this country stand for or what our soldiers fought and died for over past 250 years. We sacrifice to have country where everyone free and treated equal.

[jimnyc]

Like I said. Have at it.

I'm not having at it. My point was that it's that simple, and the defense you speak of wouldn't be necessary. Gun shops and other FFL dealers have a LOT of leeway in how they can run their business and sell guns. The "have at it" would be for those that think they HAVE to sell them a gun, or that he needs some great reason.

[jimnyc]

It wrong to discriminate and hope store owner no go through with plan. If does he should be held responsible and pay fine or whatever penalty is. People sometimes overreact. Only small percent Muslim population extremist. These people take teachings of Quran and misinterpret meaning. They are violent and look for excuse to hurt others. No need view all Muslims bad and discriminate based on actions of a few. No one want to see signs that say no whites, blacks, women, Mexicans, Asians, Jews, Christians, or gays. Muslims no different. They have same rights in this country as everyone else. Banning certain races is no what this country stand for or what our soldiers fought and died for over past 250 years. We sacrifice to have country where everyone free and treated equal.

And suppose he simply believes someone is a risky sale? You think that dealer should be fined for being cautious with whom he sells guns to? I would rather guns shops out there being too cautious as opposed to "sell to everyone and anyone".

As for banning ALL muslims. Not sure I fully agree, BUT, I'm not sure I fully disagree either. How do you know which ones are radicalized and which aren't? And the killings of soldiers on American soldiers, and who killed them... I wouldn't want such blood on my hands and would much rather simply not do business.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

What if the denial is because the owner fears they may use the weapon in a future crime? Boom, end of story. A gun store doesn't need to sell guns to everyone. Instead of stating he doesn't want to sell to "muslims", he can state he doesn't want to sell to anyone he feels could be a potential radical. Or like I said, simply close up shop and tell the "customer" to fuck off, we are now closing.

A muslim walks in and says he would like to purchase a gun. The owner simply would need to state "no thanks, have a nice day". The video was dumb, for notoriety... but he can easily, very easily, deny potential scumbag terrorists from getting their hands on guns from his store.

What if the store owner thinks they go out to their vehicle--load the gun there and come back in to shot him and his customers/ employees!!!?
None of the can be trusted ever--they have sworn an oath to destroy all of us!
I can not grasp how so many can not understand that--they are determined to kill me and you and all that are not muzzie scum. The ones not doing the killing must support those doing the killing or else be killed themselves (as apostates).--Tyr

[fj1200]

Let's remember, outside of the civil rights act - the MOMENT someone walks through his door - he can say "please leave, don't wanna do business" - so long as he doesn't state that it's based on a protected reason. Simply, LEAVE! is all they would need to no sell a weapon to them. There was a place that stopped selling guns to Obama voters too! LOL

But the signs stating "we reserve the right to refuse service..." is still 100% accurate. "Take a hike, beat it, you're on private property.."

Not really, it'll take 10 seconds for a civil rights attorney to come up with proof of discrimination. Parade ten Muslims through the store whereby each gets denied service. Try this exercise; have a restaurant owner tell a black guy to leave and see how long it takes to be sued.


I'm not having at it. My point was that it's that simple, and the defense you speak of wouldn't be necessary. Gun shops and other FFL dealers have a LOT of leeway in how they can run their business and sell guns. The "have at it" would be for those that think they HAVE to sell them a gun, or that he needs some great reason.

Do tell. I imagine ignoring the CRA is not among them.

[fj1200]

What if the store owner thinks they go out to their vehicle--load the gun there and come back in to shot him and his customers/ employees!!!?
None of the can be trusted ever--they have sworn an oath to destroy all of us!
I can not grasp how so many can not understand that--they are determined to kill me and you and all that are not muzzie scum. The ones not doing the killing must support those doing the killing or else be killed themselves (as apostates).--Tyr

http://i476.photobucket.com/albums/rr121/samblaze123/firehair.jpg

[jimnyc]

Not really, it'll take 10 seconds for a civil rights attorney to come up with proof of discrimination. Parade ten Muslims through the store whereby each gets denied service. Try this exercise; have a restaurant owner tell a black guy to leave and see how long it takes to be sued.



Do tell. I imagine ignoring the CRA is not among them.

Are you aware of FFL dealers and their ability to turn down ANYONE if they so much as think that they may be suspicious? Are you stating that a dealer cannot turn someone away, simply because he feels they are perhaps risky, or suspicious? And because too many people buy guns for others, if a gun dealer even thinks that someone may be what they call a "straw man" in dealer terms, they can refuse to sell. If you don't have full money at register, and then go outside and borrow from spouse/friend, you can then be denied even if already approved. Seen that one myself. Reason? They thought it suspicious.

As for the civil rights act and guns - This isn't even the first rodeo. I remember another shop also banned muslims, and also claims of civil rights act and all that other stuff. DOJ got involved. As far as I'm aware, absolutely nothing was done and they were within their rights. Even a DOJ probe and nada. So much for those good civil rights attorneys taking 10 seconds. And yes, the ACLU and their lawyers, and CAIR were involved too.

[fj1200]

Suspicious is not a protected class.

Link to the first rodeo?

[jimnyc]

Suspicious is not a protected class.

Hence me saying they can simply tell someone they won't do business with them, and leave it at that right there, no more explanation. If any complaints, the reason was because they felt they were suspicious.


Link to the first rodeo?

Look up Jan Morgan for starters, and then you can find the investigations from the DOJ and ACLU and CAIR garbage. That one was more about "service", but the idea is the same, doing business with Muslims - which she outright stated they are NOT welcome at her range.

Another one (can't remember where), a guy refused to give gun lessons to arabs/muslims. I think he got a hearty warning. And keep in mind, both of these cases where were these folks point blank stated why. In my world, they simply refuse to do business. You do not need to give someone a reason. With "some" gun stores, location dependent, at best they would need to notify the state of why it was denied and that's where the "suspicious" goes.

Telling someone on the record - "not selling to filthy muslims like you" - could end up perhaps fined, and if done enough, maybe lose a license.

Telling someone - "I'm so sorry, but I can't sell you a gun today". And when they ask why not, tell them "I'm so sorry, but I cannot sell you a gun today"

I would LOVE to see any authority go around and tell a gun store - that they cannot refuse service to someone they think might be suspicious or risky. And considering I highly doubt there's a line to the doors of Muslims walking into such shops, telling the occasional shopper to hit the pavement wouldn't harm him in a slight bit, nor show any pattern of sorts. All it would do is prevent a muslim from getting a gun.

[Abbey Marie]

Can a bartender refuse to serve a guy whom he suspects is an alcoholic who can't hold his liquor, and will probably drive drunk?

[fj1200]

Hence me saying they can simply tell someone they won't do business with them, and leave it at that right there, no more explanation. If any complaints, the reason was because they felt they were suspicious.

Until someone points out that all the Muslim ones are suspicious. Disparate impact will get ya in the long run.


Look up Jan Morgan for starters, and then you can find the investigations from the DOJ and ACLU and CAIR garbage. That one was more about "service", but the idea is the same, doing business with Muslims - which she outright stated they are NOT welcome at her range.

Another one (can't remember where), a guy refused to give gun lessons to arabs/muslims. I think he got a hearty warning. And keep in mind, both of these cases where were these folks point blank stated why. In my world, they simply refuse to do business. You do not need to give someone a reason. With "some" gun stores, location dependent, at best they would need to notify the state of why it was denied and that's where the "suspicious" goes.

Telling someone on the record - "not selling to filthy muslims like you" - could end up perhaps fined, and if done enough, maybe lose a license.

Telling someone - "I'm so sorry, but I can't sell you a gun today". And when they ask why not, tell them "I'm so sorry, but I cannot sell you a gun today"

I would LOVE to see any authority go around and tell a gun store - that they cannot refuse service to someone they think might be suspicious or risky. And considering I highly doubt there's a line to the doors of Muslims walking into such shops, telling the occasional shopper to hit the pavement wouldn't harm him in a slight bit, nor show any pattern of sorts. All it would do is prevent a muslim from getting a gun.

I did. There was no evidence that she actually refused service to any Muslims that I could find although she did ban some Hindus who were suspicious. ;) If there are no complaints then there is no action. It does appear you recognize the validity of the CRA though.

[fj1200]

Can a bartender refuse to serve a guy whom he suspects is an alcoholic who can't hold his liquor, and will probably drive drunk?

On what basis does he make that determination?

[Abbey Marie]

On what basis does he make that determination?

If he can do so, then he can claim any basis I suppose. OR even no basis.

Are there specific rules governing refusing to serve, beyond the bartender thinks it's wise?

[fj1200]

If he can do so, then he can claim any basis I suppose. OR even no basis.

Are there specific rules governing refusing to serve, beyond the bartender thinks it's wise?

If they're all Irish then I suppose he'll run into trouble and not be long for barkeep work. :eek: Nevertheless I believe that there are actual laws and regulations that govern serving currently drunk people not to mention case law of bars being sued, successfully, for culpability of drunk driving.

[Kathianne]

If he can do so, then he can claim any basis I suppose. OR even no basis.

Are there specific rules governing refusing to serve, beyond the bartender thinks it's wise?
I don't know if it varies state-to-state, but as for selling liquor it's up to the person selling-totally. If someone wants to buy, but the seller is uncomfortable with the ID they present (must be government issued, but if seller thinks maybe altered or not the person they can refuse). If they appear intoxicated or impaired in any fashion that would be of concern with liquor. If one smells liquor and cannot determine if they are 'ok.' All are reasons to deny purchase.

If one sells and the police stop them when leaving the store, the store can lose their license and the seller their permission to sell. You can also be fined pretty substantially-over $1000 and can be sued/jailed if they are in an accident.

[Kathianne]

Can a bartender refuse to serve a guy whom he suspects is an alcoholic who can't hold his liquor, and will probably drive drunk?
Not unless there is cause, see prior post.

[jimnyc]

Until someone points out that all the Muslim ones are suspicious. Disparate impact will get ya in the long run.

And yet, if the dealer truly feels the person in front of him is suspicious, or even just MIGHT be a danger, or a risk in any way whatsoever - it's his duty to not sell the gun. And good luck pointing this stuff out. Unless denied by the computer and FBI - there will be no records of the denial anyway the moment he walks out the door. How many guns have you purchased? They'll give you a yellow form to fill out, ask about drug/alcohol use and such. If he even DREAMS you do drugs, even outside of what you write - he has a duty to deny. At that point, if he feels you are suspicious, you are denied. That paper gets tossed in the garbage after the muslim leaves. Short of that individual filing a complaint, that's the end of it. And even if he does, being suspicious in the eyes of the dealer is all that matters.


I did. There was no evidence that she actually refused service to any Muslims that I could find although she did ban some Hindus who were suspicious. ;) If there are no complaints then there is no action. It does appear you recognize the validity of the CRA though.

Are you even reading what I am writing? When in the world did I ever go against or for the civil rights act in this? I simply stated they DO have the right to refuse service for any or no reason, and that they can simply tell them get lost basically. Nowhere have I stated it was fine to ignore the CRA and state they can discriminate based on religion. It does appear that you don't understand what I'm stating about this issue.

[jimnyc]

I don't know if it varies state-to-state, but as for selling liquor it's up to the person selling-totally. If someone wants to buy, but the seller is uncomfortable with the ID they present (must be government issued, but if seller thinks maybe altered or not the person they can refuse). If they appear intoxicated or impaired in any fashion that would be of concern with liquor. If one smells liquor and cannot determine if they are 'ok.' All are reasons to deny purchase.

If one sells and the police stop them when leaving the store, the store can lose their license and the seller their permission to sell. You can also be fined pretty substantially-over $1000 and can be sued/jailed if they are in an accident.

And if they even feel that said person is drunk, or a danger in any way, or even suspicious, the bartender doesn't have to serve either. The easiest way is to tell any person they don't want to do business with - is that they think they were already impaired, whether via alcohol or drugs. That's what most do in the City at least, to folks they don't want there. It's not a bartenders job to know for sure and run tests, his decision on this is all that matters. Of course there are limitations on everything, and a bar isn't going to be able to banish an entire race or such with something like this.

[Abbey Marie]

So, I think my analogy could work. The gun shop owner could behave similarly to the bartender. "I felt this person could be a danger to others if I sell him a gun (drink), so I'm going to refuse".

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So, I think my analogy could work. The gun shop owner could behave similarly to the bartender. "I felt this person could be a danger to others if I sell him a gun, so I'm going to refuse".

Every muslim is always a potential danger to others. Their religion commands that.
108 VERSES COMMAND IT AND NO OTHER RELIGIOUS BOOK THAT I KNOW OF HAS 108 VERSES COMMANDING VIOLENCE/DEATH UPON OTHERS!-TYR

[Little-Acorn]

Florida gun shop a 'Muslim-free zone.'


If the gummint can legally ban a Social Security recipient who hires someone to handle his account, from buying a gun in any store (as Obama is now proposing), why can't a civilian store owner ban a Muslim from buying a gun in his store?

Who has murdered more people? Muslims? Or elderly SS recipients with accountants?


Is that legal?
It's common sense.

So, it's probably illegal under this administration.

[Jeff]

Are you aware of FFL dealers and their ability to turn down ANYONE if they so much as think that they may be suspicious? Are you stating that a dealer cannot turn someone away, simply because he feels they are perhaps risky, or suspicious? And because too many people buy guns for others, if a gun dealer even thinks that someone may be what they call a "straw man" in dealer terms, they can refuse to sell. If you don't have full money at register, and then go outside and borrow from spouse/friend, you can then be denied even if already approved. Seen that one myself. Reason? They thought it suspicious.

As for the civil rights act and guns - This isn't even the first rodeo. I remember another shop also banned muslims, and also claims of civil rights act and all that other stuff. DOJ got involved. As far as I'm aware, absolutely nothing was done and they were within their rights. Even a DOJ probe and nada. So much for those good civil rights attorneys taking 10 seconds. And yes, the ACLU and their lawyers, and CAIR were involved too.

They not only have the ability to do so but they are suppose to do so, and no they don't keep records of folks they turn away. So to walk into this guys shop and investigate him would be a waste of time, now with that said if ten different Muslims come in on 10 different days and he refuses then service they may have a case, of course than you resort back to the fact of being a gun dealer you aren't suppose to sell to anyone you feel could be a threat.

Lets say I walk in wearing a shirt that says kill em all let God sort em out, that could be enough for the owner to feel like I am a risk, if I smell of alcohol, if I look stoned, any reason the owner feels I am a risk it is his job to refuse to sell. These forms you fill out ask, are you on drugs, have you ever been treated for mental illness, and so on, yes some of the questions can be picked up on a background check, but some are a way for the gun shop owner to make his decision as well, if he sells a gun to someone he knows is high or drunk he is now liable for what that guy does with the gun. So yes I believe it is a against a Muslims civil rights, but it can and will be hidden very well.

[fj1200]

And yet, if the dealer truly feels the person in front of him is suspicious, or even just MIGHT be a danger, or a risk in any way whatsoever - it's his duty to not sell the gun. And good luck pointing this stuff out. Unless denied by the computer and FBI - there will be no records of the denial anyway the moment he walks out the door. How many guns have you purchased? They'll give you a yellow form to fill out, ask about drug/alcohol use and such. If he even DREAMS you do drugs, even outside of what you write - he has a duty to deny. At that point, if he feels you are suspicious, you are denied. That paper gets tossed in the garbage after the muslim leaves. Short of that individual filing a complaint, that's the end of it. And even if he does, being suspicious in the eyes of the dealer is all that matters.

:rolleyes:


Are you even reading what I am writing? When in the world did I ever go against or for the civil rights act in this? I simply stated they DO have the right to refuse service for any or no reason, and that they can simply tell them get lost basically. Nowhere have I stated it was fine to ignore the CRA and state they can discriminate based on religion. It does appear that you don't understand what I'm stating about this issue.

Yes, I'm reading everything you're posting and how it's just so easy to get around the CRA. :rolleyes: They do not have the right for "any and no reason," to do so is ignoring the CRA. 50 years of expansion of discrimination case law says it's not so easy especially by just claiming that every Muslim that walks through the door is "suspicious."

[jimnyc]

:rolleyes:

Good argument, FJ, good argument! May I suggest some coffee in the AM instead of using smilies to dismiss and avoid arguments? You look silly when all you can offer is pre-made smilies.


Yes, I'm reading everything you're posting and how it's just so easy to get around the CRA. :rolleyes: They do not have the right for "any and no reason," to do so is ignoring the CRA. 50 years of expansion of discrimination case law says it's not so easy especially by just claiming that every Muslim that walks through the door is "suspicious."

I notice you avoided the part about "how many guns have you purchased"? What gun shops down there, I'm sure Jeff will know? Because it's glaringly obvious you don't know jack shit about buying guns and what it entails and what the dealer can do.

But wait, instead of replying, I'll just offer :rolleyes: and make it all better.

[fj1200]

Good argument, FJ, good argument! May I suggest some coffee in the AM instead of using smilies to dismiss and avoid arguments? You look silly when all you can offer is pre-made smilies.

You prefer that I make the same arguments over and over? You prefer that I respond with an argument that I'm not making? They have a duty to deny when someone is suspicious; I've not denied it and I hope they do it. Do you think they'll get away with just saying that every Muslim is suspicious? I hardly think so even though you can make blanket statements which aren't true.


I notice you avoided the part about "how many guns have you purchased"? What gun shops down there, I'm sure Jeff will know? Because it's glaringly obvious you don't know jack shit about buying guns and what it entails and what the dealer can do.

But wait, instead of replying, I'll just offer :rolleyes: and make it all better.

I haven't bought any guns but you saying that you don't dispute the CRA but then you make arguments that dispute the CRA. Where's the little round-n-round smilie when I need it?

[jimnyc]

You prefer that I make the same arguments over and over? You prefer that I respond with an argument that I'm not making? They have a duty to deny when someone is suspicious; I've not denied it and I hope they do it. Do you think they'll get away with just saying that every Muslim is suspicious? I hardly think so even though you can make blanket statements which aren't true.

I suppose this is better than simply offering the rolling of your eyes.


I haven't bought any guns but you saying that you don't dispute the CRA but then you make arguments that dispute the CRA. Where's the little round-n-round smilie when I need it?

Little odd that then. You stated earlier it would be easy for someone to walk in and find a discrimination suit. Considering every aspect of the denial of purchase is GONE the minute the person leaves, where do you suppose they get this evidence from? Unless the DA is there for the denial of course.

And I never did dispute the CRA, so I guess you ARE still not getting what I'm saying. I clearly stated from the beginning, that they reserve the right to refuse service. And then I outlined how they would do so without bringing the CRA even into it. And it is not unlawful to deny someone service at a gun store if the seller feels the person is suspicious, and it's up to the dealer to make that determination. You seem to think it's somehow unlawful for them to find someone suspicious, or that if it's multiple muslims that he's breaking the law. There's a line between suspicious and religion. I can deny a sale as I think someone is suspicious, and not based on their religion, but based on my serious belief that said person may be dangerous, or perhaps may give it to someone dangerous.

[fj1200]

I suppose this is better than simply offering the rolling of your eyes.

I aim to please.


Little odd that then. You stated earlier it would be easy for someone to walk in and find a discrimination suit. Considering every aspect of the denial of purchase is GONE the minute the person leaves, where do you suppose they get this evidence from? Unless the DA is there for the denial of course.

And I never did dispute the CRA, so I guess you ARE still not getting what I'm saying. I clearly stated from the beginning, that they reserve the right to refuse service. And then I outlined how they would do so without bringing the CRA even into it. And it is not unlawful to deny someone service at a gun store if the seller feels the person is suspicious, and it's up to the dealer to make that determination. You seem to think it's somehow unlawful for them to find someone suspicious, or that if it's multiple muslims that he's breaking the law. There's a line between suspicious and religion. I can deny a sale as I think someone is suspicious, and not based on their religion, but based on my serious belief that said person may be dangerous, or perhaps may give it to someone dangerous.

I said it would be easy for 10 Muslims to walk in and all be denied because of "suspicion." I'm pretty sure that they could document their efforts and possibly have a hidden camera to boot.

I completely understand what you're saying. You apparently are missing my point; They can't just "refuse service" without reasoning. But maybe we can agree on this; the Civil Rights Act applies to gun shops and people can be denied for various reasons (that don't violate CRA).

[jimnyc]

I aim to please.



I said it would be easy for 10 Muslims to walk in and all be denied because of "suspicion." I'm pretty sure that they could document their efforts and possibly have a hidden camera to boot.

I completely understand what you're saying. You apparently are missing my point; They can't just "refuse service" without reasoning. But maybe we can agree on this; the Civil Rights Act applies to gun shops and people can be denied for various reasons (that don't violate CRA).

10 at a time? If I were a dealer, NO WAY I sell it to them. And my reason would still be they seemed suspicious all coming in like that. And THAT IS HIS RIGHT - AND - HIS DUTY if he feels that way.

And if all at different times? They better have cameras, and they better record him stating something that is against the CRA, otherwise they're dead in the water there too. Any sensible dealer will tell someone "I'm sorry, but I cannot sell a gun to you at this time" or similar, and that's all they need to tell a prospective customer. IF said person has a camera AND the dealer outright states for the record "sorry, I won't sell to you solely because you're a muslim", then perhaps said person will have a case.

As for refusing service without reasoning, not only can they, that's EXACTLY what I've been stating all along about them and bakeries. They don't HAVE TO give these folks denial reasons, and that's what I recommend they do. Same as a bakery - you can simply state "no thanks" and there is no issue with refusing that service without a reason at all, as it is NOT necessary. But if you say clearly no to a gay marriage cake, and stick to that as your reason, well we all see how that turns out. Better off telling them "I don't like the shirt you're wearing, sorry, you need to leave the premises" <---- 100000000% legal to do.

[fj1200]

^I thought we could have some agreement.

Oh, and of course not at the same time. Oops, you mentioned that.

[jimnyc]

^I thought we could have some agreement.

Oh, and of course not at the same time.

Fair enough. :)

[Jeff]

I aim to please.



I said it would be easy for 10 Muslims to walk in and all be denied because of "suspicion." I'm pretty sure that they could document their efforts and possibly have a hidden camera to boot.

I completely understand what you're saying. You apparently are missing my point; They can't just "refuse service" without reasoning. But maybe we can agree on this; the Civil Rights Act applies to gun shops and people can be denied for various reasons (that don't violate CRA).

Fj I agree this gun shop owner by announcing to everyone, if caught refusing to sell to just Muslims is wrong and more than likley has broken some laws, but if he had shut his mouth he could of went a lifetime without ever selling to a Muslim, heck their are a million reasons that makes someone suspicious, " he looked high, I smelled alcohol, he asked if these hollow points would kill a man" and so on and on and on. As a gun shop owner it is his responsibility to NOT sell to anyone he feels is suspicious, now the fact that he feels all Muslims are suspicious well I am not sure that will fly, but there is no records kept of who you refuse to sell to so as I said earlier he could of done this for the rest of his life and never had a issue.

[fj1200]

Fj I agree this gun shop owner by announcing to everyone, if caught refusing to sell to just Muslims is wrong and more than likley has broken some laws, but if he had shut his mouth he could of went a lifetime without ever selling to a Muslim, heck their are a million reasons that makes someone suspicious, " he looked high, I smelled alcohol, he asked if these hollow points would kill a man" and so on and on and on. As a gun shop owner it is his responsibility to NOT sell to anyone he feels is suspicious, now the fact that he feels all Muslims are suspicious well I am not sure that will fly, but there is no records kept of who you refuse to sell to so as I said earlier he could of done this for the rest of his life and never had a issue.

That's all I'm saying in response to the question posed; it's not legal. And if the EEOC can find out that there was discrimination because blacks weren't hired then the DOJ can find out if there was discrimination because Muslims were turned away. Is it worth it for this guy to publicly take some sort of stand, possibly be investigated, and possibly lose his shop?

[Jeff]

That's all I'm saying in response to the question posed; it's not legal. And if the EEOC can find out that there was discrimination because blacks weren't hired then the DOJ can find out if there was discrimination because Muslims were turned away. Is it worth it for this guy to publicly take some sort of stand, possibly be investigated, and possibly lose his shop?

Honestly I am not sure it is 100% illegal, if this guy does in fact feel as though everyone that comes in that he can clearly identify as a Muslim ( many blacks are Muslims and many are Christian or what ever, only the middle eastern looking dudes are fairly easy to tell and I suppose not all of them are Muslim ) then he may be OK, the law says that he isn't to sell to anyone he feels is suspicious, I think it is really pushing the envelope so to say, but if truly believes they all look suspicious and refuses them all, but a black dude walks in and buys a gun and is a Muslim he may of just won his argument.

Quite Honestly I think it goes back to the bakery, any business owner should hold the right to sell or not sell to anyone they wish Period, I am still wanting to see a black bakery make a cake for the Klan, I would love to see what Obama's comments on that would be.

[Drummond]

Here's a thought: are you ready for it (with apologies for any British spelling ..) ?

MUSLIMS CAN BE, AND OFTEN ARE, RADICALISED.

A Muslim can, conceivably, walk into a gun shop and not - at that time - intend either to commit terrorist acts, or to hand the gun to anyone who might. A couple of weeks later, said Muslim might be looking at a Jihadist website (... as they do ...) and decide it might be a good idea to become active.

How do you guard against that ? Answer: DON'T SELL HIM THE GUN IN THE FIRST PLACE.

[fj1200]

Honestly I am not sure it is 100% illegal, if this guy does in fact feel as though everyone that comes in that he can clearly identify as a Muslim ( many blacks are Muslims and many are Christian or what ever, only the middle eastern looking dudes are fairly easy to tell and I suppose not all of them are Muslim ) then he may be OK, the law says that he isn't to sell to anyone he feels is suspicious, I think it is really pushing the envelope so to say, but if truly believes they all look suspicious and refuses them all, but a black dude walks in and buys a gun and is a Muslim he may of just won his argument.

Quite Honestly I think it goes back to the bakery, any business owner should hold the right to sell or not sell to anyone they wish Period, I am still wanting to see a black bakery make a cake for the Klan, I would love to see what Obama's comments on that would be.

Well I certainly might agree with you on the overreach of the CRA and its generally poor record but the question is a protected class and refusing service based on religion. That is an illegal act. If he believes that they all look suspicious then he is guilty of discrimination there's really no other way around it unless all of them are truly suspicious. Riddle me this; if we're going to trust the government to make rules and laws regarding gun ownership, I'm not sure who may disagree with that but, is it better to have a Muslim would-be purchaser be in the system so the hopefully smart people will be able to draw determinations? If Muslims are refused for no other reason than being Muslim by private individuals then you're pushing them into the black market.

[fj1200]

Here's a thought: are you ready for it (with apologies for any British spelling ..) ?

MUSLIMS CAN BE, AND OFTEN ARE, RADICALISED.

A Muslim can, conceivably, walk into a gun shop and not - at that time - intend either to commit terrorist acts, or to hand the gun to anyone who might. A couple of weeks later, said Muslim might be looking at a Jihadist website (... as they do ...) and decide it might be a good idea to become active.

How do you guard against that ? Answer: DON'T SELL HIM THE GUN IN THE FIRST PLACE.

We have laws in this country that don't rely on a Future Crime Division. Nevertheless do you think it more likely that one will be radicalized when they are not trusted in their own country and perceived to be guilty and a terrorist-in-waiting?

[Drummond]

We have laws in this country that don't rely on a Future Crime Division. Nevertheless do you think it more likely that one will be radicalized when they are not trusted in their own country and perceived to be guilty and a terrorist-in-waiting?

I don't see why not.

If motivated sufficiently - and religious 'extremism' certainly qualifies for that - they won't care whether or not they're trusted. [Though you're assuming a fantastic level of clairvoyance and/or intelligence efficiency, to believe that your people will make such a connection AND act on it, in just a couple of weeks !]

What if one decides to hop on a plane and head for Turkey, as a stepping-stone journey for transit into Syria to join ISIS, as some Muslims from Britain have done ? Will your people stop them from travelling ?

[fj1200]

I don't see why not.

Well, in this country we don't make laws based on science fiction movies. We also don't make laws based based on an individual's thoughts; that would be your realm. Position #108 you share with the big government, totalitarian folks. :)

[gabosaurus]

I don't see why it's not legal. But this guy seems to be doing it more for publicity than as a moral and ethical stand.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHI943GcX5s

[Voted4Reagan]

Can a bartender refuse to serve a guy whom he suspects is an alcoholic who can't hold his liquor, and will probably drive drunk?

Yes

[Gunny]

Fj I agree this gun shop owner by announcing to everyone, if caught refusing to sell to just Muslims is wrong and more than likley has broken some laws, but if he had shut his mouth he could of went a lifetime without ever selling to a Muslim, heck their are a million reasons that makes someone suspicious, " he looked high, I smelled alcohol, he asked if these hollow points would kill a man" and so on and on and on. As a gun shop owner it is his responsibility to NOT sell to anyone he feels is suspicious, now the fact that he feels all Muslims are suspicious well I am not sure that will fly, but there is no records kept of who you refuse to sell to so as I said earlier he could of done this for the rest of his life and never had a issue.

Me. a raghead and a gunshop. Anyone else see the simple math here? :laugh: