Yes.
Question user. Suppose you have a neighbor who owns a jewelry store and his store has a prominently displayed No Guns sign. You enter armed, he sees you, you point to the sign, and he says, "That's okay, don't worry about it. I know you". Doesn't he have the right to waive the sign and allow you to stay in his place of business while perhaps demanding others to leave?
That's a great point. Another reason why I say the sign sets an expectation that you may be asked to leave for carrying a firearm but ultimately the owner or store management may decide not to enforce it. Maybe because they know you. Maybe because its a large corporation that has a national policy of no firearms in its stores and posts on each store, but the local management is more gun friendly and don't care and thus don't enforce it.
All I see here is what is Legal, legal this and legal that. Where is the personally held morality and integrity anymore, does it exist in this world anymore?
Do we not hold ourselves to the same accountability as we hold others?
We are to judge others by their actions but judge ourselves by our intentions? This breeds only disrespect for others and their property. ItsOK if not caught attitude is why we require lawyers. Can we not internally police ourselves and do what is right only because it is the right thing to do?
You people keep doing what you can get away with and argue how to perceive the law in your best interest and Ill choose to do the right thing just because I try to hold my personal integrity above the law.
That is a very good point, the different between what it ethical/moral/right and what is legal. Reminds me of my college ethics class, we were asked to describe something that is not ethical but legal, and something that was ethical but not legal.
Ultimately it comes down to the sign. Is carrying where the sign says not to ethical/moral? We each have our own moral beliefs. Overall what is ultimately moral i believe is something that come from the creator, God. Now for those who don't believe in a God you can just substitute your own personal morality.
I think a lot of people operate on their own personal morality, and when the morality is shall we say questionable that's why the government steps in with laws, to define boundaries that are not to be crossed, and if they are they set penalties.
A sign is a sign, it inherently is not prohibitive. Why well I think there are several reasons but one, I don't really know the posters intention in posting it. Now some states like Texas law makers have written laws to give the sign a prohibitive nature, the reason for the law, the sign in some moral views is not prohibitive. Am I any more right or wrong to say it is not prohibitive compared to someone who says it is?
Morality can be viewed two ways..absolute or relative. I think its both, I believe there is a absolute morality guided by the creator of the universe (not to try to make this a religious argument feel free to disagree). Then we each have our choice of our own morality, for me I try to keep it inline with what I see as the absolute morality, what is really the right thing to do.
So it is right or moral to ignore the sign? Is it right or moral to follow the sign? I say both, as I mentioned you don't know who posted the sign or what their intentions were in posting it. Maybe its left over from a previous business and the new business hasn't remove it because they didn't notice it, or just haven't often around to it. Maybe its posted by the building owner but the business inside welcomes legally carried firearms and is trying to get permission to remove the sign. Whole other discussion on property owner vs business owner rights there.
Most people will say the second amendment gives us the right to carry firearms. I actually have to disagree personally I believe it confirms our God given right to defend ourselves from criminals and tyranny. As such I believe it to be right and moral to carry whenever possible.
I also support the owner's right to restrict who is in his business, and what he allows there, the business owner exercises this by asking people to leave and or not return.
But signs by nature are not restrictive. Think of a city that posts no parking signs throughout, but has no law about parking on the books.
What is the intention of the sign, no parking during certain hours, no parking unless you have written permission of the police? they mayor? A law must be on the books to give the sign its prohibitive nature because naturally it has none on its own, because the law will make assumptions of what this signs intentions are to make it clear to all.