Do you know why Police and military personnel train in hand to hand fighting? Because there are several situations where a gun is worse then no protection. There’s a range (and I forget the exact number, but it’s bigger then you think) where the attacker can get to you before you have time to get an accurate shot off. What if the attacker gets the gun from you? What if you do get a shot off and your shot goes wide and shoots a bystander coming to help?
There’s also the fact that no matter how much gun safety you practice that doesn’t mean the other people bringing their guns in practice the same common sense. That’s why I’m so careful in choosing who I hunt with.

“And that’s why many folks choose to carry to protect themselves as they go about their lives, just as many folks choose to fasten their seatbelts when in a car….”
****************************

And what backwoods holler do you hail from? I could agree with your statement in 1890, but not now. Then again that is the mindset of most neo-cons.

That said, I think most places most folks go are safe most of the time, certainly including amusement parks. If they weren’t, reasonable folks would go elsewhere.

But, of course, sometimes amusement parks aren’t safe — see http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/07/021014.php . And that’s why many folks choose to carry to protect themselves as they go about their lives, just as many folks choose to fasten their seatbelts when in a car, even if they don’t expect to be in a crash. It’s certainly why I do.

You have the exact implication flowing these stupid laws passed in Florida and Louisiana by the neander-cons who runs those states. You have the right as a property owner to deny access to anyone you choose under the “Castle Doctrine,” and non-possession of deadly weapons would be criterion one for me. You might recall that here in Virginia our betters at the General Assembly actually considered permitting concealed weapons in bars–that’s the right the lethal blending of alcohol and firearms. That alone should have been reason enough to mentally evaluate the whole Chamber. The broader question for me is when are we formally recognizing the NRA as king in this country?

The Disneyworld example seems to be the same thing. If they allow guns to anyone besides licensed and trained law enforcement professionals, I will not attend Disneyworld, and most parents would agree. It would be a business-breaker to have guns in a theme park. This is common sense, which I know doesn’t always apply to the law!

When Walt Disney was looking for a place to build a new theme park, he did not want to be hampered by city ordinances that would restrict how big he could make his attractions (a problem that frustrated him at his Anaheim, Ca, park, Disneyland. So, he made it a requirement for whatever place agreed to have him that he would have sole control of the law within his park. In effect, the laws of the state of Florida would not apply to property owned by Disneyworld.

That’s the story I heard. If it is true, then Disney will win in court. If not, then I don’t know.

I always thought that the bravest guys didn’t carry their courage on their hip. Crazy me. And I say “squawk, squawk” to russ’ “cluck, cluck.”

russ ( I mean Herr Karl) is right. You have no right as a property owner to deny your guests the right to pack heat in your house with your kids around–metaphorically or otherwise. Hell, bring ‘em to Court. We need a little more excitement. Why even at Church they are useful. Keeps the sermons short. Yeehaw!