Legal Issues

Which State Is About to Make Gun Owners a Protected Class?

Circle bar no guns sign

A new bipartisan bill, introduced by over 20 Republicans and one Democrat seeks to make gun owners a protected class of citizens. This would be similar to the federal anti-discrimination law, where a protected class is a group of people with a common characteristic who are legally protected from discrimination on the basis of that characteristic.

Circle bar no guns sign
Pennsylvania legislators are seeking to make signs like these a thing of the past in the Keystone state.

Pennsylvania’s proposed law would build on the Pennsylvania Human Rights Act (PHRA). The proposed change, House Bill 38, aims to prevent employers from discriminating against employees who own or carry firearms. House Bill 38 is currently in committee, but should go before the legislature soon. If passed, it would have a major impact on gun owners and businesses.

The primary purpose of House Bill 38 is believed by some to keep business owners from banning firearms on their property. At a minimum, it would allow gun owners to exercise their Second Amendment rights and keep a firearm locked in their car. Perhaps the final language would go further and prevent business owners from banning legally carried firearms entirely.

The PHRA is not without its opposition, of course. According to Shira Goodman, executive director of CeaseFirePA, a group aimed at working with law enforcement and community organizations to prevent gun violence in the state, “The Second Amendment right is not overly burdened here, and so why (gun carriers) need to be in a protected class is just a little bit mind-boggling,” Goodman told the Pennsylvania Record. “It’s very easy to get a gun here. We’re an open-carry state, except for Philadelphia. It’s not very hard to get a concealed carry license. We don’t have waiting periods. We don’t have registration and license.

“The issue is, there are some places that don’t want guns on their property—private property owners, private employers, and for good reason. They are worried about workplace violence; they are worried about domestic instances spilling over into workplaces. We see that all the time.” Goodman does not believe the change to the PHRA is equal to other protected classes with protections based on race, ethnicity, age, or disability. However, if the provision were eventually added to the PHRA, employers would be legally bound to put gun owners on equal footing with other protected classes.

Goodman believes including gun owners in the PHRA doesn’t make a lot of sense. She thinks it’s likely the legislation was introduced to work around current laws that allow private property owners to decide whether or not to allow firearms on their property.

“I think it’s really just an end run around this parking lot situation,” Goodman said. “The right to bear arms is a pretty robust right in Pennsylvania, and the language in our constitution is even broader than the language in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.”

What do you think of the proposed Pennsylvania Law? Should gun owners be a protected class or should business owners be allowed to set the rules on their property? Share your answers in the comment section.

[dave]

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (109)

  1. I do not recall moderating any of your comments. I just did a quick search though and do not see any comments either. Please try again. ~Dave Dolbee

  2. How about we pass a law making the Property Owner, that does not allow Firearms on their property, ‘Legally’ & ‘Financially’ responsible for the safety of its Patrons and Employees. if they wont allow me to defend myself – They should be REQUIRED to keep me safe.

    1. Tennessee has that or is in the process of that legislation IF our RINOs will vote on it. We here in Tennessee have a super majority of republicans, but there are two or three that say they support the 2nd Amendment, but last fall they voted present, and not Yea, so some legislation was held or tabled or some crap. Bet they won’t”get over” on us this next election time. Getting ready to legalize suppressors too. Something like the Sportsman Hearing protection act or such!

  3. I do not leave my firearm in my car. If I cannot carry my firearm with me, either I do not go into the forbidden venue, or I leave my firearm at home.

    Mostly I avoid places where I cannot carry. But if there is no signage or if there is signage but no metal detectors, I carry. So yeah. Places that post no carry signs, well, they clearly do not want my business. They roll out the welcome mat for criminals.

    1. Not to mention someone can steal your gun from your car. It’s safer to keep it on you. Why be an arms supplier for criminals. What if they stole your gun and came into a gun free zone and shot up everybody? Who do you think the media and politicians will blame for this incident.

  4. The logic is simple, however unwilling most left (their brain at home) wing morons choose to ignore it.

    If you come to my house (private property), and I make you leave your shoes outside, then you step on glass and cut your foot, I am legally liable for your injury. Costs, etc., are my responsibility both because it is my property and because I required your vulnerability. Therefore, if I go to a private company and am killed in an attack, they are liable not only for my being killed on their property, but legally also for requiring me to leave my guns in my car (which is NOT a viable solution – try leaving a building and getting to your car under fire).

    There is a reason that law enforcement officers and military don’t leave their guns in the car and count on the fundamental goodness of humanity to keep them safe.

    Gun control is the only political debate in which the left has no ammunition aside from unfounded fear. There is no real debate; more guns in private hands lowers crime rates, every valid study ever conducted has proven this. How many more gun-free zones have to be shot up before it occurs to the mindless drones that maybe the left is full of it and disarming victims is NOT a solution to keep criminals from committing crimes?

    Of course, the left still thinks you can swing by Walmart and buy a machine gun…

  5. I’m a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment but, that being said,…. My property, My rules. You don’t like my rules then stay off my property.

  6. Or better yet: DON’T live in one of those places where you cannot own and bear arms. Wasn’t there a California court ruling several months ago that found the “can issue” to be unconstitutional (versus “shall issue”)?

  7. I am not sure where are or are not looking, but the comment is there, on more than one post when I search — including other post where you accuse of not publishing them. ~Dave Dolbee

  8. The ability to protect oneself is a natural right…. No one should be able to take that right away from another person…. As for Private Property, no one has a right to go against the owner’s wishes…. If you want to carry a gun, respect private property… I don’t see an issue with that…. As for locking a weapon in my vehicle in someone’s private parking lot, well…that vehicle is also private property… and should be respected as such… If it were me, I would keep the weapon in my car, regardless…. and when someone robs the company that owns the parking lot, I would promise not to intervene…. I would get inside my Private Vehicle and drive away….

  9. Jog more often and it will improve your health and help you get the hell out of there before the cops show up ;D after you shoot the assailant.

  10. True but politicians and others choose to make rules and laws against gun owners and being a protected class may make it more difficult for them to continue. Unless we do something the rule of law will erode all our rights irregardless of the 2nd amendment.

  11. Iif you don’t believe we need protection as a discriminated class try living in new jersy, new york, or worst of all california

    1. I believe the Communist State of Jersey is more WORSE than Californica is in regards to obtaining and carrying a weapon. At least some could ties do grant a carry permit, compared to ZERO counties in Jersey.
      I grew up in Jersey. Am SO glad I moved to Tennessee. Here, everyone carries, and it’s not unusual to see folks carry open in Walmarts. And as far as New Yalk goes, the bad place is just NYC. The rest of the state is mostly Conservative. Wish we could make just NYC a separate state of its own. In Jersey, just POSSESSING hollow point bullets is enough to send you to the pokey. In Californica, it’s just lead that they frown on!!! LOL!

  12. Should call it a free fire zone instead of a gun free zone. If it is a gun free zone, how do i get my free gun?

  13. When someone dies in a crime the criminals are charged with a crime. Businesses should be charged with a crime if someone dies in the commision of a crime since they are responsible for disarming law abiding citizens.

  14. I don’t care what property owners or employers think or what their rules are. I know where I can and can not legally have a fire arm. It’s none of their business anyways. My personal policy is nobody ever finds out I’m carrying a gun unless I am shooting it at them in self defense. I’ve worked at jobs for years with nobody knowing. The trick is keep your mouth shut.

  15. I see that some of my comments are being posted out of context. This may lead to misunderstandings that are not necessary. Shooters Log, please be sure to post my comments right after the person I make a comment to.

    1. What you need to do is hit the “comment” button, then find the post and hit that “reply” button under the person’s comment you wish to reply to.
      If you just hit “reply” on the individual post where you pick up the NEW REPLIES, it goes to a general post statement, instead of to the one you wish to respond to. A little inconvenience, but it’s worth it to keep from going crazy! Good luck my friend.

  16. If a business owner or employer don’t allow legal gun owners to protect themselves or others, then the business owner or employer should be responsible for whatever happens. If someone is attacked or killed, the business owner or employer should be charged the same as the assailant.

  17. I am a legal firearms owner. I have my concealed carry permit. I have had firearms for many years and have found its easier to find and purchase firearms from people than stores of any kind. property owners should be able to say whether they want firearms on their property. would anyone want someone coming up with a law that says how they MUST do things in regards to their property with anyone on it. If your employer says no firearms are allowed on their property it should be respected. if someone shows up to do another person harm it would be over by the time you get to your car for your firearm, and has anyone done any real labor while carrying? all they do is get in the way and slow you down. also hostilities between coworkers can escalate quickly so why have the ass whoopin waiting to happen. if you feel the need to carry go to an employer that does allow for it. businesses are around to make money period, not to supply a person with a job. I do not think that the government needs to pass laws on every aspect of the citizens lives. if people really want to stop the criminals from doing harm with firearms I believe extremely strict laws and punishments should be imposed. when someone gets found with illegal firearms the little slap on the hand shit needs to stop. if the punishment is not a deterrent its a waste of time.

  18. As a gun owner in Alaska we have establishments that post the “No guns allowed” signs, some that have a guns are welcome message and some that are neutral. My job is one of THOSE it is a national retail store that allows gun owners to carry open or concealed that are CUSTOMERS, but NOT ASSOCIATES that work there!

  19. I think everyones rights should be protected, property owners and gun owners. I have a carry license and if an employer doesnt want me to carry then I’ll work somewhere else. If a business iwner doesnt want me to carry there then I’ll do my business else where. It is their loss. When they get robbed or killed by some crazy criminal, and there is no law abiding, gun carrying, citizen there to protect them, then it will be a sad and eye opening day for them. But im not about to force myself on them or violate their rights. Freedom for all.

  20. It is pretty sad that additional laws need to be placed on the books just to ensure what we are already granted by the 2nd amendment. IT IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS TO HAVE GUN FREE ZONES. When will the anti gun lobby open up their eyes and see that all mass shooting have occurred in GUN FREE ZONES. Translation, gun free zone do not protect anyone.

  21. Utah allows companies to ban firearms. However the must have 24hr surveillance and other measures to protect their employees, making it cheaper to allow their employees to carry. I wonder what would happen if an employer required employees to qualify and carry?

  22. I have mixed feeling about this. I am a licensed concealed carry person and carry my gun most everywhere (except any government office which are all run by liberal nut-cases who would rather see a lunatic or criminal kill their clients or employees than allow common sense carry of weapons). I believe that private businesses should have the right to ban carry of firearms by everyone however, I believe that the owners should be held civilly legally liable to be sued if there policies result in the injury or death of customers, client or employees by the action of a criminal or deranged individual who comes on their property and commits mayhem or murder.

  23. Normally I am not one to post comments publically but on this subject I am compelled to speak out.
    I am in favor of laws passed to insure that I am not discriminated against because I carry a gun. I am legal by my CCW permit, passed all background checks and my second amendment right insures I can do this. I also carry self defence insurance from the USCCA.
    Businesses that post no hand gun signs is just an open door to the active shooter that he/she can attack knowing the victims are not armed. Those signs need to come down forever. I don’t do business with those owners because I cannot protect my family on those properties.
    Once I was attacked when I was seventeen years old by four men I estimate in their mid thirties and they were drunk. They jumped me and began beating me severely, they were never caught or punished. I simply got out of my car, they pulled up behind me in the parking lot, blocked my car so escape was no option and began beating me for no reason other than they were just mean.
    Please let me explain why I carry concealed, we have very great people in law enforcement that care and work very hard but they cannot be everywhere violent attacks happen. I will never be a victim again. I believe in background checks and the CCW permit. Please pass this law and help push it to go nation wide. I do not have a duty to protect as our law enforcement does but I do have a responsibility to keep my wife, our family and myself safe.
    Those that have never been attacked might not understand why we need our guns but since I survived my attack I get it now.
    Put God first and stay safe.
    Doug

    1. Doug,
      I’m sorry that you had to endure an attack from the “wretched refuse” of our society. I am glad you chose to arm yourself so that an attack will never happen again. I have had a CCW permit since I was 19 because my job demanded it. Do you practice with your carry weapon regularly? Do you know the rules of the use of lethal force? No, I am not attacking you, but you must know these things for your own protection in case you end up in court. Look to the GOA or NRA for classes in these things. They are experts, and you can learn a lot to protect yourself in court if law enforcement charges you. I urge all who read this to do so, as it may save you from a jail sentence.

  24. Leon: Right you are. It wasn’t until we tried to pass legislation that we opened ourselves to lawsuits. As long as the church ruled with marriage being a man and a women there was nothing to really fight. When with all good intentions, they passed the DOMA, then that allowed it to be fought in court. With all the leftist judges, it was doomed. When drinking was a moral issue it was pretty much frowned on and kept in check but with Prohibition it opened up lawlessness and organized crime.

  25. I have a CCL and am greatly annoyed by the “No Guns Allowed” signs. I however, being an owner of a sizable amount of land, I demand full control of what happens on my piece of dirt. Being a gun guy though I’m known to suggest people bring their guns and show them off or shoot them on my property.

    Soooo. To satisfy anti-gun business owners and to have them stand behind their pursuit of their version of safety, they should be required to hire (at a minimal) 2 Armed guards and have full security scanning with metal detectors, ID checks etc. After all, if they want to remove your ability to protect yourself, then they should be the one’s to shoulder the responsibility.

  26. SCPistolero-

    I’ve given some thought to the rights of private property owners versus the rights of gun owners and, while I’m not an attorney, I have some thoughts.

    First, let’s distinguish between private property owners and retail businesses that are open to the public. For the moment, I’m confining my comments to the latter.

    If we look at civil rights history and Jim Crow laws, business owners denied service to African Americans and justified this with the argument that they have the complete right to refuse entry, or service, to anyone. That argument ultimately failed, as the courts and public opinion declared that businesses that were open to the public had to be open to the entire public; businesses may not set general policy that discriminates against generic classes of people. Accordingly, minorities, for example, can’t be prohibited from entering a business establishment, nor can people of certain faiths. And except for very specific conditions, nor can one be excluded from a business due to gender.

    Bringing the discussion back to weapons carry, this compels the observation that businesses aren’t prohibiting a class of people, they’re prohibiting behavior, or in this case, a thing. After all, gun owners can choose to leave their guns behind but a people can’t change their race. This concept of changeability is known under the law as “immutability.” Something is immutable of a person cannot change it.

    But, the right of a business to prohibit entry goes beyond the strict technical definition of “immutable.” For example, while it’s technically possible for a person to change gender or terminate a pregnancy, it’s absurd for a business to argue that one must do so to obtain service. Accordingly, federal civil rights law defines “immutability” as “something that cannot be changed or SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE CHANGED.” (emphasis mine). In other words, there are things that are changeable but are still defined under federal law as “immutable,” because of the “…should not be required to be changed” language in the federal civil rights law. Examples of federally protected traits that are changeable, yet immutable, are pregnancy and religion. Just because a person can terminate a pregnancy or renounce a religion, a business can’t declare that no pregnant women or people of Jewish faith are allowed on the premises.

    Which brings us to lawful concealed carry. The constitution of Texas (and the U.S., if people still believe it exists), along with specific Texas state law, guarantees me the right to lawfully defend myself with a weapon. This is the very definition of “immutable” under federal civil rights law, as a constitutional and state-sanctioned right is something that should not be required to be changed. It’s no different than religious rights. Accordingly, I argue that no business that is open to the public has a right to force a citizen, as a requirement of entry, to abandon a constitutionally protected personal right in order to be allowed on the premises.

    That said, it seems that private property that’s not a business or open to the public (e.g., a private home) has always been granted greater rights under the law to control access. I homeowner can, without cause, restrict access or ask that anyone leave. In fact, it seems to my non-lawyerish mind that the burden on entering private property is generally reversed, in that the person entering private property must have a valid reason for doing so, else they’re automatically considered to be trespassing. For this reason, I am not arguing with my comments above that lawful weapons carry trumps private property rights. I’m speaking only about those businesses that are open to the public, which includes an office building that’s open to public access, even though it’s not a retail establishment. Just because an office building doesn’t have a lunch counter or sell goods, if the property is open to public access they should be open to all of the public.

    There is in my mind, too, a distinction between open carry and concealed carry. While I believe that a business owner has no right to prohibit lawful concealed carry, I think the business owner is on more solid ground by arguing that open carry can be disruptive to other patrons and asking that weapons be concealed. (It’s absurd that the visible presence of a weapon could be considered disruptive, but I’m merely acknowledging that reality, not endorsing it.) I therefore have less of a logical case that would force a business owner to allow open carry.

    I would even go so far as to argue that these immutable rights extend to the workplace and that an employer has no right to deny lawful concealed carry any more than an employer has a right to deny employment to specific religious groups or races.

  27. I’m a disabled Vet with 3 hip surgeries and osteoporosis. I couldn’t defend myself well if attacked. I feel unprotected and insecure knowing I would be at a disadvantage. On top of all that I doubt anyone would help me. I’ll bet they would be quick to pull out their phones and post it on youtube!

  28. I carry everywhere I go it doesn’t matter to me if thay have a no firearms sign or not. If I keep it consealed nobody knows about it but me, I do this because I refuse to be a victim and I will not allow anyone to refuse to allow me the right to defend myself or my family.

  29. I have but one question, how does a business owners Constitutional rights trump any other lawful Citizens Constitutional rights? If you’re Honest, that simply isn’t possible. If you’re an Attorney… well then, Anything is possible.

  30. The logic for legal carry is sound – criminals don’t obey the laws. The only reason there is opposition to everything guns is political. The NRA is the big money behind the republican party therefore the liberals and their democratic party do everything they can to cause the NRA to waste money and time fighting unconstitutional laws. It is about weakening your political opponent just like republicans with “right to work” against the unions – although forcing someone to join a union to work is wrong, the clout behind the fight is about weakening the political opponent.

  31. This is yet another case of government violation of property rights. If a business does not want me on their private property I respect that 100%. I will carry elsewhere and spend my money elsewhere. Their loss, not mine. More dangerous than our rights being attacked on the basis of poor logic or illogic is us pitting our own rights against each other.

  32. The issue is not (or should not be, anyway) how gun owners are classified. By virtue of the fact that they own a gun, they are ALREADY classified as gun owners, and are ALREADY protected by the 2nd Amendment. The issue is that somewhere along the line, businesses have been given the option to say – in effect – “I don’t care if you have the right to keep and bear arms, you can’t exercise that right in my business”, simply because the business owner is irrationally paranoid that somehow gun owners _are_ irresponsible, but criminals _aren’t_. Business owners should not be able to deprive me of my 2nd Amendment right, any more than the government should. Eliminate “gun free” zones, and you will have taken a major step in the right direction. That being said, I also think it’s a good idea to protect gun owners from employment discrimination by those same paranoid business owners, and adding “gun ownership” to the list of things that employers cannot discriminate on (race, sex, religion, etc.) would take care of that.

  33. I recently went to visit my wife at the hospital. After going through the metal detector, I had to check a small pocket screw driver at the front desk.

    The fork that came with my wife’s dinner was a more deadly weapon than the little screw driver.

    Why do the rest of us have to give up our right to defend ourselves because others are paranoid?

  34. I’d like to have my gun in my car at work as I do drive and stop for gas or food. What if I need it before or after work at a gas station????

  35. Disallowing guns in employer parking lots essentially denies employees their carry rights on workdays. I do believe the employer should have the right to say “no” to bringing them into the building. They are the master of their castle. Of course, neither will stop a determined shooter from bringing a gun in to do harm. IMHO.

  36. Criminal don’t care what laws are. So why would they care what sign you have hanging on the door of your property. Laws don’t stop anyone but the law abiding citizens. So why make laws that can and will only put the law abiding citizens in to danger? When we just want help protect are self from ever being in the position you’re thinking the signs protecting you from. That to me is a false sense of security.

  37. About time the pendulum started to swing back toward common sense. We protect every other minority group with some type of legislation, so why not re-affirm those minorities obviously exercising an important right established under the Constitution? Good for Pennsylvania. Now to get the Texas Leg off the schneid and working toward this.

  38. Gun owners need to become a protected class. New laws and restrictions are constantly being created through lawful and illegal ways that diminish our rights little by little slowly making our rights void. Name another group that is more oppressed than gun owners?

  39. Where I work if you bring a firearm and leave it in your vehicle and get caught you WILL be terminated. In the line of business in less then a year I have had my life threaten no less then 4 times. I believe that I should have the right to protect myself as soon as I get my vehicle.

  40. Gun violence? Second Amendment rights? Guns don’t commit violence and no one has second amendment rights. The second amendment is a prohibition on the government to violate the NATURAL right of self defense. Without the 2nd amendment you would still have the RIGHT. Rights don’t exist because of a piece of paper. They exist or do not exist naturally.

  41. I like the idea of gun owners being a protected class, but it should be nationally. A private property owner should be able to dictate who he does or does not want to come on to his property, unless he is operating a business that is open to the public. In that case, he should not be able to discriminate against someone who is acting in a legal manner.

  42. Firstly we shouldn’t have classes in the USA so a special class for carriers of firearms to me seems to be as stupid as a class for eaters of ice-cream. The 2nd Amendment is sufficient protection as long as all states and localities honor it as any of the other articles in the US Constitution should be.

  43. Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever met a law-abiding criminal? Seems to me that discrimination is discrimination. The Libs want us to kow-tow to those who “self-identify”. Why can’t they give the same consideration to those of us who actually ARE law-abiding citizens. Admittedly, I discriminate. I do NOT associate with people I don’t like. Nor will I ever allow anyone to force me to do so.

  44. I should not be restricted in my God Given right to defend my self ,because some one else is afraid of firearms ,It’s just another tool in my Truck

  45. I do like the angle they are posturing with. The double standard isn’t so bad when it’s turned on its head. If you have a business open to the public than you shouldn’t be able to discriminate against any class, race or heck why not “2nd Amendment gun loving citizens.” I think it makes sense! Bravo PA! If I may add BOO Maryland! You should be more like your neighbor!

  46. I have a CCW licence here in Ohio. Our company will terminate you if you bring a gun into the workplace. a year and half ago a man cam into our store pushed a gun into my back and forced the manager to unlock the safe. The safe had a time lock so he did not get into the big cash but made off with the money from 5 registers close to 2000 dollars. 6 of us were held in the back corner of the store while the robber kept going to see if the safe unlocked. We did not know if he was going to come back and shoot us. to get rid of witnesses. Turns out a month later they got caught. He had been out of jail 3 months after serving 10 years for a previous armed robbery and they tied him to 23 armed robberies in the 3 months he had been out of jail.

    1. You can be beyond sure that no law could possibly control the behavior of this armed robber. If he is not locked up or kept under tight control eventually he will shoot someone. No gun law or any other law will have the slightest impact on what this guy does! Laws are not enacted to control the behavior of crazies. The laws are used to enable the government to gain control over sociopaths and thereby protect the public from them. No matter what the law was most normal people would not resort to a life of crime under any circumstances. The horrible restrictions we attempt to put on law abiding citizens in an effort to protect ourselves against crazies is completely misguided and essentially useless. We cannot effectively operate in a politically correct fantasyland and expect things to work out well. We have to operate in the real world where our problems also operate. Force yourself to stay real and don’t try and change the real world into a fantasyland to meet your expectations

    2. A lot of good a sign prohibiting firearms does Perpetrators ignore these lieberal signs of cowardice and irresponsibility as is evidenced in crimes involving guns at these lieberally mandated “gun free zones” My youngest son was gunned down in such a zone

      As for permitting; permits and licenses is the government seizing our God given and constitutionally guaranteed right then “selectively” selling them back to us.

      The ONLY permit necessary is OUR Second Amendment which PROHIBITS ant and all governmental statute from infringing on out God Given and Constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms!!!

  47. the sad truth is if someone wants to go in and kill a bunch of people they don’t need a license and they’re going to do it, Now, if some radical minded fruitcake goes in after these students, as they have before, and one just student happens to have a firearm guess what he might do? Blow that bastard away before he does it. No lawful minded citizen or average person not looking for trouble is going to turn loose and kill a bunch of people and if he does something is very wrong it’s unlikely. now which do you think is most likely to happen, use your head not your ass.

  48. I like the idea of gun owners being a protected class. But how does that square with a property owners right to control his property as he wishes?

    1. Well this legislation would clear that up… banning, firing, or refusing to hire gun owners would be the same as banning women. African Americans, or Muslims from entrance or employment at a public business. Just because you don’t trust Muslims doesn’t mean you can discriminate in your business operations or hiring practices. At the end of the day the second amendment recognizes your right to be armed… much like the widely accepted and honoured freedom of religion.

    2. I have felt that gun owners should be a protected class. The key to the thing is that a group of people cannot be discriminated against for the thing that makes them a class. As far as the property owner being able to control his property. It is illegal for a business to discriminate on the basis of color, race, national origin, and now, sexual preference. We gun owners are tired of being treated as second class citizens because we choose to exercise our Second Amendment rights. The Second Amendment recognized the right of the people to keep and bear arms, which went back in time to medieval times.

    3. I was thinking the same. I’m an avid shooter and CCW holder, but this bill has ramifications that go beyond guns.
      If someone walks onto your front lawn and starts loudly preaching the virtues of Islam (or Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, etc), you can ask them to leave. Their first amendment rights only apply to PUBLIC venues. Your property rights trump their right to free speech. ALL rights derive from the right to own property and that is the implied right that makes them all possible.

    4. Business owners can’t shut down employee’s first ammendment rights, why should they be able to dictate whether or not employees have the right to self protection.

    5. Would you consider banning me from carrying a pen and pencil on your property for fear that I fight write on your walls with them?

      Sure, if I use foul language, you can ask me to leave your property, but you can’t ban lips and tongues from your property because someone might say something offense.

      In the case of concealed firearms, if you get robbed and shot at while I am there, do you want me to ignore your sign or tell you widow that the sign prevented me from saving your life?

    6. I think a persons private resident should be the only place that a person should have a right to not allow guns. Now Personal business that is open to the public or a business parking lot should not be allowed to exclude firearms by employees.

    7. If you feel like that is the case then why did the framers provide a second amendment?

    8. The Second Amendment to the Constitution protects our right to throw out a tyrannical government, and institute a government that will be led by the people. This is what the FOUNDERS were most afraid of. Most had fled governments that were so oppressive, they were in fear of their lives. They wanted to create a government that would be controlled by the common man, not the very rich, or the most powerful. This is sad today, as we are controlled by the rich and powerful because our ancestors were apathetic, didn’t exercise their power to vote the rascals out, wanted to give up certain rights for a false sense of security. You want an example? Fly commercial, and endure the violations of your person and belongings. Look guilty and go through a strip or body cavity search. See how YOU like it. I do not, and refuse to fly commercial. Our Country is falling apart, and you just do not seem to see it. You remember the oath you took at either Jejune or San Diego? Did you actually read the Constitution AND understand it? Recommend you look up Hillsdale College and take the course called “The Constitution 101” I did. I understand why the Second Amendment was included in the Constitution. I thank you for your service to our Country and to its people, but I think you have some reading to do.

    9. I like the idea, too. Protection from seizure, gun registry lists, and other “gun grabber” types would follow the intent and ideals of our Country’s Founders because of the Second Amendment they penned into our Constitution. The Founders put it there for a very good reason – to protect the other God given rights guaranteed under that same Constitution. We have a short time to protect those rights because Trump was elected President, the first obvious pro Second Amendment President we have had in 50 years. I’m going to suggest that Alabama do the same as Pennsylvania by calling my State Rep and Senator tomorrow to get the ball rolling here.

    10. I forgot to recommend to others in all the other 48 states to do the same thing, too. Be sure to CALL your Reps and Senators to start a similar bill into your State Government – you will not be sorry that you took some time to do this. Be sure to call your local gun clubs to get the word out ASAP. Talk to your town or city managers, too. Every voice and vote will help. Make this go viral!

    11. Agreed. I have a CCP here in VA, but which is the bigger issue–the right of all businesses to lawfully control their places of business, or the rights of a few who wish to enter businesses armed? Also I don’t much like expanding the “protected class” designation any further.
      Just my two cents.

  49. I believe that all people who get their CWP is already background checked and fingerprinted and have gone through the hoops to carry . We should be allowed to carry wherever we want. as long as it is not hanging off your hip , or you take it out and make a fool of yourself for no reason , there should not be a problem . Sandy Hook would have never happened if people could have carried when bringing their kids to school. how many lives lost because of a stupid law.( if you remember right , the criminal with all the guns broke the law and carried and killed people) so that proves we follow the laws and they don’t , but someone could have saved some lives that day , and in many other cases, if CWP owners (who are obviously more responsible ) could carry where they want .

    1. Please show me the caveat to keep and bear arms is predicated on a “background check”

  50. Interesting. One person cited domestic violence spilling over into the workplace as a reason to NOT have guns. That is absolutely backwards. If I am working and my ex or somebody else’s ex shows up disarming me will not stop the other person’s violence.

    1. I think the reality is that the employer is just nervous about having armed employees at the workplace. All it takes is a heated, violent exchange and the risk of a shooting increases. It’s called in some quarters “going postal” and reflects, perhaps, the tendency of postal employees, for some reason, killing each other. However, the”disease” can certainly infect people other than postal employees. Banning firearms at the workplace is a pre-emptive act to prevent a potential shooting incident. Perhaps it could be called more appropriately a weapons ban as opposed to just firearms.

  51. Let us not forget, treat employees and customers right and there is no threat of violence barring the criminally intent individual, then like so many point out, the owelner might appreciate our presence

    1. Mike, great comment about going back to your car to defend yourself.
      A criminal that wants to do harm will conceal, he likely will not have a permit or registered firearm, and the sign is not going to effect his agenda.
      It would be nice if one conceal to carry permit , would cover all fifty states. DNR has it if you are caught hunting or fishing illegally , 34 states are connected to the file. Some states forbid you to hunt or fish for life, some are 10, 7, 5 or 2 years. I feel this is achievable. A armed society is a polite society. Cabelas, Bass Pro, Gander Mountain, and many other firearm stores have not had mass shootings, that is great, and shows that if the criminal realizes more legal citizens are armed, crime will decrease. There is statistics to prove this. Big Money seams to try to keep the public in adversity and in fear to control. Stahlin said ” two ways to control a country is by guns or debt.” Well most are in debt, but only 8 % of murders are committed by a firearm. 92% are from other forms of lethal means. This makes knifes, water, plastic bags a real target for pro gun advocates. All of this boils down to being a True American, a top citizen and using common sense. Please stay safe, stay positive.

  52. This is an excellent point about protected classes. When those classes are based on features a person cannot control (race, gender – classical definition, etc…) then this extension doesn’t fit. However, when protected classes are modified to include preferences of behavior (sexual preference, gender – emerging definition, etc…), then any type of behavior could fit. It becomes another tool to force acceptance of behavior, so why not use it to defend our natural rights? VERY interesting move by PA!

    1. I suppose the Second Amendment is no longer valid as we need “protection” from government infringement Right?

  53. I think “Deplorable Robert” hit the nail on the head.

    It is NOT the GOVERNMENTS place to decide where and when we carry.

    The idiot Government needs to remember (learn) that THEY work for US!!

  54. I have a CCL and carry when I choose, but I believe that property owners have the right to restrict firearms from their private property. On the other hand, I do agree that anti-gun business owners should not be able to discriminate in hiring, promotions, etc. against those who carry outside their property.

    1. I see, so what I must surmise from your comments about private property rights surpassing that of the second amendment is, if a private property owner doesn’t want black people on his property, or the property owner doesn’t want Jews on her property, or perhaps a private property owner doesn’t want homosexuals on their property, then the private property owner can just ban those people from entering their property, or being employed within their business?

      Do I have that correctly on your view?

      You really need to understand that if one constitutional right can be abrogated based on private property rights, then all constitutional rights can be abrogated based upon private property rights.

      What you and the anti-gun gal from the anti-gun organization in Pennsylvania need to understand, is that you folks seem to be supporting a very slippery slope: either we are all constitutionally protected, or none of us are constitutionally protected.

    2. Many don’t realize that ALL basic human rights derive entirely from the right to own property. This includes, at the most fundamental level, the ownership of one’s self, in mind and body.

      Thus you have the right to say whatever you please… unless you’re in MY living room. If I don’t like what you’re telling me, I can simply ask you to leave. You do NOT have an unconditional first amendment right to stay and continue lecturing. You’ll be arrested for trespassing. Feel free to keep babbling while they haul you off in cuffs. Did I violate your right to free speech? Absolutely not.

      Inversely, if we’re in YOUR living room, then you have the ABSOLUTE right to free speech. You can deliver a lengthy and detailed lecture as to why I should invest all my money in a meat-flavored ice cream franchise. I have no right or cause to silence you, but I do not have to stay and listen… the first amendment does NOT imply the right to an audience.

      Freedom of the press is likewise limited to OWNERSHIP. You have every right to print and sell newspapers, as long as you OWN that printing press. You do NOT have the right to sneak into the Wall Street Journal building and use their presses, their ink and their paper. Again, that is not considered ‘freedom of the press’, it is called, ‘trespassing’ and ‘theft’.

    3. Excellent reply. I have a deadly weapons license, including many years of training. I will not do business with a company that forbids me to carry a firearm on their property.

    4. So then any property owner can post a notice that no person of color or ethnicity or age or religion or class is allowed to enter their property.
      Isn’t that what this article is all about?

    5. You can decide who you want on your property and when. Heck, you can simply post “No Trespassing” signs and ban EVERYONE.

      Almost nobody likes the KKK… yet they are allowed to take part in parades and demonstrations. We don’t like their views, but we defend their RIGHT to their views. And if they don’t allow black people in their group or on their property, it is their RIGHT.

      So YES… people have a right to be stupid and to express their stupidity for all to see. If that means banning certain religions, or races (or gun owners) from their own property, then so be it. Property rights are sacrosanct.

    6. No one needs a “CCL” (permit) People’s apathy and being conned into believing government has the right and duty to usurp our second amendment is the reason we have to fight for what is constitutionally and God given to us

  55. As I have commented before, in my more than fifty years of carrying concealed handguns, I have often done so legally…..as well as illegally. Like other comments in this thread of discussion, my view is that I usually disregard posted venues and carry where ever I go…..with few exceptions. Like those who have commented elsewhere, I figure that should it be necessary for me to bring my piece into action, having carried that piece in a forbidden venue is not at the top of my list of things about which I am concerned.

    Also as I have commented, before, when one is carrying it is necessary to do so as unobtrusively as possible. That said, one who carries must overcome an almost natural urge to fiddle and fuss with the concealed piece in such acts as checking to see if the handgun is printing or is visible when stretching, etc. The successful concealed carrier is one who is so comfortable in his or her manner of concealed carry that they essentially forget that they are carrying and may only check, from time to time, in a reflective surface such as a mirror or store window to assure that they are, in fact, well concealed.

    It would be interesting, indeed, to conduct a study to determine just how many people routinely carry a concealed handgun. My instincts tell me that there are a whole lot more out there who are carrying than anybody might really think.

    1. I would like to see a challenge in court for a business that REFUSES guns and someone is injured because of that denial.
      Failure to protect as a CHOICE of the gun denier.
      They should have to give their business to someone who gets injured because they could not gave a weapon.
      THAT would stop these idiots!

    2. Look up Tennessee. Businesses are now liable for restricting permit carriers right to possess firearms. The mall sin my home town had those exact signs in the past. Now they DON’T!. When it comes down to it is about money. They don’t want to fork over that money if they refuse to allow people to carry and they get injured as a result.

    3. There are no caveats I repeat no caveats contained in OUR Second Amendment therefore any carrying of any weapon is NOT illegal!!! There is no authority banning us from exercising OUR God Given and Constitutional right to self protection. The ONLY restrictions are placed on government from INFRINGING on these rights

  56. same here unless it is a federal building i ignore the signs and keep my mouth shut no one will see my firearm till needed . I do not beleive in gun free zones and according to law here unless i am brandishing that firearm they can only ask me to leave they were they to spot it .Not a criminal event unless i do something stupid which i will never do with a firearm .

    1. And then when the SHTF and you are forced to use your gun?
      In an unauthorized place?
      You could lose a huge lawsuit and never be allowed to carry ever again.
      And lose your house and car.
      Perhaps go to jail for an extended time.

    2. All of those things you mentioned are at peril even if you are allowed to carry what ever weapon be it a club, knife, axe, or gun even your fist to bare against another. In these uncertain times I’d rather have the option to drop the hammer on some crazy or radical scum than cower in the corner and let him do it to me or the ones I love because of others illogical fears. All bad guy’s must be illiterate because they damn sure do not follow posted rules about prohibited weapons.

    3. Lose your right to carry?? By what “ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAl USUEPETIVE Statute ?

    4. @Hob Nob
      When SHTF and you are forced to use your firearm, you use it!… if it is actually justifiable. If not, then why do you carry in the first place? If the situation isn’t a justifiable situation, then it isn’t actually a SHTF situation where you are “forced to use your firearm”.
      Unfortunately, people don’t seem to take into consideration ALL of the actual possible results of the situations that are being discussed before making comments like yours. The possible legal dangers of the situation would depend on the laws in your state and the circumstances of the actual situation. Yes, there is the possibility that if you are in a “gun free” zone and are forced to use your gun that you could be arrested… but have you actually considered all the alternatives? Yes, you could be charged with a crime that will prevent you from owning any firearms, but what all situations would YOU consider justifiable to “use your gun” in a “gun free zone” that aren’t a possible life or death situation for someone? If you can come up with any, maybe you shouldn’t be carrying a firearm. The only situations that I can think of in which I would use my firearm in a gun free zone would be ones that could justifiably be considered life or death situations for someone.
      Then take into consideration that the majority of shootings that take place in gun free zones, or at least the majority of the ones that I have heard of, involved people the shooter did not know (whether or not it involved anyone the shooter knew). If given the choice of saving someone’s life and losing my ability to own a firearm -or- doing nothing and keeping my firearm(s), the choice is obvious.
      I would gladly risk possibly losing my ability to own a firearm in order to prevent the possible injury or death of someone… especially since, in this type of situation, “someone” would most likely include myself and, possibly, a friend or relative. If you are in a situation that is actually a life or death situation, chances are that you will not be charged. Unless you are on federal property, in a school area, government office or some other location that is specified in the law as a location in which it is illegal to carry, I seriously doubt you will be charged with anything that can cause you to lose the ability to own a firearm. That list will vary by location. If you are charged, chances are that you will not be convicted. If you are actually in a justifiable life or death situation, most people (AKA the jury) would consider your using a firearm as being justified.
      Then you must realize that if you are one of the people killed, if it is a life or death situation, you will not be able to own any firearms… unless someone slips one into your casket.
      If you are not willing to chance losing your firearms to save a life, you don’t deserve to have them.

  57. I just disregard those signs anyway. If I have to use my pistol in self defense, I’ve got bigger concerns than that idiotic sign

  58. Government gives homosexuals the “right” of protection, and muslems &the “rights” of religious protection, and so on…
    The right to keep and bear arms, the right to self defense does Not come from Government. It comes from God as an unalienable right.
    The question of should a citizen have the right to carry at a business? Yes,
    Should we have the right to carry on “private property”? Only with permission of said citizen, in my beliefs. Government should have no say in it at all. The 2 nd Amendment is there to limit Government from INFRINGEMENTS.
    I conceal carry, so as long as I don’t have to go through a metal detector, I will carry EVERYWHERE, except a.courtroom, or FEDERAL building that has….metal detectors​. It’s my duty and RESPONSIBILTY to protect myself and my family. I don’t dial 9-1-1.

    1. Self defense is a NATURAL RIGHT. It began when the first of our Pre- Hominid ancestors, who lived before the word ‘god’ was invented by man, defended themselves from the attack of another pre-hominid or animal. YOU might believe a deity gave YOU such a Right, but the arc of history proves otherwise.

    2. Just imagine POSTING a sign ENTERING your property with a list like
      No ENTRY TO HOMOS
      NO ENTRY TO FEMALES
      NO ENTRY TO BUDDHISTS
      NO ENTRY TO DEMOCRATS.
      NO ENTRY TO ANY POLITICIANS.
      NO ENTRY TO POLICE
      ETC
      ETC
      man would you have a fight on your hands.

    3. @Righteous Indignatory
      I have no problem with allowing the rest, but is it ok if I refuse entry to DEMOCRATS?

  59. Um, no. As much as I will fight to protect my constitutional right to keep and bear arms, I totally disagree with legislation which protects any “class” of citizens for choices they make under the provisions of the Constitution. The unintended consequences are unlimited. If we consider the US Constitution to be the law of the land, this type of legislation should not even be considered.

    1. Your last sentence is the key, and the crux of the various problems. Politicos have gotten so accustomed to raising their right hands and swearing lip service to that document simply as a exercise in going thru motions that is required before they can start tackling their unconstitutional agendas. Lawyers have built their profession on writing vague laws that they then peddle to their politicos, so when a case happens, there’s room for interpretation by a similarly politically-minded judge, which makes the entire system a self-propagating epidemic (pandemic? GLOBAL F#@%&ING MESS !!!!) If we had anyone with the cohones to stomp out this wildfire when it first sparked, we would not be in the deep kimchi we are today!

    2. I’m opposed to special classes too, but that’s why I like this bill. It shines a light on the absurdity and hypocrisy of requiring discrimination in the name of fighting discrimination. Besides, when everybody is special, nobody is special.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.