· Glock Block Supporter
:yawn:After the deadly terror attack at a gay nightclub in Orlando, a restaurant owner in Portland (Maine not Oregon) wanted to do something "outside the box" in order to solve the problem of "gun violence" in America.
I call it petulant.gunsmoker said:That is pretty ballsy. And stupid, for a business owner who's customer base was probably at least 40 percent composed of gun rights supporters.
Pretty much agree. Too much made of this-- is no one allowed an opinion anymore?Wow, the stupidity on display from both sides leaves me shaking my damn head .
First of all I'm amazed at this woman who owns the restaurant said that she wants to ban gun rights supporters from her property regardless of whether not they are carrying any weapons that particular day.
She just wants to boycott an entire class of people based on how they exercise their constitutional rights in other locations, or just how they would like the option TO do so, one day.
That is pretty ballsy. And stupid, for a business owner who's customer base was probably at least 40 percent composed of gun rights supporters.
The SECOND stupid thing in that article is the pro-gun retort comparing the Christain cake baker who wouldn't make a gay wedding cake.
That's way off base. Not comparable at all.
To the Christian baker, a gay wedding IS the evil act. And the wedding cake would be a key centerpiece of the event that the baker sees as evil and sinful.
The baker said he'd sell them doughnuts or snack cakes or any other product except a wedding cake intended for a gay wedding. He wasn't boycotting gays; he'd sell them all sorts of his creations-- just not a wedding cake with two grooms on it.
If that were the same attitude of the restaurant owner in Portland Maine, she would simply refuse to serve food to crazed gunmen on rampages, since THAT is the evil she wants to discourage.
And I would support her . If any jihadist or loony-tunes MWAG shows up hungry and wishes to satiate his appetite with an expeditious repast of her culinary delights, she should say "no, but after you surrender I will take an order to send a food tray to the jail, and to the law offices of your defense team. But I can't feed you while you are doing this bad thing."
So basically, she thinks the best thing to do is just Enron the entire Constitution. Seems legit to me.I don't want to take away guns of responsible gun owners. I don't care if you have 12 hunting rifles if you are a responsible hunter. I want people to not have the power to own weapons of war. I want our government to be able to deny someone they can put on the "no fly" lists to not buy a semi-automatic weapon.