asleepatthereel wrote:I may be playing devils advocate here, but I say if they want to post their property, its their right. I dont bother them with my opinion because they probably arent interested anyway. I just take my business elsewhere. If they start getting a ton of calls/email, it may only serve to bolster their stereotypical images of CHL holders as gun totin, vigilante nut jobs.
I would like to see a sign that forbids people from entering without a CHL and a gun. Call it a .45-06 sign.

I agree that it is a company's right. I disagree as to whether or not they are interested. A good company always wants to know what their customers think. A bad company won't care. Those, are truly worthy of avoidance, not just because they disarm us, but because they are poorly managed and therefore not worthy of our valuable business.
I like your pro-RKBA sign idea. Flesh that out some, would you?
I suspect that companies post those signs with out giving thought to all the issues. Sort of a knee jerk reaction. It is easy to say, "we'll ban guns at our store because guns are dangerous." We should educate and persuade them. A great place to start would be Charles Cottons CHL crime stats. Another salient point would be the fact of criminal background checks of CHL's. While a 30.06 sign does not prohibit us from unarmed patronage, it certainly discourages us. I would also wonder how many patrons the would loose if they did not have the signs up. How many non-CHL's would even notice? I'd love to see a study on that.
We won't win them over with by being belligerent and argumentative. Thoughtful, intelligent, logical, vocal, and persistent.
Scott