Just read your message about private property rights and guns
Makes better sense when you look at it in that light
Don't know why I didn't notice the message earlier....
I'm not sure what that is in reference to, we have a lot of private property discussions on the same channel, the over and over channel I think its called
I've got another peve with the CHL rule about no carry within 1000' of a school , exception being on privete property
I have posted before that I have been told by several including LSP that a business is not private property and not an exception
My point is that La Law only lists 2 types property, public and private....LEO seem to want to make a 3rd catagory private for public use....I dunno
Anyways, as I've said I'll be scheduling with you later this month for a CHL class for my renewal.unless you have a better suggestion
The thread got locked, so here is my take on your last post.
The taking of private property for public use is a 5th amendment issue in that the substantial nature of many takings requires compensation for.
What we are dealing with here is the offering of private property for public and/or employee use and how the offering of certain types of accomodations for public use makes the owner liable with respect to civil rights issues like race discrimination and gun possession.
For example, it is well established law in Louisiana that a landlord cannot prohibit either blacks or gun possession on his rental property. It is also well established that places of public accomodation can no longer prohibit blacks. What we see now, is the realization that discrimination against gun possession is fundamantally erroneous as well.
Private property rights are not violated because no property owner is required to offer public accomodations. That is a choice that they freely make.