Support NeoGAF

[Koomaster]

This isn't the first and probably won't be the last bakery/bnb/etc. that decides to pull shit like this and is then brought to their knees by the courts. Fuck all of them, the more stories like this the better. Let every business know you can't discriminate against customers based on who they are.

I am sort of surprised that these stories keep cropping up considering how it never goes in the businesses' favor.

 

[ab.aeterno]

How does my carrying a weapon (concealed) have any bearing on them? It has about as much bearing on them as my age, race, or sexual orientation. But if you look above, you'll notice that I've also been discriminated for my age when I was younger. Does it feel good? No. But if a business feels like that's how they want to do business, I don't give them business.

"Owner of a concealed carry permit" is not a protected class. That you're trying to equate a choice to exercise a right with innate qualities people cannot change (race, sexual orientation, etc.) that put them at a minority disadvantage is, frankly, as insulting as it is patently ridiculous.

 

[Aaron]

Thank you. That was the most clear and logical statement to explain the differences. Now it makes much more sense.

I still find it stupid that I can be turned away for carrying. But at least the difference between free speech and business discrimination makes more sense.

Guns are a complicated issue in the US. With their ease of access, you can make a case where you would need one in a self defense situation, but again the law can't be written to evaluate on a person by person basis. You may be perfectly all right to carry, but another person could be a nut job. The law basically has to account for what's safe and reasonable, and it doesn't always get it right either.

So now that the bakery is forced to cater, whats to stop them from charging 100K for a sawdust cake?

Does the rulling also stat what the cake has to be made of and how much they can charge?

Because they would be fined and possibly jailed. Also never allowed to run a business again. Since they would be breaking the law.

 

[Shake Appeal]

People used to claim Christianity as a defense against serving "colored folk." I find it frightening that ordinary folk will side with that reasoning as it applies to gay people.

Could be worse. Could be Rand Paul more or less saying private businesses should be allowed to refuse black people because it's their private right.

 

[ElFly]

How does my carrying a weapon (concealed) have any bearing on them? It has about as much bearing on them as my age, race, or sexual orientation. But if you look above, you'll notice that I've also been discriminated for my age when I was younger. Does it feel good? No. But if a business feels like that's how they want to do business, I don't give them business.

This is so dumb.

Why would anyone have to give you entry into their property if you are carrying a gun, permit or not.

 

[BeFlatLine]

This is so dumb.

Why would anyone have to give you entry into their property if you are carrying a gun, permit or not.

Why shouldn't they have to? Can you discriminate because someone supports one political belief? How about religious? Those can change. Fairly certain at least one of those are protected.

Seems dumb to me the idea that I'd be causing an issue with an item that no one knows I even have on me. But hey, businesses can ban them.

 

[ab.aeterno]

Why shouldn't they have to? Can you discriminate because someone supports one political belief? How about religious? Those can change. Fairly certain at least one of those are protected.

Seems dumb to me the idea that I'd be causing an issue with an item that no one knows I even have on me. But hey, businesses can ban them.

You're right. There is no difference between the fluid and ever-changing status of someone's political or religious beliefs, and the immutable, unchangeable, unchosen parts of a person that subject them to widespread and systemic discrimination.

Except that one is legally protected, and the other is not, of course.

 

[BeFlatLine]

You're right. There is no difference between the fluid and ever-changing status of someone's political or religious beliefs, and the immutable, unchangeable, unchosen parts of a person that subject them to widespread and systemic discrimination.

Except that one is legally protected, and the other is not, of course.

I'm not comparing it to the tenants of race / age / sex. I'm comparing it to political affiliation and religion. Can you legally discriminate against those factors as a business?

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

They don't, no more than these people:

Really loved the ice cream at Woolsworth

What do you mean, these people?

 

[Exotoro]

What do you mean, these people?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greensboro_sit-ins

 

[ab.aeterno]

I'm not comparing it to the tenants of race / age / sex. I'm comparing it to political affiliation and religion. Can you legally discriminate against those factors as a business?

IANAL, but I don't believe political parties are a protected class, nor is discrimination on the basis of same illegal. Religion, however, might be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greensboro_sit-ins

I think he was referencing this.

 

[slit]

I'm not comparing it to the tenants of race / age / sex. I'm comparing it to political affiliation and religion. Can you legally discriminate against those factors as a business?

How does carrying a deadly weapon compare to someone's political affilation or religion? You can't physically harm someone with ideals.

 

[BeFlatLine]

How does carrying a deadly weapon compare to someone's political affilation or religion? You can't physically harm someone with ideals.

Gotcha. It's fine if you preach ridiculous hate, but if you can physically cause harm it's not okay.

All the while, any criminal who decides to break the law and cause harm is free to do what they wish.

I grow tired of this debate. I just wanted to stress that discriminating against any group is uncool. Just because it falls under one category or another shouldn't make it okay.

 

[slit]

Gotcha. It's fine if you preach ridiculous hate, but if you can physically cause harm it's not okay.

All the while, any criminal who decides to break the law and cause harm is free to do what they wish.

I grow tired of this debate. I just wanted to stress that discriminating against any group is uncool. Just because it falls under one category or another shouldn't make it okay.

Yeah well you're not the only one that grows tired of this debate. You don't have to listen to someone preach, but there is no way to avoid bullets if you're in the line of fire. Also, yes when one puts people's safety at risk, it's fine to categorize. I have no problem with people carrying firearms to protect themselves if they feel they are in danger, but don't say there isn't a difference.

 

[Quackula]

All the while, any criminal who decides to break the law and cause harm is free to do what they wish.

Uh... come again?

 

[ElFly]

Why shouldn't they have to? Can you discriminate because someone supports one political belief? How about religious? Those can change. Fairly certain at least one of those are protected.

Seems dumb to me the idea that I'd be causing an issue with an item that no one knows I even have on me. But hey, businesses can ban them.

Nobody is banning people who believe in the right to bear arms.

They are banning people who want to put a dangerous item inside their private property.

 

[BeFlatLine]

If someone wants to make a topic going over gun free zones and their effectiveness, I'd be happy to continue this discussion there. I feel this is getting too far off from the original topic of this thread though, and don't feel comfortable continuing this discussion in this thread.

 

[besada]

I'm not comparing it to the tenants of race / age / sex. I'm comparing it to political affiliation and religion. Can you legally discriminate against those factors as a business?

In Colorado? You can't discriminate based on religious affiliation, but you can on political affiliation. The federal government has a set of protected classes, and states can add their own. The federal government's classes are:
Race
Color
National origin
Religion
Sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions)
Disability
Age (40 and older)
Citizenship status
Genetic information

Colorado adds:
Sexual orientation (including perceived sexual orientation)
AIDS/HIV
Mental illness
Transgender status

States are allowed to add their own protected classes. So, while it's perfectly legal to discriminate against transgendered persons in Texas (where they aren't a protected class) it's against the law in Colorado. You'll also note that it's okay to discriminate against the young, but not the old.

We have these things called laws, and if you believe that concealed carry owners should be a protected class, you can petition your local congress people and try to get them to add concealed carry owners as a protected class. Until then, businesses can choose not to serve you. But they can't choose not to serve gay people (in Colorado).

 

[EatinOlives]

Hilarious that some people think that being turned away for bringing in a lethal weapon into a place of business is just as bad as being turned away because you like someone of the same sex. On a basic, logical level it's immediately obvious that the former isn't just a "belief", you're actively bringing in a dangerous weapon to a public area, where the owner of the public area doesn't want lethal weapons in his premises. In what planet does trying to conduct a transaction while gay pose the same level of threat for the business?

My second favorite thing in this topic are those who say "free market, they'll go out of business if they practice discrimination". These folks should probably realize "free market" isn't a cure-all buzzword. It's ridiculously naive to think that an economic philosophy (which in its own has plenty of flaws) would miraculously come with a free side of fix-all-societal-and-cultural-problems. I mean to me that argument just tells me they're not even bothering to think enough to make a basic argument.

I mean, especially when you have another person in here crying about a different business actually closing because of people not shopping there due to discrimination.

 

[RoninChaos]

Gotcha. It's fine if you preach ridiculous hate, but if you can physically cause harm it's not okay.

All the while, any criminal who decides to break the law and cause harm is free to do what they wish.

WTF are you talking about? NO ONE IS SAYING THAT.

And I still can't believe you would compare carrying a fire arm to being black.

You also asked why cops aren't fucked with about carrying weapons in public places. It's cause they're cops. Nobody knows you have training. For all anyone knows, you could be a whack job like the ones who were carrying assault weapons at health care rallies. Sorry you feel so persecuted. You can't play Dirty Harry in a Dunkin Donuts. You'll live.

 

[Azih]

In the end it seems like the laws that keep taxis from ignoring black people.

 

[Enzom21]

I'm not comparing it to the tenants of race / age / sex. I'm comparing it to political affiliation and religion. Can you legally discriminate against those factors as a business?

That's exactly what you've been doing.
You compared your desire to walk around like you're in a western to me being black.

Don't change up now that people have pointed out how ridiculous that is.