this subject comes up a lot, especially when discussing the right to carry, the 2nd Amendment, and whether the right to carry trumps the rights or wishes of a property owner. some also confuse the distinction between private property and public property, with some thinking that just because a business or establishment is open to public traffic, is public property. and that a residence is private property, but a privately owned business is not. now i am very pro-gun, very pro-2nd Amendment, but also very pro-property rights of the individual, as well as any business or establishment, whether they be owned by an individual, or a group such a corporation. my viewpoint has always been that regardless of whether a business, or establishment wants to prohibit guns being carried upon the confines of their premises, of whether i disagree or not, is irrelevant. it's their property, and as such, i think that respecting their wishes, or rules is paramount, to also obeying the law, regardless of whether it's just a misdemeanor or even more serious. if a business posts a sign, i will respect those desires and rules of the property owner and take my business elsewhere. i have always felt it was just that simple to obey the law, and to also at the same time to respect the rights of the property owner. as property owner and part owner in family business, i would expect, and do demand that same courtesy if i wished to prohibit guns being carried upon our premises. but, at the same time, there are those who believe that the right to bear arms, and to carry, trumps those rights of the property owner. that right is absolute, and unwaivering, and without limits or consequences. it's as if they believe that laws regarding property rights apply to them because of the 2nd Amendment. that no rights have limits or restrictions.