Comcast’s Gun-Free Zone Decision NOT an Infringement on Constitutional Rights!

Folks, let’s get over ourselves! If we as gun owners ardently defend our right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment, we need to ardently defend others’ rights as well – rights that when exercised, may give us heartburn. Freedom is freedom, and we need to understand and respect it, whether we agree with the way it is exercised or not.

Example:

“Comcast Spotlight has decided it will not accept new advertising for firearms or weapons moving forward,” the company said in a statement.

[…]

This month, Comcast acquired NBC Universal in a $16.7 billion deal reported by Media Decoder.

NBC Universal had a longstanding policy against accepting advertisements related to guns, according to a report from an ABC affiliate in Michigan.

I don’t like this policy. It’s ridiculous and reactionary, and I passionately disagree with it.

However, that said… I also disagree with some people’s contention that Comcast’s refusal to accept new firearms advertising is somehow an infringement on gun owners’ constitutional rights.

“There’s no reason why we can’t promote what we believe in and something that’s guaranteed under the Second Amendment.”

[…]

Other gun shop owners and Second Amendment supporters are outraged. One, in the ABC report, called Comcast’s blacklisting of gun advertisements a “direct infringement on our constitutional rights.”

Let’s grow up, people!

The Constitution protects our rights from government infringement, NOT from others’ refusal to deal with us in a free market. The Constitution is a limit on government powers, not on the right of other free entities to do business or not do business with us.

Yes, we can promote what we believe in.  No one says we can’t.  Find a media company that will accept your advertising dollars. Build your own media outlet and advertise away. No one is taking your right to advertise away.  But if you try and FORCE a company to deal with you, and accept your business despite its desire not to, you are no better than the petty, pathetic tyrants who want to force private companies to provide services they may be morally opposed to under… say… ObamaCare.

Get the picture?

If we desire true freedom, we need to understand and accept the fact that not all entities will want to do business with us, and they have every right to say, “No!”

This is not an infringement on your Constitutional rights. There is no right to force someone to deal with you against their will.

You have every right to speak out, to promote your products and to exercise your right to keep and bear arms. But there is no constitutional requirement for others to provide you with a microphone, an advertising medium or a gun, for that matter. No one is required to do business with you if they are morally opposed to your business practices or your products, for that matter.

We may find Comcast’s refusal repugnant, but it is their right to decline doing business with firearms companies, and it is your right to take your business to a media outlet that wants to deal with you.

Or are you really going to claim that this gun shop owner should be forced to do business with everyone, even if he morally opposes the potential customer’s views?

gun shop

 

20 responses

  1. Amen sister. I cannot BELIEVE people on “our side” are pulling the same stupid bullshit they hate so much when lefties do it. This is exactly like the idiots who screech you’re infringing upon their 1st amendment right to free speech when you ban them from commenting on your privately-owned website. Gahhhhh, it is so damn unhelpful when gun rights supporters act stupidly.

    Like

    1. As much as I hate that policy, they’re absolutely entitled to it. I am, of course, entitled to take my business elsewhere, and so are millions of gun owners currently using Comcast. And I might just do that – switch to a service that’s a bit more friendly to gun rights.

      Like

    2. BTW – I seriously want to steal Primo. That photo of him with the piggy just about makes me wet myself in SQUEE!!!!

      Like

  2. Double amen. Rights are for EVERYONE, not just those you agree with.

    Like

  3. I used to hold views similar to what you’ve expressed. However, arguments like Andrew Napolitano makes finally convinced me otherwise. http://youtu.be/GP1Wgkh5MeE

    Like

    1. Sorry, but I have to disagree with Napolitano. It happens infrequently, but it happens. Property rights are inviolate. Period.

      Like

  4. My only objection to your argument is that in some area’s, Comcast is a Monopoly therefore eliminating competition. If say Williams Gunsite Shop had access to say Charter One and Comcast, then they and their customers could then cancel and set up a sponsorship with an alternate cable company. This is not the case and this is where the freedom is being denied.

    Like

    1. And I understand that argument, but property is property. It’s unfortunate that Comcast has a monopoly in that area, but that doesn’t invalidate the property argument. It just simply makes it suck more.

      Like

  5. It will be a free market when the FCC is gone. It will be a free market when more than one (1) cable company is available in the same area for us to choose.

    NO, IT’S NOT A FREE MARKET.

    Like

  6. Appreciate what you’re saying Nicki, but this ad agency has a different view and appears to be looking at taking legal action: http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/02/19/comcast-to-firearms-shops-your-moneys-no-good-here/

    Like

    1. Well, they’re certainly welcome to take their grievance to the court. I won’t debate their right to do that. I just don’t see how their desire to sell their ads trumps the company’s property rights.

      Like

    2. I find the story to be interesting… I have no problem challenging Comcast’s monopoly in court. I think that’s the right way to go about it. But claiming it’s somehow unconstitutional to allow a company to pick and choose with whom it does business flies in the face of freedom and property rights.

      Like

  7. Well said.

    For some reason, there are a lot of people who feel that because the Second Amendment guarantees us the right to own and bear arms, that we can do so anywhere we wish and be expected that other people will allow us to.

    They don’t understand that the Bill of Rights is a contract between the People and the Government, not a contract between the People. If Comcrap doesn’t want to take advertisements for guns, then that is THEIR right. Your right has not been infringed on in any way, because you don’t have a Bill of Rights contract between you and Comcrap. In fact, you have the right not to do business with Comcrap.

    If a mall property doesn’t allow you to be on THEIR premises with a firearm, they have that right to restrict you. The are allowed by their rights to create “gun free zones” if they wish. (most of the time, those GFZ are because of the high cost of insurance, btw, not necessarily because of some ideology based on not liking guns)

    You have the right not to go to malls or other establishments that do not allow firearms.

    On the opposite end of the spectrum gun shops are more than welcome to kick people out for voting for Obama. Kinda silly, if you ask me, especially if you expect the person to tell the truth if they really want to buy a gun there.

    Like

    1. And on this, we 100 percent agree.

      You have the right to keep and bear arms, but if I’m a hoplophobic doofus who doesn’t want guns on her property, I’m not violating anyone’s rights by barring them from entry.

      Like

  8. Nicki, we are in agreement. By no means do I believe that a person has the constitutional right to advertise over the objection of another. The Monopoly issue, however, does give this case against Comcast a legitimate beef and I believe this is what is at the heart of the matter regarding this issue.

    Like

  9. Comcast is a Monopoly therefore eliminating competition.

    Comcrap is NOT a monopoly. It isn’t the only media outlet nor is it the only gateway to media. You are free to watch other media outlets and free to access those outlets through other gateways besides Comcrap.

    That doesn’t mean that there isn’t a severe limitation in the number of media sources in this country. Forty years ago, there were thousands of independently-owned and operated television, radio, and newspaper outlets. Today, a handful of mega-corporations with intertwining ties to each other own and control all of the media, and therefore control the news that you get.

    It cracks me up to hear how “liberal” our “mainstream media” is (or how “conservative”, depending on who is complaining). The fact of the matter is that today’s MSM is only interested in what its corporate messaging is.

    But I digress.

    For all intents and purposes, Comcrap by itself is NOT a monopoly. Not when you have Dish TV, Direct TV, and several other non-traditional television sources available to you. Even the internet can completely bypass the need for Comcrap.

    But even if Comcrap were a monopoly. There is no constitutional right that attaches which would require Comcrap to show any commercials or programming that it doesn’t want to. Comcrap is a private company not associated with the government in any way shape or form. It is solely responsible for its revenue and its programming. It is only required to provide a certain number of hours per month of “programming for the public good” if it is required to have a broadcasting license on the open air waves.

    Most of cable programming is NOT on the public airwaves, so it isn’t bound by FCC rules on that programming.

    But hey, if you want to try to get this in a court… Have fun with that.

    Like

    1. DJ, Area’s in Rural Michigan that don’t have access to Satellite (Dish) because of Trees, or DSL (ATT) due to Location don’t have the luxury of switching providers and become locked into a Monopoly situation. So Yes, In some cases Comcast is a Monopoly.

      Like

    2. @MI8RLaine:

      You don’t have some wireless options available?

      Still, simply because an other opportunity isn’t available to you does not mean that Comcrap is obliged to serve your needs.in any other way than IT feels fit. They provide a stated service. The terms of that service is spelled out, and they deliver exactly what they promise.

      A lot of argument on the Left deals with the content provided on FOX News. While FOX News tries to make a claim of “Fair and Balanced”, I think that we can all agree that they are anything but — and they really make no effort to pretend otherwise. The thing is, they are under no obligation to be anything BUT what they are — it is their business, their rules. They aren’t required by the FCC do say or do anything, because the FCC has no control over them any more than the FCC has control over CNN, MSNBC, or any other cable channel. They are private channels each private businesses unto themselves.

      Comcrap owns NBC and MSNBC and some other holdings. They make syndication deals with cable providers — including themselves — to provide content. Time/Warner and others do the same thing with Comcrap. The fact that Comcrap might be your only gateway into either the Internet or television is immaterial. Your complaint that Comcrap will not allow certain types of advertising on the channels they own, or don’t offer certain channels does not make a claim under a monopoly law.

      But here’s the thing, Comcrap IS giving you access to the Internet, right? Once you can get on the Internet, you don’t need their television cable to watch whatever you choose to watch. You can stream virtually anything through the Internet directly into your television and never have to sign up for Comcrap Television.

      I have a Roku box at home. with it, I can stream hundreds of channels including Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Vudu, USTV, and news channels from all over the world, I also have a Boxee Box which allows me to go directly to hundreds of different television networks all over the US and the world and stream whatever I want in real time or on demand. I can also stream movies that are still in the theaters — all with a Comcrap Internet connection. I make all of my phone calls over the Internet using Google Voice which is tied into my cell phone when I am not at home. Very little of what I do is controlled, filtered or restricted by using my Comcrap connection. I am in no way restricted to watching or reading only Xfinity-approved material. In most cases, I can get television series on my TV faster than Comcrap will send them to me.

      So other than the fact that I happen to use Comcrap for my Internet access, my paying the bill is about the only time I really have to deal with Comcrap.

      Like

      1. Don’t have time to reply right now, but Deej – why in the world did this thing throw your comment into the spam filter? It’s not like you haven’t commented before!

        Like

%d bloggers like this: