Owner Makes Gun Range a 'Muslim Free Zone,' and Will Probably Get Sued Out of Existence

The state of fundamental freedoms of religion and association, in two acts.

Act One: A gun range owner has announced that her business is now a "Muslim free zone."

Jan Morgan owns the Gun Cave Indoor Shooting Range in Arkansas. She has posted a notice that Muslims may no longer use the range. She is attempting to exercise the freedom of association, along with her duties as a federally licensed firearm dealer.

The primary reasons I do not want muslims shooting at my range are listed:

1) The Koran (which I have read and studied thoroughly) and (which all muslims align themselves with), contains 109 verses commanding hate, murder and terror against all human beings who refuse to submit or convert to Islam. Read those verses of violence here.

2) My life has been threatened repeatedly by muslims in response to my publication of those verses from their Koran. Why would I want to rent or sell a gun and hand ammunition to someone who aligns himself with a religion that commands him to kill me?

3) * The barbaric act of beheading an innocent American in Oklahoma by a muslim 

* the Boston bombings(by muslims)

* the Foot Hood mass shooting (by a muslim) that killed 13 people and injured over 30 people

* and the murder of 3000 innocent people (by muslims) on 9/11

She writes that two Muslims came to the range last week and caused a disturbance, which added to the recent news about Islamic terrorism home and abroad caused her to make the range a Muslim free zone.

Two muslims walked in to my range last week with allah akbar ring tone and message alert tones on their smart phones. They spoke very little english, one did not have proof of U.S. citizenship, yet they wanted to rent and shoot guns.

Their behavior was so strange, it was unnerving to my patrons. No one would enter the range to shoot while they were there. Some of my customers left.

(can you blame them?)

She also mentions that Muslim supporters of ISIS and al Qaeda are threatening to kill innocent Americans, which is true.

She also addresses the fact that most Muslims won't pose a problem.

I understand that not all muslims are terrorists. I also believe there are as many Muslims who do not know what is in their Koran as there are Christians who do not know what is in their Bible.

Since I have no way of discerning which muslims will or will not kill in the name of their religion and the commands in their koran…I choose to err on the side of caution for the safety of my patrons.

8) On the issue of religious discrimination:

I view Islam as a theocracy, not a religion. Islam is the union of political, legal, and religious ideologies. In other words, law, religion and state are forged together to form what Muslims refer to as “The Nation of Islam.”

It is given the sovereign qualities of a nation with clerics in the governing body and Sharia law all in one. This is a Theocracy, not a religion.

The US Constitution does not protect a theocracy.

The 1st Amendment is very specific about protecting the rights of individuals from the government, as it concerns the practice of religions, not theocracies.

And that's where she's wrong. Or at least, cites opinions and facts that won't matter.

The U.S. Constitution doesn't protect theocracy, but it no longer protects our fundamental rights. The very specific First Amendment has been gutted by political correctness.

Here is Act Two.

A bakery owning married couple worked within existing Oregon state law when they refused to bake a cake for a gay couple who, in violation of state law at the time, planned to get married. The law has since been changed

That bakery no longer exists, and the couple face ruinous fines thanks to a state government ruling that their First Amendment religious rights no longer exist.

Earlier this year, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries found “substantial evidence” that Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, discriminated against the lesbian couple.

They now face a fine in excess of $150,000.

In an exclusive interview with The Daily Signal on Friday at the 2014 Values Voter Summit, Aaron said the fee would “definitely” be enough to bankrupt the couple and their five children.

---

The ordeal started in February 2013, when Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman asked the bakery owners to design a wedding cake for their same-sex commitment ceremony.

At the time, Oregon defined marriage as the union between one man and one woman; voters overwhelmingly approved the constitutional amendment in 2004.

Aaron told The Daily Signal he thought he was “well within” his legal rights to decline the service, citing his traditional beliefs that a marriage is between a man and a woman.

In January 2014, the Kleins were charged with violating Oregon’s Equality Act of 2007, a law that protects the rights of the LGBT community.

It wasn’t until months later, May 19, 2014, that a federal judge would declare Oregon’s amendment unconstitutional, paving the way for same-sex marriages.

“Ironically, the state was in violation of its own anti-discrimination laws,” said Aaron.

So the law-abiding couple whose beliefs run back about 5,000 years have lost their business and face bankruptcy, because some rights have become more equal than others.

Eric Holder is still the reigning attorney general in Washington. If he gets wind of the Arkansas gun range owner's decision to block Muslims from her business, her reasoning won't matter. Holder will bring the Civil Rights Division down on her.

Or maybe he won't, since the right to use the range is found in the Second Amendment, which is in disfavor with liberals such as Holder. But all it will take is a Muslim to file a discrimination lawsuit.