That is great news!
Dan,
The difference, at least the way the law stands, is that people who carry are not a protected class. Generally, protected classes have an "immutable" characteristic. They can't be changed by the person that has them (religion gets weird, but as a person of faith, I can see the argument that it is immutable). A CHP holder can choose whether or not to carry. A white person can't choose to be black and a person born in China can't change the fact that they were not born in Brazil.
I have a right to free speech, but you can ban me from this site for what I say because it is a privately operated forum and I am a guest. Same goes for real property. You have a right to to speech and religion, but that doesn't mean you can just hold a religious service or rally in their parking lot without their permission.
When two sets of rights come into conflict, a property owner on one side and a gun owner on the other, the government (imho) should stay out and let the market do its work. We are Adam Smith's invisible hand and our emails, FB posts, and tweets put the economic pressure on the property owners to rethink their position and hopefully results in them reaching the right decision.
As for what that means for our states carry laws, I think private property owners should be able to ban carrying. I think I should remain free to not patronize them if they do. I also think the law should be changed so that carrying on posted property is NOT a crime. We should have the rule a lot of other states have where the property owner can ask me to leave and, if I don't, have me charged with trespassing.
