I honestly dont like it on any law that "infringes on private business rights". However, in this case, I think that we should be seriously pushing for just that for open carrying of firearms. Me having a firearm on a business property is not "harming" anyone. But they act as if it does. We should be arguing that a citizens SAFETY (I love using this word against the antigunners), is that they are UNSAFE to have to leave their firearm at home, or in their vehicle, merely because they are going about their daily lives.
So the customer then has to rely on a business providing "protection" for them. Of course we know that almost NO business is going to have an armed guard there to protect the customers, any more than a cop will be posted in every business. They are there to protect the business owner's property, not their patrons lives. In a shootout, most will run away, leaving the now disarmed citizens to fend for themselves.
It also deals with equal protection under the law. Forcing a citizen to not have a gun, while allowing the business, or a police officer to have a gun, smacks of a 14th amendment violation (because its a 4th degree felony under NM law for a citizen to be there).
If anything, the Clackamas mall shooting should be used as a prime example of making a felon out of an otherwise law abiding citizen, who used his gun to stop a mass shooting. In NM, the citizen would had been "wrong" under the law, would had lost his gun rights forever, and perhaps 5-10 years of his life in jail. I feel that businesses should not be playing with our lives, by not allowing people to have the means to protect themselves.