NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Carry Issues => Topic started by: jFader on June 04, 2014, 12:33:08 PM
-
With several recent announcements of national chains not allowing FireArms any longer per corporate policy......I have been thinking more about where I spend my money! Which is all fine & dandy but the majority of Americans & I would guess even the majority of gun owners don't put much thought into it...
Let me start by saying that I don't even know if I think this is a good idea or not! Just a brainstorm or maybe a brainFart.....
What do you think the reaction of the average casual gun owner would be if they walked up to chilotle for lunch & there were 2 guys holding a large banner that read something to the effect of 'chipotle doesn't support your 2nd amendment right to protect your family while dining here'.?
Or something like that....I don't really know how effective it would be, would it turn people away or make them think twice before spending money with that business?
I realize that there is the 'business owners right's.....but there is also the right to self protection!
I don't really know. Just looking for some feedback or other ideas
.
Obviously this one costs money to make a banner & man it!
-
You might be confused for a member of Westboro Baptist :) And if it was Chipotle, I would ignore said banner and carry in compliance with Nebraska state statute as I do now.....because its so good....
I am busting your chops a little on my first comment....
-
You might be confused for a member of Westboro Baptist :) And if it was Chipotle, I would ignore said banner and carry in compliance with Nebraska state statute as I do now.....because its so good....
I am busting your chops a little on my first comment....
I would go to Qudoba where the food is better! Even though the one I go to is in the mall.... :laugh:
Do I think that it would effect there business? Possibly. I think that a lot of people that choose how to spend there money based on the companies firearms policy keep tabs on situations like this and keep a personal non friendly list. Joe blow that doesn't care about if he can about what companies do are going to comply and eat his burrito.
-
You might be confused for a member of Westboro Baptist :)
"God Hates People Who Hate Guns" ..... BwaHaHAHA!
I'm just wishing that there was a way that we could make their decisions hurt them financially because I just don't think they will take notice if I don't eat at Chipotle ever again!
I asked the plumber on the job site I'm working on today to check Chipotle (177th & Center) for a sign....apparently it remains unposted!
Maybe a better target would be posted businesses &/Or shopping centers! & maybe a better technique would be to go after them online/social media rather than buying a bunch of banners....if I had the answers I'd let everyone know!
-
Do I think that it would effect there business? Possibly.
So you are telling me there's a chance?!!?
-
So you are telling me there's a chance?!!?
I think 97.6834927485093% of people will think your a crazy gun nut. The other 2.(what ever)% will go "oh snap" really.
I personally have learned more about our states gun laws from this forum in the last year or so time than I have at any other point in my 25ish years of life. People have to want information to actually take the message that is in it.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/06/03/carrying-guns-in-restaurants/ (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/06/03/carrying-guns-in-restaurants/)
Much ado about nothing
By Dr. John R. Lott Jr.
Published June 03, 2014
The NRA’s strong statement reprimanding a few people for carrying long guns into restaurants was bound to get media attention. Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action and much of the media quickly jumped in and described various restaurants as “asking customers to leave their guns at home.” But their assertions couldn’t be more misleading.
The headline at USA Today saying “No Guns Inside” or at MSNBC and Huffington Post saying “No-Gun Policies” are simply wrong.
The question here isn't whether open carry deters crime. The question is what deters crime more: open or concealed carry.
A big deal has been made of Starbucks, Jack in the Box, Chipotle, Wendy's, Applebee's, Chili’s and Sonic’s supposed bans on guns, with Bloomberg’s groups declaring “victory.”
Yet, Starbucks “respectfully requesting” customers no longer bring in openly carried guns is not a ban on guns.
Jack in the Box’s statement “we would prefer that guests not bring their guns inside our restaurant” refers to open carry. Neither restaurant forbids customers from carrying concealed handguns and comments like “request” or “prefer” are a long ways from bans.
Calls to all these restaurants revealed that none of them have changed their policy about posting any signs banning either generally banning guns or permitted concealed handguns.
With 11 million concealed handgun permits in the United States, it is understandable why none of these businesses want to risk losing that many customers
~READ MORE AT THE LINK~
-
As long as these places are not posted properly, I can legally carry my concealed firearm there, and I intend to do that. Denny's lost my business a month ago when we walked up to have a couple of banana spliits, and saw the no carry sign at the door. We returned to the car and left. I will be printing up some "no guns, no cash" cards and return to present them with one. I do have choices!!!
-
They haven't banned guns at Chipotle. They have just indicated that they prefer people not carry there.
Another thing is that you have no second amendment right to carry there.
-
Ah hah.....my example of chipotle was bad because they aren't posted yet at least locally.
Just getting started on here, I witnessed how fast the Gretna Crossing got turned around & even without a public statment.... it still smelled like VICTORY!
From my vantage point it appeared that the shear number of comments on social media & emails to them changed their tune pretty quickly!
What about the S.A.Q.A.R.T.T.P.A.F.U.Y.A.S........
the 'Second Amendment Quick Action Response Team To Put A Foot Up Your A$$ Squad'??
Whenever Moms Against Our Freedoms is on the prowl , they spring into action & take whatever steps are necessary to quell the disruption!
-
They haven't banned guns at Chipotle. They have just indicated that they prefer people not carry there.
Another thing is that you have no second amendment right to carry there.
Now I'm confused.....Where does the 2nd amendment right to carry stop/extend to? I'm guessing it depends how liberal the federal court judges in your region are? Do property rights trump the bill of rights?
-
It's always been true that only the government can infringe your rights. An employer can fire you if you bring a gun on their property. A business owner can ask you to leave if you do so. If you refuse to leave private property that you have no right to be on when asked to leave, you are a trespasser.
That doesn't make it right to ban guns in businesses. I don't like it and I try to avoid such businesses if at all possible. But they are not infringing my rights.
-
It's always been true that only the government can infringe your rights. An employer can fire you if you bring a gun on their property. A business owner can ask you to leave if you do so. If you refuse to leave private property that you have no right to be on when asked to leave, you are a trespasser.
That doesn't make it right to ban guns in businesses. I don't like it and I try to avoid such businesses if at all possible. But they are not infringing my rights.
Yep. If I have a business, and I don't want to allow anyone in wearing pink, I can do that---if someone comes in, I can ask them to leave. It is my private business, after all. Similarly, if I suddenly turn incredibly stupid and ban guns in my business, that is a completely legal thing to do, since it is my business.
But that doesn't make it GOOD business.
When we speak to businesses about guns not being allowed in their stores, we don't want to phrase it in terms of "rights"---because in THEIR store, it isn't a rights issue. It IS, however, a business issue, and we need to let them know that it will impact their income if they bar law-abiding citizens from the means to defend themselves in their stores.
The problem in Nebraska, of course, is that the gun signs banning carry actually DO have the force of law, instead of simply being a business decision for that particular storefront. (And changing that is one of our goals in the NFOA, if I recall correctly. As well it should be.)
A business can tell you to leave if they want you to leave, and that is their right, as it is their private business.
We just need to make sure they know that if they DO ban self-defense tools in their place of business, it is going to hurt their business.
-
This is an interesting topic, and one that can (and does) easily fall into the "us" vs. "them" category, something which only serves to increase anger on both sides of the issue. While I agree that we should be letting businesses know that they lose income by posting "no weapons" on their business, a totally confrontational approach will ultimately be self-defeating. It is also the same tactic being used by anti-gun groups.
As far as the open/concealed carry issue goes, I am not sure that pushing the open carry issue is strategically beneficial for firearms owners at this time. Open carry, especially when approached in a confrontational manner, lowers the proponent of firearms ownership to the level of those misinformed anti-gun citizens (yes, citizens - because I refuse to lower myself to their level by demonizing them the way they demonize us). There are too many people who have been fed misinformation about how responsible firearm owners can be expected to behave in public for such a tactic to work. What is called for here is not confrontation, but education, and this should be the first strategy deployed in these types of situations. Only when the business community and the public recognizes the responsibility with which the majority of legal firearms owners behave can we expect to have reasonable reactions from people who encounter open carry situations.
From what I have seen, many of these policies are knee-jerk reactions by companies who are misinformed about how concealed carry works. I think that, instead of being confrontational (especially in an angry manner), an inclusive approach would benefit gun rights more. How about approaching the local managers and assistant managers with an offer of free concealed-carry and/or gun safety classes? They could then have a better idea of how and why we chose to exercise our rights to self-defense, and be informed about the type of training that concealed carry permit holders have in regard to when and how to use our firearms legally and safely. Of course, it also allows them to shoot in a safe and instructive environment, which in my experience does more for people's understanding of firearms than anything else.
I realize that the reality is that many of these businesses are national chains, and I believe that a national organization - say the GOA or NRA - should make these same offers to the upper administrative levels of the national chains, but as a local organization we can instill confidence in local business owners that we are responsible and trained. Additionally, we should look at other people - politicians, representatives, etc. - who we can invite to participate in such classes. Such things will only serve to inform against, rather than rant against, anti-gun rhetoric.
Is there a form letter that can be sent to some of these businesses expressing concern over carry policies? If not, why not? A reasoned, respectful, and considered letter to these businesses expressing support for our right to carry and, more importantly, their right to freely express their rights however they see fit, might be a good start to a good-will, informational campaign.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents - or $1.50, the way I went on...
-
Here's a thought. What if, instead of banners and standing outside of a place of business, we had matching T-shirts that said, "Violent criminals, the patrons of this business have been disarmed for your convenience"? :)
-
Or perhaps some sort of business card with information for business owners about the effects of them banning guns? I think that would be brilliant.
-
Over time private property owners have been saddled down with a mountain of rules and regulations, some for the better some for the worse, depending on your point of view. Some were made to keep business from trampling on an individuals rights.
I can't see it happening, but I personally would like to see NO GUN signs go the way of the dinosaurs. ;D
-
Here's a thought. What if, instead of banners and standing outside of a place of business, we had matching T-shirts that said, "Violent criminals, the patrons of this business have been disarmed for your convenience"? :)
And the T-shirts could have the NO GUNS NO MONEY card printed on the reverse side.
-
This is an interesting topic, and one that can (and does) easily fall into the "us" vs. "them" category, something which only serves to increase anger on both sides of the issue. While I agree that we should be letting businesses know that they lose income by posting "no weapons" on their business, a totally confrontational approach will ultimately be self-defeating. It is also the same tactic being used by anti-gun groups.
As far as the open/concealed carry issue goes, I am not sure that pushing the open carry issue is strategically beneficial for firearms owners at this time. Open carry, especially when approached in a confrontational manner, lowers the proponent of firearms ownership to the level of those misinformed anti-gun citizens (yes, citizens - because I refuse to lower myself to their level by demonizing them the way they demonize us). There are too many people who have been fed misinformation about how responsible firearm owners can be expected to behave in public for such a tactic to work. What is called for here is not confrontation, but education, and this should be the first strategy deployed in these types of situations. Only when the business community and the public recognizes the responsibility with which the majority of legal firearms owners behave can we expect to have reasonable reactions from people who encounter open carry situations.
[...]
Anyway, that's my 2 cents - or $1.50, the way I went on...
Wow, maybe a tad long-winded, but you have hit the proverbial nail on the head. Worth way more than a buck fifty. I vote with my wallet often, and have actually passed out a few cards in my time, but I have never taken it beyond that. I like your free class idea, but instructors need to make $$$ to maintain their business'. Although it might be worth it for the NFOA to sponsor a few classes for business owners who are standing close to the fence.
-
Agreed, instructors should be paid for their time, but as you say a sponsored class could have some benefit. I don't see more than a couple or three sponsored classes a year anyway.
My earlier post may have sounded wishy-washy, but I assure you it was not meant to be. Instead of bemoaning what should have been done, I was trying to address the situation in terms of what it is, and suggest things that can be done going forward to fix the problem. Getting angry is all well and good, but crying about what used to be and what should be doesn't put the rabbit in the pot. I truly believe that we can turn the erosion of our rights around, but we cannot give in to the expectations of the anti's by being obnoxiously confrontational about the issue - which carrying an AK into a store is. Rather, we have to make our points respectfully (every citizen has the same rights, after all) and with the sure knowledge that we will prevail.
-
A good way to spread the word would be a bulk purchase of Chuck Klein's book "Guns in the Workplace" and selectively passing them out to business owners. There is no guarantee that they will read it though.
A seminar based on the content of that book supplemented by Nebraska law is an excellent idea.