If you don't want guns in your restaurant, just post a sign--THEN WE WILL BOYCOTT YOU

[Kolesar]

The weapons producers talk a good line like they want reasonable compromises regarding possession of firearms. Well here is proof that they are not reasonable.

My employer does not permit firearms. Why should employers of cooks and waiters have to put up with the threat of menacing or a shooting if they don't want to?

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-cleveland/rumored-boycott-of-ora-appears-inevitable

Rumored Boycott of ORA appears Inevitable, by hyper gun advocate Charles Hairston

In an article on April 15, 2011, the Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner reported on the opposition of the Ohio Restaurant Association (ORA) to the passage of Senate Bill 17, led by Director Richard Mason.

The article stated: “Rumor has it that an underground movement is being organized by the 250,000 concealed carry license holders and the thousands of open carry advocates to boycott Ohio restaurants and take their business across state lines to Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky and Pennsylvania”.

Through a variety of sources, it now appears that the proposed boycott of Ohio Restaurant Association Affiliates is more than just a rumor and that a boycott is inevitable. Apparently, Mason’s Office received such massive calls and emails from supporters of the bill that the ORA pulled it Board of Directors Directory from the World Wide Web.

Pulled their directory? So that nutjobs don't call them at home and harass them? or threaten them?

[hlthe2b]

1. I remember smokers responding this way as well...

Over the long term, it really didn't work.

[eqfan592]

2. Except smoking is a much larger hazard....

..both to your own and to others health. A legal permit holder carrying a firearm? Not so much.

[niyad]

6. how many people is the smoker going to kill?

I have never been harmed by cigarettes in restaurants. however, I was in a fast food joint one day to pick up some tickets, and a fight broke out. the person directly in front of me pulled a gun right in front of my face. that was slightly more scary than someone waving a lit cigarette.

[eqfan592]

11. Depends on how many people end up with cancer from his habit.

Far more people have been killed by second hand smoke than permit holders. It's not even close, in fact. And permit holders are at least doing something constructive for themselves (personal protection). The smoker is just slowing killing him/her self and anybody else around them.

Edited to fix spelling error

[wtmusic]

24. Didn't you mean "wabbit"?

[eqfan592]

27. lol

thanks :P

[movonne]

42. A man could walk into a restaurant and shoot a lot of people before

being taken down...and it bars is scary...in the old west they took your guns away while in a bar...

[eqfan592]

60. A man can still do that...

...even with a "no guns allowed" sign. Signs do not have some magical powers to prevent people from doing what they prohibit.

[DWC]

64. Shooting rampage at Luby's Cafeteria left 24 dead

If I can not practice ccw in a restaurant I simply will not eat there.

I was in Killeen, Texas October 16, 1991.

I will never forget.

Semper Fi,

[RSillsbee]

66. Neither will Susanna Gratia Hupp NT

[DWC]

106. Everyone should read her book

From Luby's to the Legislature.

It is the most objective, honest piece on the pros and cons of armed self defense I have ever read.

Semper Fi,

[Cid_B]

170. Still one of my favorites....

[Kolesar]

5. delete

[wtmusic]

7. You mean they quickly tired of driving to the next state to go out to eat?

Imagine.

[ZombieHorde]

14. I think gun enthusiasts are a more dedicated group than smokers.

All my friends who smoke occasionally mention quitting. None of the gun owners I know ever mention selling all their guns.

[hlthe2b]

17. Why would they have to sell their guns?

[ZombieHorde]

21. Gun owners don't have to sell their guns.

I was trying to say gun owners like their guns more than smokers like their cigarettes. I have never heard a smoker say, "from my smelly, dead hands." Smokers usually have a love hate relationship with tobacco, while gun owners don't seem to have this internal conflict.

[wtmusic]

26. Or they realize their addiction is hopeless. nt

[RamboLiberal]

3. Boycotts are the right of either side of this debate

And no harassing anyone at home is STUPID!

I know DU'ers boycott businesses for supporting Republicans and other very good reasons.

Gun owners in OH certainly have the same right to boycott restaurants in this group that want to ban weapons by state law in their establishment instead of having the guts to just post a no gun sign.

Why should employers of cooks and waiters have to put up with the threat of menacing or a shooting if they don't want to?

As I stated they have that right by posting a sign. And I just bet the criminals will obey it!

Good point in OP article:


As one person commented, “The ORA should consult national franchise members such as Buffalo Wild Wings as to whether they had had any issues in the over 40 states in which they have businesses that allow carry in their restaurants”.

Ohio restaurants should check neighboring states Applebee's, TGIFriday's, Chili's, etc. In my area near Pittsburgh I've never seen any of the chains that serve alcohol have a sign prohibiting guns and the only red running in the aisles may be a spilled glass of red wine.

[pipoman]

99. Actually, the OP made up the idea that anyone was contacting anyone at home..

it simply isn't found anyplace in the cited text.

[jpak]

4. Bullies with Jackboots

and guns

yup

[Kolesar]

10. Mean, vengeful psychopaths with a dangerous attitude...eom

[eqfan592]

15. So anybody that boycots a place of business...

...that is doing something they don't agree with is a mean, vengeful psychopath with a dangerous attitude? Or just folks who don't happen to agree with you on a subject?

Either way, wow, just wow. That's a shockingly regressive, short sighted, ignorant attitude to have.

[RamboLiberal]

16. News to DU'ers that boycott WalMart they are

Mean, vengeful psychopaths with a dangerous attitude

[Euromutt]

20. You mean these guys?

http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/press/view/1219/

[Kolesar]

30. Trying to be cute, I see.

[eqfan592]

32. Ummm, you said what you said...

...don't blame others for pointing out your hypocrisy.

[Euromutt]

44. And succeeding magnificently, if I do say so

If planning a direct boycott makes you a "mean, vengeful psychopath with a dangerous attitude," then that applies to the Brady Campaign as much as it does to Ohio gun owners. Sauce for the goose...

[friendly_iconoclast]

78. I rather think *these* boycotts will work better than the Brady one has n/t.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

88. They clearly have

[one-eyed fat man]

103. even more magnificent

Look at his signature line....

"People who are easily offended, or who are not accustomed to having their opinions (including deeply personal convictions) challenged may not feel entirely comfortable here. A thick skin is necessary to participate on this or any other discussion forum."

All that and listen to him squeal, "That's different!"

Brady boycott of Starbucks = Progressive, forward thinking, praiseworthy

Ohio gun owners = Mean, vengeful psychopaths with a dangerous attitude.

[SteveW]

163. Ah, those heat-seeking missles with a shitty gyroscope. nt

[beevul]

Duplicate N/T

[beevul]

69. Rofl.

[PavePusher]

33. Accusations noted. n/t

[Straw Man]

95. Lighten up a little.

Mean, vengeful psychopaths with a dangerous attitude...

It's really not that bad. Really. Trust me.

[rl6214]

157. You're gonna get in trouble

calling jpak a mean, vengeful psychopath with a dangerous attitude.

Normally your posts are just stupid, this one I like.

[RSillsbee]

48. Not a single person mentioned the BATFE until you did jpak NT

[Bold Lib]

54. And here I thought you supported the ATF.

Guess not.

[Hangingon]

71. Posting a no guns sign means you don;t want gun owners business.

Crying about gun owners boycott is hupocracy.

[krispos42]

80. I don't think you should call the restraunt owners those names.

Maybe fraidy-cats. Or people overly worried about lawsuits. But the Nazi references just Godwin you right out of the debate.

[Straw Man]

94. Love you too ...

Bullies with Jackboots

... and your boots!

[ZombieHorde]

8. Interesting article. I wonder how the boycotts will turn out. nt

[rrneck]

9. If you cant take the heat...

Were there any actual threats? Does anybody with half a brain put personal contact info on the internet?

If contact information was such a big deal why did the author encourage readers to contact the ORA and list contact information at the bottom of the piece?

[Kolesar]

13. If you cant take the heat...Does that mean that the gun extremists should "bring the heat"?

Do you look at life as a contest of wills? Win at any cost?

[rrneck]

23. Do you

advocate corporate authoritarianism to resist the collective action of the people?

[cleanhippie]

50. Who knows, its YOUR assumption so YOU tell us.

[Hoyt]

12. The 300 million that don't see the need to tote in restaurants should pick up the slack.

[spin]

29. Many people in Florida do not carry firearms ...

but they do not have an irrational fear of the 813,127 people who have concealed weapons permits issued by the state of Florida. To most Floridians, the fact that someone might be carrying a legally concealed firearm in the restaurant they were at would be no big deal.

Of course, we have had "shall issue" concealed carry since 1987 and even the people who do not have licenses see little need to change the law.

[GreenStormCloud]

74. False statistic.

Your are counting people who are too young to have CCWs, people in states that don't issue them, people in nursing homes, and others in the population who can't get CCWs as if they had voluntarily chosen not to.

[Hoyt]

100. Just for you -- the 200+ million that don't carry vs. the 10- who can't walk outside w/o gun.

If you want an exact number, it's 218,697,327 vs. 9,134,666. Are you happy, now?

[oneshooter]

104. Cite to proof, if you can. n/t

[GreenStormCloud]

105. No, I am not happy. Your number is much too high.

About 1/3 of the population is in states that restrict issue of CCWs. Much of the population of the issues states is too young. Do better research.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

85. The impact of boycots is very hard to gauge. If someone tells a merchant or service provider they

will no longer patronize them due to their policy about X, they will wonder how many others they lose because of it.

In another life I was a Platinum/President Level with a particular hotel chain. Many of their hotels are franchises, not directly owned. One I had been staying at regularly instituted a new policy that I found offensive. I told their duty manager about it and said I would no longer stay there due to the new policy. He shrugged it off and did not ask my name or room number. I told the national chain in writing. Within 30 days, I received noticed that the policy was revoked and a couple of free nights at the property in question. When I used them, the general manager asked me to stop by and talk to him. He did not realize the new policy would be controversial and had no idea that one of his subordinates had just brushed me off. Note that this had nothing to do with firearms.

YMMV, but vocal boycotts seem to get attention at a local and national level when they reach the right ears. If individual restaurants do not want CCW business, there will be lots of others that will welcome it. Even vendors which start out with "no guns allowed" signs tend to go back off once CCW holders start telling the owners they will not patronize and why. It is not like it is a demonstrable higher risk.

[rl6214]

89. Is this how you 'tote' in public hoyt?

http://www.zappos.com/womens-totes?gclid=CJeZ9q6O7qgCFQkMbAodgSh7Bw

There are lots of totes here that you can use. I'm sure there's something here for you.

[Hoyt]

101. I'd should post a link to a TBagger toting his guns, and ask you the same?

[rl6214]

160. I carry concealed, I don't tote, however you do that.

[Euromutt]

18. Why do the words "Starbucks" and "Brady Campaign" come to mind?

What course of action was it again that the Brady Campaign wanted pursue with regard to Starbucks permitting firearms in its locations? Oh, normally my memory is much better than this...

[Bold Lib]

56. My thoughts exactly!

[X_Digger]

107. Here's an image to help jog your memory ;)

[Katya Mullethov]

19. Do you work at Noodles ?

Rob Lewis would never let them get away with that shit . Fight on brother !

[spin]

22. Since 1987 people have carried concealed weapons in restaurants that serve alcohol in Florida ...

and there hasn't been a rash of restaurant shootings caused by those licensed individuals.

I carry a concealed weapon when I go to a restaurant but I can't go into the bar portion of the establishment. Since I don't go to a restaurant to get drunk it's no big deal.

I can see how I might disturb some people in the restaurant if I was openly carrying a firearm, but that is illegal in Florida. Nobody realizes that I am carrying so only those people who suffer from irrational fear of legal concealed carry have any concern.

[PavePusher]

25. Why do you accuse people exercising their Second Amendment rights of criminal intent?

Boycotts are not violence, and open carry activists don't go to restaurants to threaten the workers.

Your projection is dishonest and vile.

Grow up.

[Kolesar]

28. that's a load of spin...eom

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

36. Really?

"the threat of menacing or a shooting"

"So that nutjobs don't call them at home and harass them? or threaten them?"

"Mean, vengeful psychopaths with a dangerous attitude"

edit: "proactive about preventing workplace violence"


Please, unspin, if you can....

[cleanhippie]

51. Hahahaha! Your ENTIRE post is nothing BUT spin.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

86. Yes as usual you are spinning things, about as poorly as always

[JohnnyRingo]

34. I find it incredible that people here in Ohio will drive across a state line for a burger

if there's a sign that asks not to carry a gun in a resturant.
Who cares what a sign says? It's concealed so no one will know. I think keeping quiet is preferable to a long drive out of principle.

Believe it or not, the resturant owners post those signs to make other customers feel safe. If carrying a gun was a selling point for businesses, they'd post signs begging people to bring their guns wouldn't they?

[Kolesar]

35. Bring a gun into here and you get fired or a trip to the police station

My employer is proactive about preventing workplace violence.

[eqfan592]

38. Banning concealed carry is not being proactive about preventing workplace violence.

Somebody interested in doing violence in your workplace isn't going to give two shits less about their ban on firearms in the facility. All your employer is doing is making sure that if somebody decides to do something like that, none of you will be able to effectively defend yourselves.

[Kolesar]

39. "none of you will be able to effectively defend yourselves" -- pure projection

and fantasy. Embarassing

[eqfan592]

41. Try reality.

If you honestly think a sign on the window is going to stop somebody intent on doing violence in your workplace then the only person who is living in a fantasy is you. And yes, I'm sure it's very embarrassing for you, but only you can solve your own ignorance.

[Kolesar]

43. Don't see any violence in my company's facilities

there's your proof, Mr. Imaginitive.

[eqfan592]

45. lol

So because you don't see any violence in your company's facilities means there can never be any, nor has there every been any in other facilities with other companies with similar policies?? THAT is your logic? Wow, that's just sad. If this is an example of your reasoning abilities, then it says a lot about the sorry state of the education you received.

[Euromutt]

47. Can we say "post hoc ergo propter hoc"?

There's any number of conceivable reasons why no incidents of violence have occurred (including sheer luck). Perhaps your employer treats employees as people, rather than as "human resources." I have no way of telling.

[cleanhippie]

52. The Post Office never saw any violence either.

Until they did. repeatedly.

There's YOUR proof, Mr. Ignorant.

[one-eyed fat man]

68. The Postal Service not the Post Office

The United States Post Office Department was a cabinet level agency, headed by the Postmaster General. The Post Office issued firearms to mail clerks and mail carriers.

The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 abolished the Post Office and created the United States Postal Service, a corporation-like independent agency with an official monopoly on the delivery of mail in the United States. The Post Office issued firearms. There were no "workplace" shootings when most mail clerks and every mail carrier had a sidearm.

My former father-in-law was a Railway Mail Clerk. EVERY CLERK IN THE MAIL CAR WAS ISSUED A REVOLVER

This is what they looked like. A Colt Banker's Special in .38 Colt N.P.



They had a distinctive "R.M.S. P.O. DEPT." marking on the backstrap.



The Postal Service on the other hand is noted for being gun-free. The Postal Service collected and stored surplus firearms at the Eastern Area Supply Center at Somerville, New Jersey. In 1993, this accumulation of thousands was sent to a foundry at Newark, New Jersey, for supervised destruction. This ensured that when a disgruntled Postal Service employee went on a shooting rampage he would not have to worry about anyone shooting back.

[Confusious]

82. Postal shootings started in 1983

Funny that.

[petronius]

93. Interesting, thanks! I toured a mail car a while back at the train museum in

Sacramento - it was really quite an impressive system...

[SteveW]

164. Very nice information. Thanks...

BTW, I am SteveM from another "era." I have been out of action due to computer foul-ups since January. This is my first day to post on DU Guns in almost 6 months!

[GreenStormCloud]

77. The place where I work has a "No guns" policy.

Yesterday a criminal with a gun came in and held up the cashier. The "No guns" policy didn't seem to deter the robber.

[Straw Man]

96. Don't see any elephants in your M&M patch?

Don't see any violence in my company's facilities

It's because they paint their toenails different colors.

there's your proof, Mr. Imaginitive.

[Euromutt]

97. I've never heard that variant

The way I know it is that elephants paint their toenails red and hide in cherry trees, and paint the bottoms of their feet yellow and float upside-down in custard.

[Straw Man]

152. Upside-down in custard?

Love that image.

[beevul]

70. We'll have to remember that.

We'll have to remember that VT and Columbine were just "fantasy" next time someone brings them up as an argument for gun control.

[GreenStormCloud]

76. You can't see the concealed guns. N/T

[PavePusher]

40. If a restaurant had a sign saying "No Blacks allowed"....

or "No Women allowed" or "No Catholics allowed" or "No Mexicans allowed" or "No Disabled allowed" or "No Readers allowed"....

I'd go a lot farther than across a river to avoid the place and send them a copy of the receipt I got from a competitor.

Civil Rights are all equal.

[JohnnyRingo]

53. Black people can't leave their race in the glove compartment of their car.

Neither can the disabled. It's not their choosing.

People who think they might have to send an overcooked steak back to the kitchen at gunpoint are not having civil rights trampled on by businessmen who may rather hand over the cash register to a robber than have their place forever be known as the scene of a violent bloodbath.

[Bold Lib]

57. So one civil right is more equal than others? Got it.

You know, there would be no need for a codified right to free speech if everyone agreed with it. Please consider that in context of the 2A.

[Hoyt]

102. No question that rights of minorities are more important than your supposed right to carry a gun.

For you and other gunner to even think otherwise, demeans the whole civil rights movement (where lots of good folks were killed and oppressed by gun carrying racists).

Try carrying a machete or spear gun in public and see how people react.

[rrneck]

108. According to you

"toters" are a tiny, insignificant minority. I guess some minorities are more equal than others.

[Hoyt]

109. Despite what you think, gunner's rights are not anywhere near as significant as real human rights.

Obviously, you need to review a little history and get your head out of your barrels.

And that goes for those gunners who'll whine about this post.

[rrneck]

112. The right to defend oneself is about as human as it gets.

Yours is an interesting bigotry that allows you to prioritize others rights.

Does a black man have the right to defend himself against a gang of racists with a gun? On the street?

[Hoyt]

113. Nope. None of us has the right to play judge, jury and executioner. Leave em at home.

[rrneck]

114. You just did exactly that.

Prouduce a firearm free self defense solution or shut the fuck up.

[Hoyt]

115. Nope, won't shutthefuckup. You guys need to learn how to interact in society without a friggin gun.

[rrneck]

116. You need to learn how to think about

someone besides yourself.

Produce your solution.

[Bold Lib]

119. You guys need to overcome your phobia of lawful carry. The problem is yours

if you over react to someone excessing their rights, not mine.

[SteveW]

166. Your projection is showing. nt

[Bold Lib]

120. We all have the basic right to self defense. I'll keep the most affective means

of self defense with me anywhere legal. Don't really care what you do.

[TPaine7]

158. So if I am attacked by a group of clan members or skinheads I have a civic

duty to take whatever they can dish out, up to and including death?

Gotcha.

[Bold Lib]

118. The right to self defense is one of the most basic human rights.

yup

[SteveW]

165. Harriet Tubman packed. So did Rosa Parks. And Fannie Lou Hamer.

[RSillsbee]

58. Surely you can cite an example

of someone sending a steak back to the kitchen at gun point

[PavePusher]

61. "send an overcooked steak back to the kitchen at gunpoint"

Yeah, that's what this is all about.

Dude, are you fucking high, or just fucking stupid? I can't tell.

[cleanhippie]

63. My money is on the second choice.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rl6214]

90. I worked at Red Lobster for 24 years

The last 15 years or so I carried a 9mm in my briefcase because sometimes I was there until 3 or 4 am and sometimes went into work at 6am. It's got nothing to do with being afraid, it's got to do with the reality of bad people do bad things.

I have seen restaurants across the country get robbed at gunpoint.

[cleanhippie]

62. "People who think they might have to send an overcooked steak back to the kitchen at gunpoint"

Bwahahahahahahahaha!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[SteveW]

167. Jeez, here it is near 4:20 and you post that mellow yellow thing. nt

[Upton]

46. I drove over 60 miles round trip last Friday..

just to sign I-1149 here in Washington state. So I sure as heck would drive that far and even further to find a restaurant that doesn't discriminate against those who choose to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights..

[YllwFvr]

72. Property rights for me

They dont want me then ill go elsewhere. I OC so concealing wont work. Even if I wanted to it wont conceal

[buddysmellgood]

37. Whatever.

[cleanhippie]

49. What complete and utter nonsense.

Why should employers of cooks and waiters have to put up with the threat of menacing or a shooting if they don't want to?


Uhm, they ALREADY put up with it RIGHT NOW. You know, if a criminal wanted to rob the place or shoot someone, they are ALREADY putting up with that danger. In fact (yes, its a fact) persons with a concealed permit are many times LESS likely that the average person to commit a crime or use a gun in a crime. But you knew that, as this has been explained to you many, many times, along with the supporting data. So that makes you dishonest.

Lets refresh----you knowingly posted false information, so that makes you dishonest.

[shadowrider]

55. Ain't no big deal to me, I NEVER spend money in a place that has a "No Firearms" sign

I always go elsewhere. Been doin it for years.

[Bold Lib]

59. Many places put up the "No guns" signs in 95 when Texas got it's CHL law.

I politely obeyed their request to not carry on their premises. I also politely informed them that I was taking my business elsewhere. I noticed that those signs came down (for the most part) by 96.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

87. That is what has happened in most places

The antis' outrage subsides and cooler heads prevail

[oneshooter]

132. This site might keep you from using too much gas.

http://texas3006.com/index.php

Listings of both 30.06 and 51% places to avoid.

Perhaps someone might start such a site for Ohio. Save people a lot of time looking for an acceptable restaurant.


Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Bold Lib]

141. Never saw that before. Thank you. n/t

[oneshooter]

148. No problem. Spread it around to the other Texas gunnies. n/t

[SteveW]

168. Yep, Even the "No Weapons" signs at public schools have comedown. nt

[beevul]

65. I generally avoid those "no guns" places, and I don't even carry a gun.

And I very much doubt I'm alone in that.

[Kolesar]

125. or money, either

[beevul]

128. What? N/T

[eqfan592]

135. Maybe he's trying to say you don't have money?

And if so, deserve to be ridiculed for it? That's my guess anyway. Just kinda underscores the sort of person he/she is that they would attempt to make fun of somebody for that sort of thing.

[oneshooter]

147. Sounds to me like he is saying that you can't afford to eat at a high end

restaurant like the one he works at.

sniff,sniff such a elitist comment.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[slackmaster]

67. I'd be inclined to avoid a restaurant that posted a No Guns sign even though I don't carry one

Such a sign COULD make a business look like an attractive target to a deranged lunatic who wanted to go out in a blaze of glory.

[SteveW]

169. Yup. Maybe that's why the "No Weapons" signs are coming down.

Please note that I am SteveM (that old name and e-mail was so corrupted, I could not open or send e-mails). After reaming out my computer, I am at least back on line, somewhat.

[lawodevolution]

73. "no gun zones" = "mass shooting zones"

[GreenStormCloud]

79. Here in Texas on simply does not see a "No Guns" sign in a restaurant.

In fact it is rare to see on on any business entrance. One does often see a "No unlicensed guns allowed" sign but it means nothing. It doesn't apply to CHL holders and criminals will ignore it anyway.

[krispos42]

81. So then gun owners should be forced to spend money at gun-banning restraunts? n/t

[ileus]

83. One would think businesses would welcome safe trustworthy CC clients

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

92. Boycotts are one of the most grassroot & fundamental methods indivuals can use to change things

Boycotts are one of the most grassroots and fundamental methods indivuals can take part in to participate in direct political action. Raw democracy in action. It's like gathering to protest or collective bargaining going on strike.

If people want to boycott for whatever reason... then good.

[pipoman]

98. Why the fantasy?

Why are you making shit up? Did you not read the whole sentence you chose to highlight? Please post a link to an actual source which backs up your claim...the cited source doesn't say a single word about contacting anyone at home.

Apparently, Mason’s Office received such massive calls and emails from supporters of the bill that the ORA pulled it Board of Directors Directory from the World Wide Web.

Do you always protest people contacting board of directors of companies and organizations to try to effect policy? Or is it just this issue which you believe people shouldn't be allowed to respond to?

[one-eyed fat man]

110. Hey, wait a minute!!!!!!!

"Pulled their directory? So that nutjobs don't call them at home and harass them? or threaten them?"

Guess who supported publishing the names of Concealed Carry Permit holders names and addresses in the paper?

Guess who was upset when Court of Common Pleas Judge John D. Schmitt has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate if Shelby Co. Sheriff and Sidney Daily News editor violated the civil rights of the 85 license-holders whose private information was disseminated.

Guess who was unconcerned that people who were hiding from abusive ex-spouses were upset that their new address was published in the paper?

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=65896&mesg_id=65898

[X_Digger]

111. Lol.. BUSTED!! n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

117. HA! Looks like *someone's* been serving dishes they don't want to eat.

Why am I not a bit surprised?

[Bold Lib]

121. Hey pot! Meet kettle.

[slackmaster]

122. Nice bust, one-eyed fat man!

You have a good memory.

:nuke:

[GreenStormCloud]

133. Great catch. N/T

[TheWraith]

123. So you claim that gun owners are a tiny group of lunatics...

...and yet they're able to exert such massive economic pressure on restaurants that it will crush them?

Which is it?

[Kolesar]

124. I noticed that none of you guys responded to the real thesis of my post

Hint: It's in the first sentence.

[friendly_iconoclast]

126. Asserting something is 'reasonable' or 'unreasonable' is no proof that it is

It's a subjective feeling.

[Kolesar]

127. That's what you weapons-industry-promoters were saying a few years ago

Then you insist on ridiculous weapons policies that the police and the public don't want. But it works for the weapons industry and the party because it gets RW voters to the polls.

[beevul]

129. You'd be so much better off...

You'd be so much better off, if you ceased to be ignorant on this issue.

What gets people concerned about gun rights to the polls, is publicly expressed anti-gun sentiment, and proposals for so called "resonable" restrictions which are in no way reasonable.


And from what I've been able to tell, you reside in both those camps.

So you really have no room to complain, since its you and your movement that are pushing those concerned to the polls.


But you don't care at all about that, do you.

[Kolesar]

130. That was imaginitive, but wrong

-1 for beevul

[eqfan592]

136. He's got evidence on his side.

What do you have, Kolesar? Oh, that's right, jack shit. Just opinion with no hard evidence to back any of it up. You're no different than somebody who denies climate change.

[beevul]

138. When the truth is so painful as to be intolerable...

Deny deny deny.

[DonP]

131. You left out fraud and hypocrite.

[friendly_iconoclast]

139. No matter who says it, it's still true. I don't play the genetic fallacy card

And if the public really don't want "ridiculous weapons policies", then why on Earth do they not vote accordingly?


Short of claiming false consciousness, the only answer must be- expanded gun control just isn't as popular as its proponents

claim it is. It's been bandied about by certain posters that gun owners are 'frightened' and 'paranoid. It seems more likely

that gun controllers are 'pronoid'- iow, they think they are more popular then they really are....

[X_Digger]

137. "thesis"? *snort*

Two opinions do not a thesis make.

[MicaelS]

144. With you defining "reasonable"? Fuck that idea..

That's like a member of some anti-abortion group claiming people who are pro-choice aren't serious about "reasonable" restrictions on abortion.

[slackmaster]

149. Appeal to "reasonableness" is often really a form of argumentum ad hominem

Anyone who disagrees with whatever you are proposing is automatically flagged as being an unreasonable person or behaving in an unreasonable manner.

[GreenStormCloud]

134. If an eatery posts a "No guns" sign then they should be happy when CCWers go elsewhere.

After all, that is what they want, isn't it? The fact that the CCWers money also goes elsewhere is a mere by-product.

[gravity556]

154. Yep. Business owners are perfectly within their rights to post

"No Guns" signs. That said, gun owners are also perfectly within their rights to organize boycotts of businesses who do so. My money spends just as well at an establishment that doesn't presume that I'm a bloodthirsty maniac looking to kill because the kitchen burned my burger.

As for the "guns in bars?!?!?! it'll be a massacre-blood on the salad bar, bullets whizzing around instead of darts!" crowd, keep in mind that "bar" in most of these laws is any establishment that serves alcohol in any fashion. That would include 4 and 5 star establishments and here in AZ, even Rubio's serves beer (fast food mexican place-fantastic fish tacos).

The public is at much greater risk from the drunks driving home from the gun-free bar than they are from the CCW permit holder who is having an iced tea with dinner.

And for the folks suggesting "just leave it in your car!", think that one through. A loaded firearm left in a vehicle, unattended, just means that when some shithead breaks your window to steal your stereo and whatever else he thinks he's entitled to take, now he gets a gun as well. Eff that noise...

Too bad for the wait staff as well-90% of my friends who carry also tend to tip 20% or more.

[one-eyed fat man]

140. Look, it really is that simple.

You can make a choice, put up a no guns sign or not.

When I see such a sign, I am completely free to go elsewhere.

You sound like one of the 'nicotine Nazis' who claims cities must ban smoking in all establishments. It is unfair to let restaurant owners choose to allow or not allow smoking because people who smoke will go to places that allow smoking.

We saw that play out here. The city on the south end of the county passed a smoking ban. The city on the north end did not. The city on the south end saw drop in revenue from the restaurant tax. There was big hue and cry about how unfair it was the county didn't force the north end to ban smoking.

They argue it's simply not right to let some restaurants allow smoking because historically people who smoke go out more often, spend more, tip better, and will choose places that allow smoking to the detriment of those that don't.

You want the sign, put it up. It will either have no discernible effect on your bottom line or not. If you see no change or an increase in revenue, you can smugly revel in the righteousness of your position. If you see a drop in revenue, you can either rejoice in the sacrifice to maintain your "principled" stand, despite those gun-toting barbarians...or take down the sign.

That's how a free society works, you make your choices and everyone else does too.

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RamboLiberal]

143. +1 I was about to suggest same thread

Wonder if that restaurant had a no guns sign?

[DWC]

146. Even if they had a "No Guns" sign

It would not have mattered to the murderer and if they did, I am glad it didn't matter to the honest citizen, ccw defender.

Semper Fi,

[DWC]

150. Better yet,

just Google restaurant shooting. There are more than enough instances listed to keep you reading all night.

Semper Fi,

[WatsonT]

145. So boycotts of businesses that don't act in a way you approve of are unacceptable now?

I suppose then we should come down on DUers who don't shop at walmart, or who prefer Union-stores to non-union.

[Philippine expat]

151. Not something I would do

but I can think of worse reasons to boycott

[beevul]

153. WAAAAAAAAAA

"We posted no gun signs and they took their money and their business elsewhere...WAAAAAA"


Better make that phone call now:

[slackmaster]

155. You too, Kolesar.

The Day of the Long Knives continues.

To the Bozo Bin with you!

http://midi.mididatabase.com/queen/Another_One_Bites_the_Dust.mid

[friendly_iconoclast]

156. UPDATE- Guess who was promoting boycotts here at DU a couple of years ago?:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=6302469


It seems some animals are more equal than others...

[beevul]

159. "reasonable compromises"

What has the anti-gun part of the equation in the word "compromise" EVER given up?

[diveguy]

161. Don't know about OP's state

But here, the sign mean nothing legally. The most someone can do if they see you in their establishment with a gun can do is ask you to leave. Concealed means concealed

[beevul]

162. I meant in general.

Antigunners LOVE to use the word compromise - you know, give and take - however they define "compromise", as the gun lobby doing all the giving, and the anti-gun lobby doing all the taking.

Me? I think its time for THEM to be doing the giving, and US - the pro-gun folks - to be doing the taking.


15 years worth ought to about balance the books.