Chipotle vs Tools for Dissent

[Bartholomew Roberts]

And let's review what Open Carry has accomplished in Texas...according to local news (http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/05/22/...ed-not-to-carry-rifles-in-private-businesses/), Starbucks, Chipoltle, Jack-in-the-Box, and Wendy's have all prohibited unlicensed carry of a firearm (which is long guns or black powder guns in Texas).

Additionally, TABC just sent a warning to EVERY restaurant in the whole damn state that serves alcohol that they'll lose their license if they allow open carry. This one boneheaded incident by supposedly pro-gun advocates has done more to slow down open carry in Texas than Bloomberg has done in a decade.

What has to happen before we acknowledge this tactic is not working?

 

[jrdolall]

and the sad thing is, if these idiots had left the rifles at home and gone door-to-door for any one of the several prominent Texas politicians supporting open carry, this whole thing could have been avoided and a lot more done for open carry rights.

Yeah but then they wouldn't have had that fabulous photo op.

 

[MachIVshooter]

and resulting in a predictable, negative response from the pro-gun side of the guns rights issue as well - one which we have been more than happy to provide loads of; which also, I am sure, is very pleasing to the anti-gun groups.

Quite the contrary. When the extreme majority of the pro gun community condemns the behavior of, and distances themselves from, a person or small group of people who acted irresponsibly, it tends to make the anti's whining moot. The rest of the population (that is actually paying attention) sees that the usual suspects are bitching, but also that the group they are usually bitching at are wholly critical of the behavior in question, and they simply write off the people who engaged in said behavior as outcasts, not representative of the pro gun side.

In contrast, if we remain silent or defend this kind of jackassery, then the non-gunners (quite different from anti gunners) can reasonably deduce that the pro gun folks are just fine with abnormal, antagonistic and downright unacceptable social behavior from their own, and that's the kind of conclusion that turns non-gunners into anti gunners.

 

[BullfrogKen]

MachIVshooter -



Word.



When any group publicly distances itself from some outrageous behavior done by a fringe element trying to connect itself to the platform the mainstream holds, it can dismiss that outrageous position when the opposition later tries to paint the mainstream with it.

Only then it can get back on message. Otherwise, it will get confronted with it. It won't just go away because you want to ignore it, and the mainstream platform must then spend political capital and precious time trying to explain why it tolerated such outrageous behavior in the first place. Before it can get back on message.

This is indefensible behavior.

Yet some apologize for it.

 

[Nom de Forum]

Bravo MachIVshooter!

 

[JohnKSa]

Personally, I do believe the two guys carrying the guns actions were inappropriate.

So do I. And that is why I will not support them and will try, as a gun owner, to distance myself from them and others who have the same mindset.

However, I also believe that Chipolte's overreaction was equally inappropriate...

I disagree emphatically.

Chipotle reacted PRECISELY as any rational person would expect them to react.

1. They are in business to make money and you don't do that by allowing people to come in and disturb/irritate/alarm your paying customers.

2. As already mentioned, walking into most gun stores, or coming into the "clubhouse" of a shooting range with an uncased firearm would almost certainly generate an even more enthusiastic response than Chipotle's. It's ridiculous to expect a restaurant to be more tolerant of people carrying uncased firearms than a gun store.

In contrast, if we remain silent or defend this kind of jackassery, then the non-gunners (quite different from anti gunners) can reasonably deduce that the pro gun folks are just fine with abnormal, antagonistic and downright unacceptable social behavior from their own, and that's the kind of conclusion that turns non-gunners into anti gunners.

These people have appointed themselves as spokepersons for the gun community. If we keep quiet, then they get to keep their self-appointed positions and speak for all of us. If they do not represent us and we consider their actions to be inappropriate and imprudent, then we MUST speak up to make our dissent clear so that the entire gun community is not stereotyped by the ill-advised actions of a few.

Additionally, TABC just sent a warning to EVERY restaurant in the whole damn state that serves alcohol that they'll lose their license if they allow open carry.

Open carry and campus carry were the TSRA's two main priorities for the next legislative session. Want to bet that strategy is now being re-evaluated? We've had 2 solid decades of slow but steady progress of passing pro-gun legislation in TX, but much more of this kind of buffoonery and we're going to have to stop advancing and go on the defensive.

 

[NavyLCDR]

No, to date Chipoltle has not done that. They've banned open (i.e. unlicensed) carry of any firearm - the exact type of carry that threatens their TABC license. They haven't posted 30.06 signs at any of their restaurants at this time (the sign that prohibits the type of carry allowed by TABC - licensed concealed carry). Additionally, nothing in their statement appears to be directed at CHLs.

Wow. Really? Let's see, shall we?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/21/us-usa-chipotle-guns-idUSBREA4K02220140521

"Because of this, we are respectfully asking that customers not bring guns into our restaurants, unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel," company spokesman Chris Arnold said.

So, what you are trying to tell us, Mr. Roberts, is that your CHL makes you authorized law enforcement personnel? Also, I don't see the words "open" or "unlicensed" in their statement at all. I see "not bring guns into our restaurants". So, if the gun is concealed and carried by a CHL holder, then it isn't there....being "brought into" their restaurant?

It's funny the stuff that is being made up, imagined or exaggerated in order to support your opinion. Kind of reminds me of the way other groups like to claim things that have no basis in facts.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Sailor,

I appreciate you linking us to the preferred haunt for the Open Carry movement.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

And while we set our own rules at THR, I find the rule you linked to at that site quite telling.

(14) LONG GUN CARRY IS OFF-TOPIC: This web site is focused on the right to openly carry properly holstered handguns in daily American life. We do NOT promote the carry of long guns. Long guns are great! OCDO co-founders John & Mike and most of the members of this forum own at least one long gun - but due to urban area issues of muzzle control and lack of trigger guard coverage, we cannot support long gun open carry.

If your Open Carry advocate forum considers carrying long guns off-topic, I find it unreasonable to carry on a discussion here they won't permit there.


Usually we don't follow the rules and decorum of other forums here on THR. Our mission is focused around mainstreaming gun ownership. We also promote the carrying of firearms in public is mainstream, and judging by the attitudes and legislative results over the past decade I'd like to think we're contributing to that success.


If openly carrying rifles in urban communities isn't considered within the scope of your Open Carry forum, then it's certainly not mainstream. Even among the Open Carry community.

Based on the consensus that this is not mainstream, not even marginally mainstream among RKBA advocates, this conversation can go nowhere.

It is exhausted and can't go forward. Not on your Open Carry site, and not here.


I have closed it.

If anyone thinks this discussion has value to the mission of THR and mainstreaming 2A rights, make an appeal to a Staff member.