or the more logical way to look at it is the Colonist are in bad company being lumped in with people fighting against America and with people fighting against good sense
Chipotle vs Tools for Dissent
- Thread starter conw
- Start date
- Status
or the more logical way to look at it is the Colonist are in bad company being lumped in with people fighting against America and with people fighting against good sense
USAF_Vet
Member
I'm 100% pro gun, and believe in the repeal of all gun control laws, regulations and restrictions. But open carry of a long gun in public serves no rational purpose. Its an in-your-face tactic that's designed to draw attention, just to show "its legal." I'm okay with open carry of a holstered handgun, having done so myself often enough prior to my CPL.
Just because its legal isn't always the best justification for doing something. Its legal in Colorado and Washington to smoke pot, doesn't mean I'm gonna run out and buy a bag and smoke it up.
And, as stated earlier, doing something just because its legal, and inciting fear in the ignorant, gets laws passed alter the legal status of said activity.
Open carry at a pro gun rally, if you insist on OC of a long gun.
Just because its legal isn't always the best justification for doing something. Its legal in Colorado and Washington to smoke pot, doesn't mean I'm gonna run out and buy a bag and smoke it up.
And, as stated earlier, doing something just because its legal, and inciting fear in the ignorant, gets laws passed alter the legal status of said activity.
Open carry at a pro gun rally, if you insist on OC of a long gun.
Rocketmedic
Member
Here's my thoughts on it (reposted from my blog and another forum).
Background: I am a veteran combat medic with lots of infantry time, a combat deployment, I've shot a human being and I'm a paramedic in a busy urban system. Not squeamish or afraid of guns, but not comfy with these cretins either.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/20/news/companies/chipotle-guns/
So, here's my thoughts on the Chipotle gun policy.
They did the right thing, both for their business, for their patrons and for the gun-owning community. Hear me out.
These gentlemen are exercising their "rights" in exactly the same way as those who manufacture K2 do. Just because something isn't technically illegal does not make it smart, intelligent or even safe to do. When someone goes out in public, openly-armed, there is a massive difference in perception between a holstered, non-threatening weapon and one that has hands on it. There's a MASSIVE difference in perception between a handgun and an assault rifle (and yes, these are assault rifles: they were literally designed and built to specifications that optimize them for close and midrange rapid-fire during the course of an assault in built-up terrain with a wide variety of possible engagement ranges, ie an assault in its classic military sense). A handgun is a near-universal defensive weapon in a holster as far as perception goes, I don't perceive a man with a holstered handgun as a threat nor do the overwhelming majority of people. I do perceive a degree of threat from anyone that walks in with a long rifle dangling, because quite frankly, this is not a combat zone. It's the USA, and it's pretty damned safe, and no, I don't need a thirty-round 5.56mm magazine hanging out of a rifle designed to effectively arm assaulting troops in urban combat, presumably loaded, with a sling system designed to facilitate rapid deployment of said rifle. It's a nonverbal aggressive stance. It's an escalation of force to present a weapon. (Incidentally, cops don't draw their guns before traffic stops for this reason, soldiers don't generally fondle their rifles when in polite conversation with the locals, and we certainly don't walk around our hometowns at the low-ready). Trust me- there is a difference between a holstered handgun and a hanging long gun. (best answer is for no one to know you're carrying, but that's a whole different spiel).
Anyways, so these gentlemen come into a Chipotle for a delicious meal, exercising their rights and either blissfully unaware of the four-kilogram firearm they're tactical-carrying that's on full display, waving around and in an unknown state of readiness (presumably round-chambered, safety off, and mag in, because I'm a paranoid person and I don't trust idiots). Seriously, there's no way to not know that this was going to cause a reaction, but I digress.
Most people don't associate long-rifle toting young men in civilian clothes with safety and freedom. We see Bad Things, rows of dead kids and news helicopters and explosions and SWAT teams. We see young men trying to get on CNN, and the best way to do that is often with a mass shooting. That's what I see when I see this picture- I see two young, indiscreet men with weapons designed for urban infantry combat looking like self-righteous *******s, cheesing for the cameras, and I worry. If I'm sitting in there, I'm forgetting right about that burrito because someone is coming with a very serious weapon and presumably knows how to use it. That's not PTSD or meddling, that's awareness of a threat. Am I in the middle of political theater or the next Aurora? I am now committed to one thing and one thing only- escape from the threat. That means that my wife and I are immediately leaving, and if that's not an option, I am very uncomfortable. If Sunglasses there is in the low-ready, it's a very quick transition to "blazing away" at people, and I'm seriously considering my own handgun's deployment or verbal deescalation- but if these people are too dumb to understand that they're setting off mass panic, I have no idea of knowing how they're going to react to being told to drop their rifles. So we're back to square one- running like hell. Most people think along similar lines and have the sense to not be around the fat, non-uniformed, neckbearded weirdo and Crazy Sunglasses toting assault rifles. So, we have Mass Panic as a matter of course, with a side of Mexican Standoff and Too Dumb to Listen To Reason with a side of I KNOW MAH RIGHTS! Tasty!
Chipotle, predictably, doesn't want people fleeing their restaurants in droves every time an "Open Carry the most obnoxious, dangerous, people-killing friendly firearm you can carry because Freedom and 'Murica" decides he wants to make a statement. They probably didn't have a problem with dudes wearing holstered pistols, but those aren't four-kilogram assault rifles either and it's a lot harder to kill a lot of people really fast with a pistol (hence why they're not primary weapons). Sadly, those people have started to push the limits of public acceptance of firearms, and they're eventually going to blow it for us all.
Chipotle just wants people to come, spend money on a good burrito, and feel safe enough to come back. I have an appetite for burritos, I have money and I like Chipotle. I don't see where guns tie into this, because frankly, Chipotle isn't strip-searching me and I don't see a need to unconceal a firearm to buy a burrito. Up until recently, they probably didn't see a need to care. Its good business to keep Neckbeard and Sunglasses out of the store, because no one wants to be the guy that the Chipotle Shooter hit first and mass panics are bad for business (and most people are not so rabidly open-carry that they are going to accept abstract rights over immediate safety). Neckbeard might be fat, but he's not going to eat a lunch rush of food and Sunglasses is clearly watching his figure, so yeah...it's better business to alienate two than two hundred.
As for the gun-rights community? I think that we need to police our own. We need to realize that our rights do not stop at us, and that discretion is a must. Firearms are not cars or phones. They are weapons, and should be treated with respect and discretion as to how to carry them, how to use them and how to manage our perception with them. Carrying openly as part of an organized rally with a clear message and a coherent point is one thing. Carrying for defense is another. Carrying assault rifles "just because" in public is just plain stupidity that makes us ALL look dumb, indiscreet and untrustworthy. Don't believe me? Look at California's ban on doing this- passed after idiots carried openly in Hippytown. If we let Neckbeard and Sunglasses be the public face of gun rights in the United States, we will lose our guns.
Background: I am a veteran combat medic with lots of infantry time, a combat deployment, I've shot a human being and I'm a paramedic in a busy urban system. Not squeamish or afraid of guns, but not comfy with these cretins either.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/20/news/companies/chipotle-guns/
So, here's my thoughts on the Chipotle gun policy.
They did the right thing, both for their business, for their patrons and for the gun-owning community. Hear me out.
These gentlemen are exercising their "rights" in exactly the same way as those who manufacture K2 do. Just because something isn't technically illegal does not make it smart, intelligent or even safe to do. When someone goes out in public, openly-armed, there is a massive difference in perception between a holstered, non-threatening weapon and one that has hands on it. There's a MASSIVE difference in perception between a handgun and an assault rifle (and yes, these are assault rifles: they were literally designed and built to specifications that optimize them for close and midrange rapid-fire during the course of an assault in built-up terrain with a wide variety of possible engagement ranges, ie an assault in its classic military sense). A handgun is a near-universal defensive weapon in a holster as far as perception goes, I don't perceive a man with a holstered handgun as a threat nor do the overwhelming majority of people. I do perceive a degree of threat from anyone that walks in with a long rifle dangling, because quite frankly, this is not a combat zone. It's the USA, and it's pretty damned safe, and no, I don't need a thirty-round 5.56mm magazine hanging out of a rifle designed to effectively arm assaulting troops in urban combat, presumably loaded, with a sling system designed to facilitate rapid deployment of said rifle. It's a nonverbal aggressive stance. It's an escalation of force to present a weapon. (Incidentally, cops don't draw their guns before traffic stops for this reason, soldiers don't generally fondle their rifles when in polite conversation with the locals, and we certainly don't walk around our hometowns at the low-ready). Trust me- there is a difference between a holstered handgun and a hanging long gun. (best answer is for no one to know you're carrying, but that's a whole different spiel).
Anyways, so these gentlemen come into a Chipotle for a delicious meal, exercising their rights and either blissfully unaware of the four-kilogram firearm they're tactical-carrying that's on full display, waving around and in an unknown state of readiness (presumably round-chambered, safety off, and mag in, because I'm a paranoid person and I don't trust idiots). Seriously, there's no way to not know that this was going to cause a reaction, but I digress.
Most people don't associate long-rifle toting young men in civilian clothes with safety and freedom. We see Bad Things, rows of dead kids and news helicopters and explosions and SWAT teams. We see young men trying to get on CNN, and the best way to do that is often with a mass shooting. That's what I see when I see this picture- I see two young, indiscreet men with weapons designed for urban infantry combat looking like self-righteous *******s, cheesing for the cameras, and I worry. If I'm sitting in there, I'm forgetting right about that burrito because someone is coming with a very serious weapon and presumably knows how to use it. That's not PTSD or meddling, that's awareness of a threat. Am I in the middle of political theater or the next Aurora? I am now committed to one thing and one thing only- escape from the threat. That means that my wife and I are immediately leaving, and if that's not an option, I am very uncomfortable. If Sunglasses there is in the low-ready, it's a very quick transition to "blazing away" at people, and I'm seriously considering my own handgun's deployment or verbal deescalation- but if these people are too dumb to understand that they're setting off mass panic, I have no idea of knowing how they're going to react to being told to drop their rifles. So we're back to square one- running like hell. Most people think along similar lines and have the sense to not be around the fat, non-uniformed, neckbearded weirdo and Crazy Sunglasses toting assault rifles. So, we have Mass Panic as a matter of course, with a side of Mexican Standoff and Too Dumb to Listen To Reason with a side of I KNOW MAH RIGHTS! Tasty!
Chipotle, predictably, doesn't want people fleeing their restaurants in droves every time an "Open Carry the most obnoxious, dangerous, people-killing friendly firearm you can carry because Freedom and 'Murica" decides he wants to make a statement. They probably didn't have a problem with dudes wearing holstered pistols, but those aren't four-kilogram assault rifles either and it's a lot harder to kill a lot of people really fast with a pistol (hence why they're not primary weapons). Sadly, those people have started to push the limits of public acceptance of firearms, and they're eventually going to blow it for us all.
Chipotle just wants people to come, spend money on a good burrito, and feel safe enough to come back. I have an appetite for burritos, I have money and I like Chipotle. I don't see where guns tie into this, because frankly, Chipotle isn't strip-searching me and I don't see a need to unconceal a firearm to buy a burrito. Up until recently, they probably didn't see a need to care. Its good business to keep Neckbeard and Sunglasses out of the store, because no one wants to be the guy that the Chipotle Shooter hit first and mass panics are bad for business (and most people are not so rabidly open-carry that they are going to accept abstract rights over immediate safety). Neckbeard might be fat, but he's not going to eat a lunch rush of food and Sunglasses is clearly watching his figure, so yeah...it's better business to alienate two than two hundred.
As for the gun-rights community? I think that we need to police our own. We need to realize that our rights do not stop at us, and that discretion is a must. Firearms are not cars or phones. They are weapons, and should be treated with respect and discretion as to how to carry them, how to use them and how to manage our perception with them. Carrying openly as part of an organized rally with a clear message and a coherent point is one thing. Carrying for defense is another. Carrying assault rifles "just because" in public is just plain stupidity that makes us ALL look dumb, indiscreet and untrustworthy. Don't believe me? Look at California's ban on doing this- passed after idiots carried openly in Hippytown. If we let Neckbeard and Sunglasses be the public face of gun rights in the United States, we will lose our guns.
plmitch
Member
These two make great NRA poster boys.......just true ftards.
RustyShackelford
member
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2006
- Messages
- 4,018
Chipotle....
I respectfully disagree with a few of the recent posts/remarks.
"Good burritos"?
I disagree.
I do agree that the 2 young guys with "long guns" or rifles, used bad judgement.
US soc media & Youtube.com are filled with the "Look At Me Stanleys" & people that gravitate towards 2A causes/guns for a # of reasons. Few of which involve CCWs, hunting, target-match shooting, protective services, military training or collecting.
I'm working now at a location that has protestors & a few break-ins/bomb threats. Local law enforcement & civic leaders take these issues seriously.
In discussions with a few police officers, we agree that the big threat(s) aren't from the protestors or people voicing their 1st amendment right to free speech but the extremists or fringe element that use this political cause to lash out or cause havoc.
I do not agree with Chipotle or it's corporate management to evoke anti-gun SOPs in locations where OC is legal. Is it prudent or ethical to wave a M4 or AK around in a fast food restaurant? No. But if OC is legal, then I can live with it.
FWIW; if I saw these 2 guys or any other armed citizen play/horse around with a weapon or act reckless, then Id exit ASAP & contact the local PD.
Most fast food chains & small restaurants have DV cameras or CCTVs so any improper gun handling or misuse will be documented.
Rusty
I respectfully disagree with a few of the recent posts/remarks.
"Good burritos"?
I disagree.
I do agree that the 2 young guys with "long guns" or rifles, used bad judgement.
US soc media & Youtube.com are filled with the "Look At Me Stanleys" & people that gravitate towards 2A causes/guns for a # of reasons. Few of which involve CCWs, hunting, target-match shooting, protective services, military training or collecting.
I'm working now at a location that has protestors & a few break-ins/bomb threats. Local law enforcement & civic leaders take these issues seriously.
In discussions with a few police officers, we agree that the big threat(s) aren't from the protestors or people voicing their 1st amendment right to free speech but the extremists or fringe element that use this political cause to lash out or cause havoc.
I do not agree with Chipotle or it's corporate management to evoke anti-gun SOPs in locations where OC is legal. Is it prudent or ethical to wave a M4 or AK around in a fast food restaurant? No. But if OC is legal, then I can live with it.
FWIW; if I saw these 2 guys or any other armed citizen play/horse around with a weapon or act reckless, then Id exit ASAP & contact the local PD.
Most fast food chains & small restaurants have DV cameras or CCTVs so any improper gun handling or misuse will be documented.
Rusty
Rocketmedic
Member
Rusty, it's not necessarily just indiscreet. These young men literally mimicked the exact MO of several well-known spree shooters. That's concerning.
Honestly, when I see them, I don't think "political activist." I think "weird guys with rifles."
Honestly, when I see them, I don't think "political activist." I think "weird guys with rifles."
RustyShackelford
member
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2006
- Messages
- 4,018
Input....
RM; I think your reading to much into it.
This is partly what's wrong with the world wide web & soc media.
I posted the first Chipotle remarks yesterday afternoon & in a few short hours it's now filled up with a lot of forum posts/messages.
Some web posts speculate that it's a scam & these guys are "plants" by the anti-gunners.
To compare them to a spree shooter or "active shooter" is a stretch too. Are they wearing camo face paint? Do they have M9 bayonets? Do they have body armor?
We(as gun owners, armed professionals, hunters, match shooters, etc) all have different views & experiences with firearms. I don't see a OCer & wig out. If they started pacing around or acted "furtive", then Id be concerned.
I've watched a few YT clips online of open carry guys(and a few gals ). Most are wholesome, clean cut & just want to carry firearms for protection/range use.
A few do seem/look odd. They seek out uniformed LE to get a video scene or to make a political statement.
One cop even told the young OCer to join the police force & get on SWAT.
Rusty
RM; I think your reading to much into it.
This is partly what's wrong with the world wide web & soc media.
I posted the first Chipotle remarks yesterday afternoon & in a few short hours it's now filled up with a lot of forum posts/messages.
Some web posts speculate that it's a scam & these guys are "plants" by the anti-gunners.
To compare them to a spree shooter or "active shooter" is a stretch too. Are they wearing camo face paint? Do they have M9 bayonets? Do they have body armor?
We(as gun owners, armed professionals, hunters, match shooters, etc) all have different views & experiences with firearms. I don't see a OCer & wig out. If they started pacing around or acted "furtive", then Id be concerned.
I've watched a few YT clips online of open carry guys(and a few gals
). Most are wholesome, clean cut & just want to carry firearms for protection/range use.A few do seem/look odd. They seek out uniformed LE to get a video scene or to make a political statement.
One cop even told the young OCer to join the police force & get on SWAT.
Rusty
I'm more bothered by some of the comments in the various threads about this threatening violence and/or confrontation against these idiots just for acting stupid. Rocketman's comment above, "and I'm seriously considering my own handgun's deployment or verbal deescalation- but if these people are too dumb to understand that they're setting off mass panic, I have no idea of knowing how they're going to react to being told to drop their rifles. ", or Old Dog in another thread's comment about throwing them out of the door after they spend some face time with the floor.
Yeah, pulling a gun on them or physically attacking them really helps "our cause". There is no Constitutional right not to feel uncomfortable.
Yeah, pulling a gun on them or physically attacking them really helps "our cause". There is no Constitutional right not to feel uncomfortable.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
That may, or may not, be the case. I'm a proponent of open carry in some situations myself.
That, however, really isn't cogent to this discussion, is it? Everything is appropriate in degrees. This act was far enough outside social norms, and was alarming to enough people to turn a neutral situation into a negative situation. Was there a positive result here that we're all missing?
What the hell? If you've got something pertinent to the debate, share it.
Don't hide behind some perceived inability to speak in a polite and non-profane way (about the only way you'd "rack up an infraction").
Joe Demko
Member
Next person who mentions the quality of Chipotle's food automatically loses.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
No, but walking into a public assembly venue with rifles at the ready is far enough outside of what is currently within the realm of normal behavior. It is very abnormal, and there are really only two possible "plots" to the tale folks' eyes are telling them when they see someone doing this.
Plot A: Active shooter. A lot of people are about to die.
Plot B: Gun rights advocate peaceably demonstrating his RKBA.
In the consciousness of the people of our society, Plot A has about 900 times the currency and awareness that Plot B might have. In other words, "ain't nobody" thinking "oh, look at those nice RKBA activists..." when they see a pair of young guys walk through the door with carbines in their hands.
We may see the Constitution as protecting, on the face of it at least, our right to bear arms in that way if we so choose. However, we are NOT in any way at all Constitutionally protected from social and legal repercussions of the fallout from those actions.
Therefore it makes good sense to consider well what the repercussions are likely to be and if we're ok with living with them.
Joe Demko
Member
Neckbeard and Kushh walking into a dining area bearing long guns might stir memories of these two fine young men for those of us whose memory extends back farther than last week.
Neckbeard and Kushh proved to be attention whores rather than mass murderers, but John and Jane Q had no way of knowing that.
BSA1
member
Lots of comments most of which condemn the two men in the picture that open carried their long guns.
As I sit here drinking my cup of Joe I thinking of all of the restrictions we as gunowners submit to even though they are perfectly legal in the name of political correctness. Just a few that come to mind;
1. Not having pro-gun bumper stickers on our vehicles.
2. Not wearing clothing with images of guns on them.
3. Not displaying bumper stickers, signs and wearing clothing with any message that might be controversial.
4. Accepting rules in our schools that our children can not wear any clothing with images of guns or even messages that quote the 2nd Amendment of it.
5. Accepting rules that children drawing any kind of picture that teachers object to is wrong. There is a recent case where the police were called on a child that drew a picture of the stick figure in the game “Hangman.”
6. Accepting rules that children pointing their finger like gun is dangerous.
7. Accepting rules that a five year old male child is capable of sexual harassment.
8. Hiding our guns from causal view by visitors in our homes.
9. Condemnation by gun owners of gun owners that own guns they find offensive or don’t like….like AR rifles.
10. Avoiding conversations with others about owning guns such as in the workplace and social activities like church.
11. Avoiding showing/displaying our guns when outside our home but still on our property for concern that the neighbors will call the police and report a man with a gun
12. Continuing to give our business to anti-gun businesses and companies .
13. Remaining silent while all of these events happen.
Given a while longer I’m sure I can come up with many more. The point is how many restrictions should gun owners accept? Is it time to stop pushing for fewer gun restrictions and settle of what we have for fear that future efforts will backfire and result in more restrictive laws been passed?
As I sit here drinking my cup of Joe I thinking of all of the restrictions we as gunowners submit to even though they are perfectly legal in the name of political correctness. Just a few that come to mind;
1. Not having pro-gun bumper stickers on our vehicles.
2. Not wearing clothing with images of guns on them.
3. Not displaying bumper stickers, signs and wearing clothing with any message that might be controversial.
4. Accepting rules in our schools that our children can not wear any clothing with images of guns or even messages that quote the 2nd Amendment of it.
5. Accepting rules that children drawing any kind of picture that teachers object to is wrong. There is a recent case where the police were called on a child that drew a picture of the stick figure in the game “Hangman.”
6. Accepting rules that children pointing their finger like gun is dangerous.
7. Accepting rules that a five year old male child is capable of sexual harassment.
8. Hiding our guns from causal view by visitors in our homes.
9. Condemnation by gun owners of gun owners that own guns they find offensive or don’t like….like AR rifles.
10. Avoiding conversations with others about owning guns such as in the workplace and social activities like church.
11. Avoiding showing/displaying our guns when outside our home but still on our property for concern that the neighbors will call the police and report a man with a gun
12. Continuing to give our business to anti-gun businesses and companies .
13. Remaining silent while all of these events happen.
Given a while longer I’m sure I can come up with many more. The point is how many restrictions should gun owners accept? Is it time to stop pushing for fewer gun restrictions and settle of what we have for fear that future efforts will backfire and result in more restrictive laws been passed?
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
BSA, no one here -- not one -- has suggested restrictions should be in place to make this illegal.
Many are expressing that -- just like in every other aspect of your life -- you are part of a society and you serve yourself (and if you care, the "gun community") best if you use some sense, discretion, and consideration in how you deal with others.
You probably don't do a thousand things each day that you have every right to do, simply because that would needlessly bother other people and you'd have to deal with the repercussions. Why would your shooting and/or gun ownership be any different?
What's my immediate need?
What's the easiest way to accomplish it?
What are the likely repercussions of that action?
Are there ways to accomplish the task without associated negative results?
What's my long-term need, and how does all this fit together?
Everything from your gun rights bumper sticker, to putting a symbol of your religious faith on your business cards, to walking into a restaurant with a loaded rifle at the ready, to sunbathing in a Speedo on your front lawn in view of the neighbors and their kids, or open carrying a pistol to a job interview -- all get run through the same analysis.
We all operate in a society, to good or ill.
Many are expressing that -- just like in every other aspect of your life -- you are part of a society and you serve yourself (and if you care, the "gun community") best if you use some sense, discretion, and consideration in how you deal with others.
You probably don't do a thousand things each day that you have every right to do, simply because that would needlessly bother other people and you'd have to deal with the repercussions. Why would your shooting and/or gun ownership be any different?
What's my immediate need?
What's the easiest way to accomplish it?
What are the likely repercussions of that action?
Are there ways to accomplish the task without associated negative results?
What's my long-term need, and how does all this fit together?
Everything from your gun rights bumper sticker, to putting a symbol of your religious faith on your business cards, to walking into a restaurant with a loaded rifle at the ready, to sunbathing in a Speedo on your front lawn in view of the neighbors and their kids, or open carrying a pistol to a job interview -- all get run through the same analysis.
We all operate in a society, to good or ill.
Joe Demko
Member
Items in red have nothing to do with RKBA, particularly. Items in plum are advised as ways to minimize making one a target for theft. Remaining items could be discussed as RKBA-related issues.
Rocketmedic
Member
Like Sam said, I can't think of a lot of good reasons for carrying an assault rifle at the low-ready, one step away from up and firing. If they've got signs, banners, bullhorns, etc; then I understand what they're doing. If they look like slovenly idiots fondling absurdly-powerful firearms for no good reason while my wife and I are trying to enjoy lunch, I am not thinking "gun-rights demonstration". I am thinking "active shooters".
I don't want to be someone's before-and-after selfie.
I don't want to be someone's before-and-after selfie.
<sigh>
It seems like some of our brethren in the firearms community are just plain incapable of good judgement.
Parading around a guy's place of business, causing discomfort to his customers is simply NOT a wise move that will bear digestible fruit.
It seems like some of our brethren in the firearms community are just plain incapable of good judgement.
Parading around a guy's place of business, causing discomfort to his customers is simply NOT a wise move that will bear digestible fruit.
Neo-Luddite
Member
So...have they actually posted the 30.06 signs yet??? My bet is that they quietly hope this goes away and that they don't have to risk alienating so many people. Folks in TX please keep us posted--I've wagered with my anti-friends (who thought this all quite a great media win for 'their team') that Chipolte will just try and let this go away without really making a lawful policy change. I wouldn't be surprised if the folks in question were Bloomberg's paid flunkies....
This whole paragraph (but especially the bolded part) made me laugh a lot.
After reading all the posts it appears that the majority of people posting feel that the guys "abused" their right and I couldn't agree more. A couple of d-bags that deserve a butt whipping.
However.......I don't see a lot of condemnation for Chipotle choosing to make a national stand against guns in their stores. Yes it is within their rights in many states to post that guns are not allowed. In some states those signs have absolutely no legal power. The bottom line(ultimate cliche) is that gun owners and RKBA people need to be the ones FORCING Chipotle to change this policy because if we don't do it then I would guess it will begin a domino chain. If gun rights folks don't cause an uproar over the policy and hurt Chipotle in the pocketbook then why shouldn't TGIF and all the other chains do something similar?
However.......I don't see a lot of condemnation for Chipotle choosing to make a national stand against guns in their stores. Yes it is within their rights in many states to post that guns are not allowed. In some states those signs have absolutely no legal power. The bottom line(ultimate cliche) is that gun owners and RKBA people need to be the ones FORCING Chipotle to change this policy because if we don't do it then I would guess it will begin a domino chain. If gun rights folks don't cause an uproar over the policy and hurt Chipotle in the pocketbook then why shouldn't TGIF and all the other chains do something similar?
We just had a recent situation in Ohio that didn't make national news. Two 25-year-olds paraded around a suburban town outside Cleveland with their long guns.
Here's the kicker. They chose (probably unknowingly) the town of Ohio Speaker of the House Batchelder, one of the most powerful individuals in Columbus. There is currently a bill being considered in Ohio with one provision protecting OC by stating that OCers cannot be arrested for disorderly conduct or inducing panic for exercising a constitutional right.
After a bunch of negative phone calls to Columbus about this incident, one Ohio gun rights organization received a phone call from Columbus telling them that provision in the bill was going to be removed because of that incident.
http://medinagazette.northcoastnow....carry-guns-medinas-public-square-prove-point/
Here's the kicker. They chose (probably unknowingly) the town of Ohio Speaker of the House Batchelder, one of the most powerful individuals in Columbus. There is currently a bill being considered in Ohio with one provision protecting OC by stating that OCers cannot be arrested for disorderly conduct or inducing panic for exercising a constitutional right.
After a bunch of negative phone calls to Columbus about this incident, one Ohio gun rights organization received a phone call from Columbus telling them that provision in the bill was going to be removed because of that incident.
http://medinagazette.northcoastnow....carry-guns-medinas-public-square-prove-point/
Right after Georgia passed a new law* further winnowing the list of places where guns cannot be carried, some fool showed up at a Little League game (where he had no kid involved) and set about making a total horse's rear of himself, frightening women and children, etc. http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/man-gun-causes-scare-during-childrens-baseball-gam/nfhJS/
With "friends" like this, who needs Bloomberg?
*But before it went into effect! There wasn't even a legal connection between his acts and the law.
With "friends" like this, who needs Bloomberg?
*But before it went into effect! There wasn't even a legal connection between his acts and the law.
I don't mean the following questions purely rhetorically, you're welcome to answer it:
How many people each year enter a business with a slung rifle at low ready and surprise the patrons?
What are the various things those people might be doing?
I can come up with two things, and one of them isn't being an activist. How about you?
What do you think the percentage breakdown is between the two?
Now, maybe you're familiar with the "ability, opportunity, intent" paradigm regarding use of lethal force.
Fact is a guy with a rifle who is behaving in a manner consistent with a mass shooter (not to mention in this case also fits other profile aspects) has established the first two and is at least half way to establishing the third until some action he takes shows otherwise.
I and most people voicing this can't afford to assume otherwise because the Bayesian odds essentially dictate a higher likelihood that a guy with a rifle at low ready entering your building is something other than an "activist." it takes mental gymnastics to conclude otherwise.
Note no one has said shoot em. That's because as the encounter unfolds a trained individual makes decisions based on the unfolding. Responding decisively to a potential lethal force situation that matches certain criteria as one is trained to do, short of actually pressing the trigger immediately, is something that would not be difficult to articulate and present legally speaking here based on proper training and the AOI paradigm.
Sorry if that bums you out but that's just how it is.
RustyShackelford
member
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2006
- Messages
- 4,018
Post #58, you're not my real dad, Chipotle menu.....
I agree with the remarks in #58. As a gun owner, CCW license holder & 2A supporter; it's not my job or responsibly to "police" any other firearm owner/license holder. Unless the acts/statements/behaviors are grossly inappropriate or clear violations of the law, I'm not going to wave my finger or scold any other OCing gun owners.
I'd be annoyed & irate if restaurant patrons/staff/by-standers came up to me repeatedly while I ate or drank a cup of coffee.
I'd be like Youtube personality; The Yankee Marshal, & say something like; you're not my real dad.
Open carry advocates should use common sense & good judgement. If they want to start fights or scare people then they'll see quickly they can lose their carry licenses/2A rights.
The general public should learn & understand the local-state laws too. As I've posted in other topics; the laws are what they are not what you think they are.
Rusty
PS; I checked the 2014 menu of Chipotle & it still looks
.
I agree with the remarks in #58. As a gun owner, CCW license holder & 2A supporter; it's not my job or responsibly to "police" any other firearm owner/license holder. Unless the acts/statements/behaviors are grossly inappropriate or clear violations of the law, I'm not going to wave my finger or scold any other OCing gun owners.
I'd be annoyed & irate if restaurant patrons/staff/by-standers came up to me repeatedly while I ate or drank a cup of coffee.
I'd be like Youtube personality; The Yankee Marshal, & say something like; you're not my real dad.
Open carry advocates should use common sense & good judgement. If they want to start fights or scare people then they'll see quickly they can lose their carry licenses/2A rights.
The general public should learn & understand the local-state laws too. As I've posted in other topics; the laws are what they are not what you think they are.
Rusty
PS; I checked the 2014 menu of Chipotle & it still looks
.I have had no interest in eating at Chipotle either before nor after this story came out. But I think Chipotle could have handled it much better by asking patrons to leave firearms holstered and requesting long arms to be left in the vehicle. That would have have been certainly better than banning all types of firearms at Chipotles throughout the U.S.
Yes I hope Texas does go to open (pistol) carry, and if that were the case already we would not be commenting on this. But this demonstration of these two geniuses to protest Texas carry laws have now made it impossible for gun owners to no longer carry either CCW or Open,...at all Chipotles throughout the U.S.. Not even Bloomberg or his Moms groups could ever hope to accomplish that!
.
Yes I hope Texas does go to open (pistol) carry, and if that were the case already we would not be commenting on this. But this demonstration of these two geniuses to protest Texas carry laws have now made it impossible for gun owners to no longer carry either CCW or Open,...at all Chipotles throughout the U.S.. Not even Bloomberg or his Moms groups could ever hope to accomplish that!
.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
