(OH) Concealed carry supporters deal businesses resistance

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Concealed carry supporters deal businesses resistance

MICHAEL C. FITZPATRICK , Morning Journal Writer 06/09/2004

LORAIN -- Supporters of Ohio's new law that allows for the carrying of concealed handguns are taking aim at businesses that ban the practice on their premises.

Ohioans For Concealed Carry is compiling a ''do not patronize while armed'' list of businesses that ban concealed carry and is posting the list on its Web site at www.ofcc.net.


OFCC is also selling ''do not patronize'' business cards, which concealed carry license holders can hand out to the businesses that ban them.

The card states: ''You lost my business today and in the future. For your convenience, you will be added to our ÔDo Not Patronize' database.''

The card also features a graphic that depicts the banning of guns being equal to the loss of money.

Jim Irvine, a spokesman for OFCC, said the organization's actions should not be construed as a boycott of the businesses that find their way onto the ''do not patronize'' list.

''It's to let people know they can't go in certain places, so they won't get cited for trespassing,'' said Irvine, who lives in Strongsville and is also a commercial airline pilot.

Several Lorain County businesses are listed on the ''do not patronize'' list, including the Apples grocery stores in Elyria, Lorain and Norwalk, The Morning Journal and Fligner's Supermarket in Lorain.

Ben Fligner, who owns and operates Fligner's, was surprised to learn his business was on the list. Fligner said he decided to ban concealed carry at his store because he feared it could eventually lead to an anger-fueled shooting in his store.

''People might do something they might not usually do if they weren't carrying the weapon,'' Fligner said.

Steve Krakomperger, who owns the Apples grocery stores in Elyria and Lorain, as well as the Village Market in Wellington, would not comment on his decision for banning guns in his stores or on the reaction of his customers.

Owners of some of the other area businesses on the organization's list could not be reached for comment.

More than 25 area businesses and municipalities are listed.

Irvine said businesses that ban concealed carry are setting themselves up for a hard time. He said criminals target businesses that ban concealed carry because ''they know there is no one to stop them.''

Irvine said anti-gun advocates have taken to calling businesses that ban concealed carry ''gun-free zones,'' but he thinks they'd be better off calling them ''victim zones.''

''I'm in this to save lives,'' Irvine said. ''I'm alarmed at Ohio's rates when it comes to murders, robberies and carjackings. We never said it (a concealed carry law) will solve crime problems, but it will help lower them.''

Irvine said he's also angered by anti-gun groups who in certain areas have gone to businesses and told them to post the signs that ban concealed carry.

''We knew these signs would go up, and most of them are going to come down,'' Irvine said. ''We also know it's a matter of time before somebody gets killed where there is a no-concealed-carry sign posted.''

Ohio's concealed carry law, passed earlier this year, makes it legal for individuals who apply and are granted a concealed carry permit to carry their weapons clandestinely anywhere they want with the exception of most public buildings, bars, schools and in private business where a sign is posted by ownership stating concealed carry is not permitted.

The Web site lists approximately 650 businesses, banks and taxpayer-funded entities such as city parks and fairgrounds on its list.

More than 1,000 individuals have filled out applications for the concealed carry licenses in Lorain County, according to the Lorain County Sheriff's Department, which issues the licenses.

According to the Sheriff's Department, 437 total licenses have been issued, and 629 are pending background checks. The department has received approximately 25 permit applications a day.

http://www.morningjournal.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=11909811&BRD=1699&PAG=461&dept_id=46371&rfi=6
 
Fligner said he decided to ban concealed carry at his store because he feared it could eventually lead to an anger-fueled shooting in his store.
''People might do something they might not usually do if they weren't carrying the weapon,'' Fligner said.

Another intellectual giant heard from.
 
Buck up, Buckeyes. Stay on them. It will get better, look at the experience of other states.

Just got back from Tejas. When I first started going there in '95, all kinds of victim zones. Not now!:D

Did not even see them in Austin (even when I was in a condition to read)!:D :cool:
 
We are winning this battle. The list of busnesses that took down the signs is growing and includes, Kroger, Marc's, Frisch's and MicroCenter.

Check out our website http://www.ofcc.net/modules.php?name=CPZ, for a complete list of those who ban and those who no longer ban.

As time goes on this will get easier and easier, El Tejon is right, once most businesses see allowing CCW in the store will not lead to unprovoked violence they will take down the signs.

Gerard
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Central Ohio Coordinator
 
Ohio's concealed carry law, passed earlier this year, makes it legal for individuals who apply and are granted a concealed carry permit to carry their weapons clandestinely anywhere they want

They make it sound so sinister to carry a defensive firearm.:rolleyes: You never hear what James Bond does being described as "clandestine," yet you hear of the "enemy" spy operations being described that way. Nothing like writing to instill an opinion.
 
You Ohioans are lucky. Pray for just behind the iron curtain in California. :(

I like reading the back-pedal letters/email of business that had signs up and are taking them down.
Now, if only a business would write that not only have they taken the signs down, but they have fired the one responsible for putting them up in the first place... :D
 
"How many times have you seen visibly angry people in a supermarket??"

Me.

Every time I go.

I hate shopping.

I whine more than my kids when they were little.
 
Uh, I know that I am a bit dull-witted ;) but, if you are carrying concealed, then how are they going to know?? I mean, I carry concealed (yes, in California, and legally) and nobody knows I have a gun because it is concealed. Do these stores have metal detectors or something? What am I missing? Just carry and don't tell them. :D (I gotta be missing something here!)
 
Well, no one knows by looking at me that I'm Jewish (half), but if I were to encounter a store with a sign that says 'No Jews' I'm going to be extremely upset.

I don't carry a gun (I don't even have a gun) but I understand what's so upsetting about this.
 
Well, I certainly understand the principle behind it, but that wasn't what I was addressing. My question is, how do these dodo businesses know if anyone is carrying or not? If you have your firearm properly concealed, they would never know. Have there been instances of people actually being arrested for trespass?
 
And you miss my point entirely.

Sometimes principle is, and should be, everything.

If someone dislikes you simply for who you are, and not for what you've done, where are your own principles and priorities if you support them?
 
No, I get your point, JPL. And I agree with it. I have actively worked for civil rights for all peoples since the 1960's. I was just trying to point out the obvious: that these moronic store owners have no way of enforcing their silly rule: i.e. - how do they know if someone is carrying or not? Of course gun owners, including me, would not patronize them. But beyond that, how in the heck do they think they can tell who "we" are in the first place? :) I took a class from Clint Smith in which he discussed this issue. He said that he sometimes will watch people in a mall, etc. and try to determine who is carrying. With his wealth of experience with firearms, he can't spot a firearm if the person has properly concealed the weapon. An anti-gun store owner will definitely not be able to spot a properly concealed weapon and, therefore, making such a rule for their store is absurd and pointless in the first place. That was my point. :cool:
 
So, blacks in the 1960s simply should have painted themselves white and hoped for a day with no rain?

How about the Jews? A nose job and a crash course in Christianity to hopefully evade the Nazis?

Hiding never promotes positive change.

To simply pull your shirt tail down over your gun and slink through the store, hoping that the owner doesn't see that you're armed, is nothing more than cowardice and complicity at its worst.

I wish I could agree that making such a rule was absurd and pointless.

But the Holocaust started with a few absurd and pointless theories.
 
JPL - you aren't listening to what I am saying. You obviously have an axe to grind. Go grind it with someone who disagrees with you and pay attention in the future. :rolleyes: Henry, thanks for clarifying that point. That IS relevant to my point! (By the way, great handle!! Great book!)
 
Well, if by an "axe" you mean my unease at being told that instead of standing up for something that is legal I should skulk around like a timid doormouse, hoping, nay praying that I'm not caught...

If by an "axe" you mean unease at hysteria and ignorance being allowed to flourish unchecked...

Yes, I do have an axe to grind, then.

Ignorance should never be met with acquiescence, nor should it be met with timidity.

If you also worked with the civil rights movement of the 1960s, then you should know what I'm talking about.

Yet the recommendation is that people hide in the shadows, not work to educate the ignorant.

I find that hard to understand, or accept.

Should Dr. King have called off the Montgomery bus boycott simply because there were seats at the back of the bus?

Is there really any difference between the person who wouldn't ride a Montgomery bus, choosing to find another means of transportation, and the Ohio CCW holder who chooses to shop at another store?

Both are defending rights that they know belong to them, and which are being denied unfairly, no?

Or, maybe, we were wrong in the 1960s.

Blacks could sit at the back of the bus.

And gun owners can just sneak through the front door.

I'm not a gun owner.

I don't carry a gun.

I don't really have any plans to get a gun.

And yet, the actions of these uninformed store owners in Ohio offend me as deeply as the actions of store owners in the South who posted "No Blacks" signs on their establishments.

Why do I hear what Vernon John heard when he tried, and failed, to organize an impromptu bus boycott -- "You ought to know better" -- and that was from his fellow blacks.

Sigh.
 
I started to go into a local grocery store in galion that had the no guns allowed sign..there next to it in big letters it had another sign.."not responsable for injuries damages ect ect on the premises".needless to say,they got their point across and I went elsewhere.I dont have a permit nor do I carry but seeing the 2 signs ticked me off.
 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
 
I agree with JPL.

When ONE Home Depot store banned guns, my friend was at the forefront of a letter/emailing campaign to get it changed. The number of "concealed means concealed" emails he got was stagggering.

That's not the point. The point is they, as a private business have a right to do what they want, but we have a right to do business elsewhere and/or lobby for a change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top