The day after legal restaurant carry

[Guest Ravendove]

I have to agree with you, Cowboy. I'm in favor of OC as much as the next guy, as my previous statements have displayed, but OCing around people who've been throwing more than a few back isn't a situation I'd call safe, for the carrier or the people around him/her. And just for argument's sake, let's say that a permit holder was perfectly capable of perceiving and intercepting a surprise gun grab attempt by someone less than sober. Why even get into that situation in the first place. Self defence shouldn't happen just for its own sake. In martial arts there's a saying. The best type of block is not being there.

[RotorHead]

Does anyone know if it is true that servers who hold an "ABC" card, required to serve alcohol, are denied the right to arm themselves when working at a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol?

[Guest HexHead]

You all can say what you want. There is a time and a place for everything, but rarely is every place time for everything.

There is nothing to be gained by going to Applebee's strapped and OCing. There is something to be lost.

I agree. While I think most restaurants won't post, it won't take too much "in your face" behavior to change that.

It's kind of like the whole gay thing. I don't care what they do behind closed doors, but when they start the Gay Pride parades dressed like the Village People in assless chaps, they lose any sympathy from me.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Does anyone know if it is true that servers who hold an "ABC" card, required to serve alcohol, are denied the right to arm themselves when working at a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol?

I dont think it will matter unless the server is sipping on the way to the table...

[Fallguy]

(Bold Added)

Sorry guys, I know I'm in on this discussion late but can someone explain "properly posted"? I don't think I really understand that. 39-17-1359 uses language like "substantially similar". I don't think I've ever seen a REAL sign as prescribed by this statute, with the exception of the airports in Nash and Mem. Asking for clarification not stirring the pot.

Not sure there has ever been a court case that has defined what "substantially similar" is for the purposes of 39-17-1359.

But on here (so take it for what it's worth) it is generally agreed the sign must designate the area where carry is prohibited, mention the code 39-17-1359, that it is a criminal offense and what the punishment is.

IMO the reason for "substantially similar" has been so a property owner can "customize" the sign. Instead of saying "Owner/Operator" of this property, they could use the actually company name." Instead of saying "Weapons" they could say "Handguns", "Knives" or any other specific weapon if the didn't want to ban all. Instead of saying "This property, This Building or This portion of this building" they could list specific areas.

So to me other than those 3 "customizable" areas the sign should be worded like the rest of 39-17-1359, but that is definitely only my opinion, it has not legal foundation.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I agree. While I think most restaurants won't post, it won't take too much "in your face" behavior to change that.

It's kind of like the whole gay thing. I don't care what they do behind closed doors, but when they start the Gay Pride parades dressed like the Village People in assless chaps, they lose any sympathy from me.

not to change the subject but did you see Fox this morning, a school district in California is making children use a pro gay lesson plan in schools. Its starts out with 5-8 year olds using a book that includes 2 gay penguins raising a baby penguin.

[Fallguy]

Does anyone know if it is true that servers who hold an "ABC" card, required to serve alcohol, are denied the right to arm themselves when working at a restaurant or bar that serves alcohol?

The only thing I've heard is they aren't supposed to consume, but don't know about being armed.

[Guest cowboy20th]

Anyone holding an abc card could possibly carry at work if the establishment allowed that. however, for insurance reasons, most places do not allow employees to have weapons of any kind. Lets say a gunman does enter and a carrying employee draws and fires, the damage to the establishment would not be covered, ie broken glass, bullet holes in walls, people running around screaming and breaking everything.

[Guest SomeGuy]

Raven,

Tell me, did you follow up in any way on the cop who assaulted you? Press charges? Civil suit? Formal complaint even?

Glock,

Those are not statistics. I covered that expected response in my previous post. While I enjoy posting here (self-evident else I would not be a member myself) I would disagree with your statement that the most internet savvy come here. The TFA has members in the legislature after all. Anyone wanting the best and closest to the source is coming to our forums. This does not detract from these forums at all, as stated before, I like this place, and it is a good forum. When it comes to the laws regarding HCP however, I do think the TFA membership/forum is hard, if not impossible to beat in that arena. (Perhaps I am splitting hairs with you as well. These forums do have different purposes anyway, though again, I do think the TFA is top tier at the laws.)

Regarding Brady, I was illustrating a point, though perhaps not the gentlest of ways. I will note, nothing I have said on here I would be afraid to say to the faces of the posters present. The personal agenda ties in here as well. With Brady I was making an analogy towards your "statistics". I was saying that Brady makes statements based on feelings with no proof, just as you mentioned your statistics which do not exist. IOW, I was using an analogy to say you were using the same tactic she does.

Lastly, my burr isn't focused on you, as you can see, I sent you no PM as I hold no personal animosity towards you. My 'burr' as you put it, is against the feeling that we should take what we can get, this feeling that we should knuckle under and take whatever scraps we are handed. My burr is against the gun owners who will message their legislator and tell them they accept "reasonable restrictions" and will accept whatever they are given. We have more than a few of those mealy mouthed types who have forgotten what it was like to really fight for freedom, and instead only beg for a minor lightening of the pressure on our collective necks. (As you noted, I am young, but my heart and soul burn with the values of an ardent libertarian in these arenas. Perhaps I have read too much Heinlein? Either way, I also have paid attention to, and soak up as much knowledge of history as I can. Age in my case, in this area, is only a number.)

I think it is worth noting, the same attitude you have is rather pervasive in your generation. Having been forced to lose, and accept defeat, you have a hard time using a winning hand. Example: Look at how the GOP squandered having a Congressional majority, and the POTUS for 6 years. They were so used to being a minority, they did not know how to use the power. Now, with the Democrats in complete control again, the GOP finally pushes for things properly (I refer to NP carry.) My advice, and yes, I am enough of an impertinent youngster to give you advice, is stop being so afraid that you refuse to really push for something. You have been defeated before, so have I (I am not new to politics, I have been active for nearly a decade all ready, and yes, you can do the math and figure out about when I got started), and it did not kill us. Get angry, push harder. But never, never stop fighting for what you believe in. When you stop fighing for what you value, you truly have been defeated.

benchpress, Consider your scenario. I could give the exact same rational to a black man, example "Why date a white woman? What if someone makes a scene?" I could give the example to a woman "Why work? What if someone questions you about not being in the kitchen? You must think you are..." Of course, I could give the example of the gun owner, but you already have.

Edited May 27, 2009 by SomeGuy

[Guest nraforlife]

Personally, I like 'flying under the radar screen' and not draw attention to the fact that I am carrying. Nobodies business what I maybe carrying and definitely not something I want a BG to see. Only thing I ask is that nobody be an ass while carrying, be polite and tip your server.

[Guest Ravendove]

No, I sure didn't. He said he also worked at that store as loss prevention and the store manager came over and backed him up, saying that firearms weren't allowed there (even though the store wasn't posted at all). The only response I had was to stop shopping there. I used to get my groceries and all my gas there and at the time I was a delivery driver for pizza hut, so I filled up every day.

It's funny the different responses you'll get from police. A uniformed officer at a McDonalds saw me OCing a few weeks before that and all she did was politely ask me if I had a permit. I said yes and offered to show it but she said it wasn't necessary.

[Guest SomeGuy]

Raven, the female cop had a reasonable response. Checking you out, but she used common sense. Working loss prevention does not however grant the right to draw on people who pose no threat - I know, I used to work it. When someone violates your rights/puts you in danger, you need to respond in some form, even if it is next week with a lawyer.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Raven,

Someguys right you cant let actions like that go unpunished... you should have filed a complaint with the police officers dept. and the stores owner/corp. office.

A police officer simply cant threaten the use of deadly force like that.

[Guest Ravendove]

You know, I hadn't really thought of it like that but you're absolutely right. It won't make much difference now since it's been several years and I don't remember the guy's name but I will definitely change my way of dealing with these situations should they arise in the future.

I actually just remembered, he didn't tell me he was a cop until halfway through the encounter. He just walked up behind me, put his gun in my back and reached for mine. My first reaction to the hand going for my firearm, before I saw his, was to drop my elbow, locking it in place. He caused a dangerous situation to say the least and I'm glad it was me and not some hot head who would have started a shootout.

Thinking back on it, I probably was thinking something along the lines of "the cops will probably just shrug it off if I file a complaint" but I won't be making that mistake again.

[Punisher84]

Raven,

You're a better guy than me. I won't sling any macho bravado around, but that dipstick would have damn well been explaining himself to myself and his shift Sergeant if I had a gun stuck in my spine.

[Guest SomeGuy]

You are both better than me. I would have treated that like the direct threat on my life it is, and responded accordingly. You do not just stick a gun into my spine.

The encounter you are describing begs the question, how could you acquiesce so? Did you not feel violated? This wasn't just annoying, this could have killed you.

[Guest D.B. Cooper]

I've already had this discussion with our Directory of Risk and Safety. Our restaurants (in TN: Big River and Bluewater Grill) will not post signs.

[Guest SomeGuy]

Bisch, I don't know what you do in those restaurants work wise, but I can tell you this, I avoided them solely because I could not carry. No other reason. Hopefully, after an over-ride, that can change.

[Guest Jamie]

You are both better than me. I would have treated that like the direct threat on my life it is, and responded accordingly.

Acting accordingly, in this instance, would be to put your hands up and comply with what you were told. Doing anything less would've been reasonable grounds for the officer to pull the trigger, as far as the court would be concerned.

If a police or security officer thinks there's reason to point a gun at you, your job is to convince him there's not. And bowing up and turning hostile is not the way to do that.

You do not just stick a gun into my spine.

Y'know, when I first put on a uniform and badge, I honestly believed my sidearm would be carried far more than it was ever drawn... And then the reality of the job set in and I rapidly lost count of how many times I ended up pulling the thing and pointing it at someone.

Now, you may think - and even be right in thinking - that you have every right to walk around with a gun on your hip without having anybody become alarmed, or think you might be a threat of some kind.

But the fact is, it's not the normal or usual to see someone who's not a cop or soldier doing so these days. What is most often normal is for someone openly armed to have a screw loose or have criminal intentions. And in those cases, it's best to have your own weapon in hand and ready to use before you confront them.

Does this need to change? I believe so. But until it does, you'd better be prepared to deal with the consequences before you O.C.

[Guest D.B. Cooper]

Bisch, I don't know what you do in those restaurants work wise, but I can tell you this, I avoided them solely because I could not carry. No other reason. Hopefully, after an over-ride, that can change.

I work in the corporate office. Hopefully, after the over-ride, we will see you in our restaurants often!

[Punisher84]

Jamie,

I work private security and deal with alot of LEOs so I'll say this. Anyone dumb enough to physically touch another person with their gun should be relieved of duty. If that "officer" didn't announce who he was he was wrong flat out.

There is 0 justification for what he did. If he had drawn, ordered him to turn around and produce a permit you've got a different story. That is NOT what happened in his case.

[Guest Jamie]

Jamie,

I work private security and deal with alot of LEOs so I'll say this. Anyone dumb enough to physically touch another person with their gun should be relieved of duty. If that "officer" didn't announce who he was he was wrong flat out.

There is 0 justification for what he did. If he had drawn, ordered him to turn around and produce a permit you've got a different story. That is NOT what happened in his case.

Punisher, I'm not disputing that the incident needed to be reported to the officer's superiors.

However, getting one's self shot because the officer didn't handle things as he/she should have isn't exactly a remedy I'd recommend.

In other words, don't compound someone else's error by making one of your own. Especially when it's your own hide that will likely be taking the holes.

Edited May 28, 2009 by Jamie

[Fallguy]

Punisher, I'm not disputing that the incident needed to be reported to the officer's superiors.

However, getting one's self shot because the officer didn't handle things as he/she should have isn't exactly a remedy I'd recommend.

But he wasn't acting as a LEO but in a security matter. Not sure if was even in uniform or not (can't remember seeing it one way or the other) and didn't identify himself as a off-duty LEO until well into the encounter.

So...at first it is simply a stranger coming up behind you with a drawn gun.

[Guest Jamie]

But he wasn't acting as a LEO but in a security matter.

He's still working in a professional capacity, and hired to provide security, so I'm not sure it makes any difference.

Not sure if was even in uniform or not (can't remember seeing it one way or the other) and didn't identify himself as a off-duty LEO until well into the encounter.

I'm not sure there's any requirement that he should identify himself as LEO or not, but he should have identified himself as store security, at bare minimum.

So...at first it is simply a stranger coming up behind you with a drawn gun.

Again, no matter who it is holding the gun, it's in the person who's in front of it's best interest to not take any action that will cause them to get shot, no?

Now, given that I wasn't there, and haven't even heard the whole story as it's been told here, I'm not going to make any generalizations past what I already have.

If somebody can point me to where ever it's written up, and if the writer would care to respond to any questions I have after reading it, then maybe I can form a less generalized opinion. *shrug*

[Guest SomeGuy]

Busch, the one Amnicola near the Railroad?

Jamie, read the story. The officer was unannounced, this was a man of unknown origin putting that gun there. Secondly, I never said I would draw the gun. Up that close, first chance I get I am using my hands. I earned my black belt years ago, and frankly, guns are NOT the ideal tool for a fight in close quarters like we are talking.

Regardless, cop or not, doing what was described involves me defending myself. Thankfully, Tennessee law protects citizens who protect themselves from over-acting LEOs. 39-11-611(e)(3)(A and

Also, before we get too hot headed over this, it is worth noting, it was a story by a poster, who never took any follow up. Frankly, I am not treating it as a real incident, but as a what if scenario.