Any interest in staging a Pro-Carry protest against a restaurant that bans?

[Guest Old goat]

No, I wouldn't either. We all knew before Bredesen's veto, that some would post, really wasn't that big of a deal, and still isn't to me, their choice and mine. If the parks Bill doesn't go down, Lots of towns still won't allow it, but State Parks will. Just because we think of a restaurant as a public place it is not public property.

[Guest KWW67]

I would be there. And for the record even though I would be disappointed if anyone in here chose not to stick together, I would still respect their decision and not hold it against them. There are strength in numbers and I for one will be there, but if you feel that strong against it, never go against your principles. I am with you David if it goes down...

[Guest Old goat]

Should a restauraunt owner be forced to allow permit holders to carry in his place of business?

[Guest KWW67]

Should a restauraunt owner be forced to allow permit holders to carry in his place of business?

I think so. Just like they can not stop a person of color from coming in there. If I am not mistaken, doesn't some states prohibit holders from being barred? Right are rights and I believe the 2A are going to be even more expanded in the coming years by SCOTUS. You are already seeing it in the court of appaeals. Look how oppressed we were recent years ago. It is being pushed to the max nowdays and the 2A is gaining ground in the courts.

Edited May 30, 2009 by KWW67
Spelling

[Punisher84]

Should a restauraunt owner be forced to allow permit holders to carry in his place of business?

No. I don't believe they should be "forced." I don't think what David is trying to do is scare tactics or to force anyone to change the way they do business.

I think the point of this, as is the point of any protest, is to bring attention to a cause. The media has branded us as hillbillies with guns itching for a fight. That is simply not the case.

[Punisher84]

I think so. Just like they can not stop a person of color from coming in there. If I am not mistaken, doesn't some states prohibit holders from being barred? Right are rights and I believe the 2A are going to be even more expanded in the coming years by SCOTUS. You are already seeing it in the court of appaeals. Look how oppressed we were recent years ago. It is being pushed to the max nowdays and the 2A is gaining ground in the courts.

Well that is a different way of looking at it. Hadn't thought of it that way necessarily.

[Guest JavaGuy]

Said like that, I can respect your decision at least.

From my perspective, you should have respected his decision from the get-go. I'll go further than that - I agree with him. Based on the posts I've read from many of you, I realize that you'll have dismissed anything further I have to say without considering it on its merits, but here goes anyway...

1) A private business owner should be able to post his/her property if he/she wants to. You should respect that.. yes, you're free to protest the decision if you please, but it's still the law that the business owner can post the property. That's his/her business, not yours. If you want a restaurant totally open to carry of pistols, rifles and M1A1 battle-tanks, feel free to open one up. Hey, put a sign up at the door saying that if you don't have a gun on you, the restaurant will loan you one for the duration of your meal.

2) No, you're not the rapists, murderers and drug dealers who would be carrying weapons into restaurants serving alcohol... by and large, you're all law-abiding citizens. However, the general public doesn't know you and doesn't know that you're okay. And the general public does know that too many people now go to bars (and restaurants serving alcohol) and don't know when to stop drinking. Those drunks then go out and get into their cars to weave their way either home or to the scene of the crash.

The general public (flamed on by the media's sensationalism) looks at someone openly proclaiming his/her desire to be able to "protect" himself in a restaurant as if you think yourself the modern day version of Bill Hickok. By the way, you do know that he was killed by someone who slipped up behind him and shot him from behind, the killer not being willing to try cases with an armed man face to face.

3) I don't know you guys in person (with a couple of exceptions) but many of you have been quite hot-headed about this whole thing. Every time someone has disagreed with your pursuit of carry in restaurants or parks, etc., that person has been branded as seven kinds of fool, coward, POS, etc. Listen guys, you might not know it, but the founders of this country set it up so that we would have a representative form of government. Yes, you say.. you know that.

But what many of you don't seem to know is that you elect a representative to go to the seat of government and to learn what he/she can about an issue in order to make an informed and responsible decision on it... which might NOT be what a popularity poll would indicate is the decision the people want. Don't agree with the representative's vote? Fine, campaign against him or her in the next election, but don't call him or her names. You didn't see all the evidence, hear all the testimony that he or she did. Oh... and since Gov. Bredesen is in his 2nd term of office, he won't be running for re-election. I've seen several comments where some of you believe that you can threaten him with the loss of your vote in the next gubernatorial campaign. He might seek other offices in the future but who knows... Just saying that some of you might want to do some reading about what the responsibilities of the three branches of goverment are and how Tennessee's government works.

4) DaveTN - you're all right in my book. Thoughtful and willing to look at all sides of an issue. If you decide to run for office, I'd be happy to vote for you if I'm within that district. Heck, I might even be able to kick in a fiver or ten-spot for campaign expenses.

[Guest JavaGuy]

I think so. Just like they can not stop a person of color from coming in there.

So you were born with a pistol on your hip? 9mm or .40 cal? Grin...

[Punisher84]

From my perspective, you should have respected his decision from the get-go. I'll go further than that - I agree with him. Based on the posts I've read from many of you, I realize that you'll have dismissed anything further I have to say without considering it on its merits, but here goes anyway...

I respect Dave's posts on their face as much as I'm sure he does mine, but I was willing to ask him civil questions and he responded with civil answers. That was the end of it. You obviously don't respect my point of view or you wouldn't have butted in now would you?

I read your entire post as I have read most of your posts in other threads. Yup. I don't care

[TGO David]

I think it would be a good idea for us to contact our STATE senators and representatives and ask them to vote to override the Governor's veto of this bill. They have the power to override and I heard on the news this morning that they may consider that option as early as this Monday (June1). I have already emaioled by State Rep. and Senator here in W TN today asking them to override his veto. It's worth a shot if they get enough feedback.

First and foremost, welcome to TGO. I see that was your first post here so thank you for signing up and joining us.

There's definitely be a concerted effort among TGO members to email, call and sometimes even visit their Reps and Senators about this issue. We've made a good deal of impact on them from what I understand and we absolutely need to continue doing it.

I think this is a really good idea David...I dont know when you plan on doing it, but if you get some more details worked out I might be able to make the trip. While I dont agree with much DaveTN said I do understand the logic of not picketing a business owner thats exercising his right to post a sign. Would there maybe be a better location?

It's their right to post a sign but it's also our right, guaranteed by the First Amendment, to peacefully protest it. If they don't want our business, fine. But let's let it be known to everyone else that they don't want our business because we have opted to dine only in establishments that will allow us to exercise our right to bear arms for our protection.

Owners of establishments catering to the public often make knee-jerk decisions based on popular opinion.

Too many complaints about Pepsi being served instead of Coke? We'll see if we can change that.

A lot of people asking for mozzarella sticks on the appetizer menu? We'll see if we can add that.

People complaining about smokers ruining the dining experience? We'll support a law in favor of banning that.

People complaining that they can't smoke while dining? We'll advertise ourselves as an age-restricted venue and cater back to the smokers.

...

So why not make it so that they see just how many pro-2A, pro-personal protection customers are unhappy about their decision to prohibit carry because of their unfounded phobias? Writing letters doesn't help. As a business owner myself, I ignore a boatload of junk mail every day.

But if I owned a restaurant and had taken a stance against HCP holders exercising their legal right (or privilege, as DaveTN calls it) to bear arms for their own protection in my establishment, and 25-50 people showed up and started picketing my business and drawing attention to my fear-based policies... I'd probably reconsider.

And if I didn't, I bet other restauranteers watching from across the road or across the state on TV would.

Just because we think of a restaurant as a public place it is not public property.

See above. Realistically, any business that opens itself to the public puts itself at the mercy of the public to ensure that money keeps coming in. If a business were to prohibit anyone who wore Ecko clothing from entering the establishment, it would by virtue of prohibiting an item also be telling a lot of young, black males to go do business somewhere else. And who could cry foul about it? They didn't say "No colored people allowed" they just said "No clothing popular among young black people can be worn here". No harm in that, right?

It's the same sort of covert-discrimination that comes when you prohibit a legally licensed handgun carry permit holder from entering your restaurant while armed. Since most of us refuse to go anywhere unarmed, it's telling us that we as gun owners are not welcome there.

Sure, we're welcome if we disarm. Same as the young black man would be welcome in my theoretical setting if he would just take off that Ecko jersey shirt and put on a nice Izod polo istead.

Should a restauraunt owner be forced to allow permit holders to carry in his place of business?

Forced? No. Enlightened about the revenue they are losing? Yes.

Edited May 30, 2009 by TGO David

[Guest KWW67]

So you were born with a pistol on your hip? 9mm or .40 cal? Grin...

No. But for what it matters, I was born in this country with the same rights the contitution affords anyone of any color. grin...

[Guest Old goat]

I think so. Just like they can not stop a person of color from coming in there.

I think there is a difference in the two. If I was the restaurant owner, I wouldn't post, but I wouldn't want the State to tell me I couldn't either.

[TGO David]

I think there is a difference in the two. If I was the restaurant owner, I wouldn't post, but I wouldn't want the State to tell me I couldn't either.

You seem to have misread the intended purpose of a picket. It's not to cause the State to force anyone to do anything. It's to cause the business owner to reconsider his fear-based discrimination against those who wish to legally go armed while dining.

[Guest JavaGuy]

I respect Dave's posts on their face as much as I'm sure he does mine, but I was willing to ask him civil questions and he responded with civil answers. That was the end of it. You obviously don't respect my point of view or you wouldn't have butted in now would you?

I read your entire post as I have read most of your posts in other threads. Yup. I don't care

Actually, I do. If you'll read my statement, it says, "many of you." My mistake was in using that construction immediately following stating that you should have respected his opinion from the start. It did falsely lead to the impression that I don't respect your POV.

As for my butting in... grin.. I'm sorry. I was under the impression that this was a forum where many people could "butt in" and give the benefit of their different perspectives on things. My general problem with forums is that I see a whole lot of name-calling when one doesn't agree with someone else. Again, you have my apology for butting in.

Have a great day!

[Punisher84]

Actually, I do. If you'll read my statement, it says, "many of you." My mistake was in using that construction immediately following stating that you should have respected his opinion from the start. It did falsely lead to the impression that I don't respect your POV.

As for my butting in... grin.. I'm sorry. I was under the impression that this was a forum where many people could "butt in" and give the benefit of their different perspectives on things. My general problem with forums is that I see a whole lot of name-calling when one doesn't agree with someone else. Again, you have my apology for butting in.

Have a great day!

You actually have my apology as well because I confused you with another member with "guy" in his username and that is who I was thinking about when I made the "other posts" comment.

I only meant butting in, in the context of Dave and myself's back and forth because I felt it was settled between us, even if it was done in the public setting.

[TGO David]

Just forget it. I'm pretty discouraged that we have even a fraction of people here who feel like the path of least resistance is the way to go. :-\

The rules of engagement have changed over the past 20 or so years and the Leftist anti-Liberty, anti-Personal Responsibility crowd have been fighting us using completely different, radical tactics. Yet for some reason we seem damned and determined to keep fighting the way we always have.

I bet there had to have been a British commander or two during the Revolutionary War who was a bit pissed at his superiors for insisting that the Red Coats keep lining up in tight, nice, clean formations on the battlefield while the colonists were fighting using guerrilla tactics and handing them their butts. If there was, I'm starting to know how they must have felt.

<-- apparently the new flag of the American gun owner.

[Guest KWW67]

Just forget it. I'm pretty discouraged that we have even a fraction of people here who feel like the path of least resistance is the way to go. :-\

The rules of engagement have changed over the past 20 or so years and the Leftist anti-Liberty, anti-Personal Responsibility crowd have been fighting us using completely different, radical tactics. Yet for some reason we seem damned and determined to keep fighting the way we always have.

I bet there had to have been a British commander or two during the Revolutionary War who was a bit pissed at his superiors for insisting that the Red Coats keep lining up in tight, nice, clean formations on the battlefield while the colonists were fighting using guerrilla tactics and handing them their butts. If there was, I'm starting to know how they must have felt.

<-- apparently the new flag of the American gun owner.

+1

[Guest Old goat]

You seem to have misread the intended purpose of a picket. It's not to cause the State to force anyone to do anything. It's to cause the business owner to reconsider his fear-based discrimination against those who wish to legally go armed while dining.

No, I understand the intended purpose of the picket, and I actually agree with the "intended purpose", I (personally) don't think it would produce the desired results. I don't believe that most owner's fears are based on having law abiding permit holder in their place of business, I think the fear is how the rest of his customers feel about it. I think the public is the ones who need to understand that we are not a threat to them, and I don't think a pichet in front of their favorite restaurant show that to them.

[Punisher84]

Just forget it. I'm pretty discouraged that we have even a fraction of people here who feel like the path of least resistance is the way to go. :-\

The rules of engagement have changed over the past 20 or so years and the Leftist anti-Liberty, anti-Personal Responsibility crowd have been fighting us using completely different, radical tactics. Yet for some reason we seem damned and determined to keep fighting the way we always have.

I bet there had to have been a British commander or two during the Revolutionary War who was a bit pissed at his superiors for insisting that the Red Coats keep lining up in tight, nice, clean formations on the battlefield while the colonists were fighting using guerrilla tactics and handing them their butts. If there was, I'm starting to know how they must have felt.

<-- apparently the new flag of the American gun owner.

Well... I see 19 votes for it and only 4 against. I share your disgust, but it is the way it is. Some people stand for what they believe in, others are happy to let people stand for them, and some just will not be swayed to action because they will live their lives however the powers deem.

[Oh Shoot]

Just forget it. I'm pretty discouraged that we have even a fraction of people here who feel like the path of least resistance is the way to go. :-\...

Lordie, you just started this a few hours ago, and the poll is 19/4 supporting your venture. Not just "in favor of" either, but "would participate".

Seems rather overwhelming in your favor to me.

- OS

[Punisher84]

I don't think a pichet in front of their favorite restaurant show that to them.

So what will?

[DaveTN]

Just forget it. I'm pretty discouraged that we have even a fraction of people here who feel like the path of least resistance is the way to go. :-\

The rules of engagement have changed over the past 20 or so years and the Leftist anti-Liberty, anti-Personal Responsibility crowd have been fighting us using completely different, radical tactics. Yet for some reason we seem damned and determined to keep fighting the way we always have.

I bet there had to have been a British commander or two during the Revolutionary War who was a bit pissed at his superiors for insisting that the Red Coats keep lining up in tight, nice, clean formations on the battlefield while the colonists were fighting using guerrilla tactics and handing them their butts. If there was, I'm starting to know how they must have felt.

<-- apparently the new flag of the American gun owner.

You have 83% of the people that have posted ready to go with you; they just want to know when and where.

That’s a pretty good percentage.

I’m discouraged that you see me taking a stand for a business owners rights as bending over.

[Guest Old goat]

Just forget it. I'm pretty discouraged that we have even a fraction of people here who feel like the path of least resistance is the way to go. :-\

<-- apparently the new flag of the American gun owner.

Bull:poop:, I'm not giving up, hell I'm not telling you or anyone else to give up or not picket if that's what you feel like you need to do. But let me ask this David, had you thought about doing this before the veto, or did it stem from that. Either way do what you need to do, and quit crying, hell you've got 80% support, looks stroung to me.

[oldogy]

IMHO, it would do nothing but draw attention to those crazy gun people.

oldogy

[Guest SUNTZU]

I think that something more than the letter writing we have been doing needs to be done. I think that if we single out a restaurant to picket, the media, which doesn't seem to be on our side anyways, would just put this in a negative light. I don't think this would help our cause in reaching the uninformed masses whose decisions seem to be easily swayed by an newsanchor's fart.

What about wearing an Unarmed Victim/Gun Free Zone T-shirt and showing up in groups of three and four to eat at one of these restaurants. Act like we don't know each other. It would be like those cigarettes kill commercials they play all of the time.

Something more needs to be done, and with the greatest positive impact we can get.