Applebees may not be HCP friendly

[Guest crotalus01]

Everyone is posted at that point, so very few (if any) places allow us entry - that is the goal. Remember we are taliking about Antis. It makes sense because now we are banned from the maximum number of places...

[RinTN]

Everyone is posted at that point, so very few (if any) places allow us entry - that is the goal. Remember we are taliking about Antis. It makes sense because now we are banned from the maximum number of places...

Ah, but their claim isn't that they don't want us in other places. Instead, their claim is that they don't want to have to put up a sign because it will make people worry that their business isn't safe. But, simply forcing it on others doesn't change the fact that they'll have to post a sign. Thus, if their actual concern is the sign, their businesses are still going to look unsafe.

Ultimately what I'm getting at is that I think Tygard's claim about *why* these businesses are pushing for this change is full of . Instead, their true reason for trying to find a way to circumvent the law is as you said - they are Anti-2A and want to force their position on others. In doing so, they just wanted to come up with a smoke screen to try and obscure their true position.

[JayC]

There is a small vocal number of restaurant owners who are behind the push for this ordinance to block carry with beer permits. There maybe a number of 'me too' council members who like being on TV and getting calls from the paper, but there are some restaurant owners (a very small number) who are pushing for this behind the scenes...

My personal belief is they don't want to allow carry but at the same time don't want to loose business to those restaurant which don't post.

If you to want believe that HCP holders have some kind of clout as group; go for it. I see no indication that business owners want Metro to do their dirty work for them; this is just some Metro politicians looking for a way to circumvent a law they don’t like.

They are working on that. You aren’t old enough to remember what the night life use to be like.

The state has also made restaurants safe for you by being willing to trample the rights of businesses owners on the smoking issue. They know what is best for you.

I’ll bet you were okay with banning smoking in restaurants.

[Guest HexHead]

Ah, but their claim isn't that they don't want us in other places. Instead, their claim is that they don't want to have to put up a sign because it will make people worry that their business isn't safe. But, simply forcing it on others doesn't change the fact that they'll have to post a sign. Thus, if their actual concern is the sign, their businesses are still going to look unsafe.

Ultimately what I'm getting at is that I think Tygard's claim about *why* these businesses are pushing for this change is full of . Instead, their true reason for trying to find a way to circumvent the law is as you said - they are Anti-2A and want to force their position on others. In doing so, they just wanted to come up with a smoke screen to try and obscure their true position.

I believe their thinking is that if just the real "anti" restaurant owners post, there will be a backlash and loss of business from both HCP carriers and people that support them, even if they don't carry. If they can make all the restaurants have to post, they won't be singled out.

[Guest HexHead]

My personal belief is they don't want to allow carry but at the same time don't want to loose business to those restaurant which don't post.

BINGO!!!

[Guest crotalus01]

I believe their thinking is that if just the real "anti" restaurant owners post, there will be a backlash and loss of business from both HCP carriers and people that support them, even if they don't carry. If they can make all the restaurants have to post, they won't be singled out.

Most likely true; however, that is faulty logic on their part - I will not patronize any restaraunt that posts, period. Therefore a blanket ban will cost ALL.

Most grocery stores are not posted, and I am a pretty good cook.

[RinTN]

I believe their thinking is that if just the real "anti" restaurant owners post, there will be a backlash and loss of business from both HCP carriers and people that support them, even if they don't carry. If they can make all the restaurants have to post, they won't be singled out.

That's a reasonable guess too. To me that still means that "Tygard's claim about *why* these businesses are pushing for this change is full of :poop:".

[Guest KevinM]

If you to want believe that HCP holders have some kind of clout as group; go for it. I see no indication that business owners want Metro to do their dirty work for them; this is just some Metro politicians looking for a way to circumvent a law they don’t like.

We have clout, hence why we are passing these bills. This isn't just Metro...it is also restaurant owners (Randy Rayburn) that don't want to be forced to show their political stripes.

You aren’t old enough to remember what the night life use to be like.

Please tell me what it used to by like, how it is different and why that matters.

I’ll bet you were okay with banning smoking in restaurants.

1. Nope. Very much against this.

2. What did I post that would make you think that?