B O Y C O T T!!! ALL restaurants that serve alcohol....

[Guest AreSeeFiddyWon]

I won't be boycotting, I'll be following the law.

I carry, therefore establishments that serve alcohol for on site consumption ban me, not the other way around. If that hurts the restaurant owners, they need to take it up with the state legislators.

[Wingshooter]

I won't be boycotting, I'll be following the law.

I carry, therefore establishments that serve alcohol for on site consumption ban me, not the other way around. If that hurts the restaurant owners, they need to take it up with the state legislators.

+1

[kwe45919]

Whoa.....8 pages of pure controversy.....

Boycotting isn't the answer here I'm sorry to say but anyone can do or think as they wish since it's a free country....

P.S. I don't go to Applebees because of the liquor or because they don't allow guns, I go to eat the food. Besides, most places these days have curb side pick up so you don't have to go in anyways....just call'em and keep carrying your gun in your car when you pick up the food......anyone think of that?? I'll still spend my money there, I just don't have to go in.

[Guest clsutton21]

That is all.

[Guest louderthebetter]

First let me say that I come here often and read most everthing posted on this forum.

Having said that , I don't post often because its my style to read everything

posted and make decisions based on what I read and a little common sense.

That is TILL NOW.

I don't think a boycott will do any good rather than make us feel good about

ourselves and how we're stickin it to the man(Restaurants that serve alcohol) by

not eating there.

The people whos attention we need to get are our elected officials.They and they alone can help fix this mess.Call them,write them,e mail them and get your friends

and family members to do the same.

Make waves (they don't like waves) and force their hand on this and we MAY have

a chance to correct this mess in Nashville.

I'm old as dirt and diden't get that way by stupid so I know that some of you

will rant and rave,get out the sack cloth and ashes and say were doomed but If we

get to the powers that be in Nashville they can fix this.

I'll most likely get crap from some of you about my view of this and thats fine.

Seems like most are in a tizzy anyhow so go for it.

As for me,I'll do as I always have,"Don't ask,Don't tell" eat where I please and do

whatever it takes to protect me and mine.

[Guest 70below]

How is the business owner supporting me, if they don't take action as simple as a letter to get my business? Just because they allowed me there when the law said they could? I don't remember a bunch of 20% off specials for carry permit holders when the law passed.

That's absurd.

I think my question was fair, I'm honestly willing to change my stance on the whole topic, if someone can give me insight on how inaction to post when the law changed, then further inaction with the new ruling, is somehow supporting me/us? I'm not talking specific restaurants that may have made an extra effort to welcome us......but those are few and far between.

Furthermore, I don't understand how voicing my opinion on a ruling that is supposed to be supported by a group that represents "their" interests by not spending my hard earned money at their restaurants can be considered a "Thug Mentality"? I don't recall anyone advocating anything but a peaceful passive method to voice their opinion.......well, with the exception of the guy that wanted to put cockroaches in the food......but I'm thinking he was probably kidding.

Edited November 22, 2009 by 70below
missed a word...

[TGO David]

Regarding 20% off specials for carry permit holders... Do you think restaurants did that for black people when segregation ended?

20% off your meal if you can show us that you're less than 51% Caucasian!

Come on, really. Let's stick to the realm of reality here.

[Motasyco]

I won't be boycotting, I'll be following the law.

I carry, therefore establishments that serve alcohol for on site consumption ban me, not the other way around. If that hurts the restaurant owners, they need to take it up with the state legislators.

Pretty simple concept. I see no controversy with this. We're just back to the place we were before July.

[Guest HexHead]

Regarding 20% off specials for carry permit holders... Do you think restaurants did that for black people when segregation ended?

20% off your meal if you can show us that you're less than 51% Caucasian!

Come on, really. Let's stick to the realm of reality here.

HAHAHAHA.... 0bama would have had to show his birth certificate to get the discount.

:D:D:D

[Motasyco]

HAHAHAHA.... 0bama would have had to show his birth certificate to get the discount.

:D:D

Which birth certificate?

[Guest mikedwood]

I think my question was fair, I'm honestly willing to change my stance on the whole topic, if someone can give me insight on how inaction to post when the law changed, then further inaction with the new ruling, is somehow supporting me/us? I'm not talking specific restaurants that may have made an extra effort to welcome us......but those are few and far between.

There was an article in the Oak Ridger after they passed the law and they interviewed like 12 resturants. Most of them said without a doubt they would post to prohibit carry. I drove by and checked the doors on a few after a couple of months. I don't think one I checked had posted at all. I have been curious as to why not, but not so curious as to ask.

After all the uproar when the law was passed I noticed very few posting to prohibit. I don't know what that means if anything. Just an observation that I have no answer for.

[Guest 70below]

Regarding 20% off specials for carry permit holders... Do you think restaurants did that for black people when segregation ended?

20% off your meal if you can show us that you're less than 51% Caucasian!

Come on, really. Let's stick to the realm of reality here.

I didn't honestly expect them to do 20% specials, that was a bit of sarcasm.....but I would expect them to do SOMETHING, to indicate that they were "welcoming" carry holders if they are genuinely "supporting" our rights. Otherwise, there is no distinction from the ones that are just lazy. How are we to recognize the ones that are for our right and which are not. Simply posting or not posting is not an actual measure of that. I hardly think segregation in a good comparison here either.

[TGO David]

I didn't honestly expect them to do 20% specials, that was a bit of sarcasm.....but I would expect them to do SOMETHING, to indicate that they were "welcoming" carry holders if they are genuinely "supporting" our rights. Otherwise, there is no distinction from the ones that are just lazy. How are we to recognize the ones that are for our right and which are not. Simply posting or not posting is not an actual measure of that. I hardly think segregation in a good comparison here either.

I think you're seriously expecting way too much. How about the reward being that you're able to carry for your protection and that of your family while you dine, without being hassled ... or thrown in jail.

That's all the reward I need, but apparently you were put off that none of these restaurants rolled out the red carpet for you as a HCP holder. I don't feel like I'm special because I carry. I don't expect anyone else to treat me that way either. That's probably part of the reason why I work hard to keep it concealed.

[Guest bkelm18]

I'm mad because I wasn't showered with $100 bills and served dinner on a diamond encrusted platter the first time I legally carried into a restaurant that served alcohol.

[Raoul]

I think you're seriously expecting way too much. How about the reward being that you're able to carry for your protection and that of your family while you dine, without being hassled ... or thrown in jail.

That's all the reward I need.

+1. Why would any restaurant owe an HCP holder anything. I understand this is an emotional issue. But we seem way off base in some of the posts here. Do we need to make our displeasure known? Certainly. But until something occurs that changes the system, we have to proceed working through the system we have. Even though it stinks.

just my ,02.

[Guest 70below]

I think you're seriously expecting way too much. How about the reward being that you're able to carry for your protection and that of your family while you dine, without being hassled ... or thrown in jail.

That's all the reward I need, but apparently you were put off that none of these restaurants rolled out the red carpet for you as a HCP holder. I don't feel like I'm special because I carry. I don't expect anyone else to treat me that way either. That's probably part of the reason why I work hard to keep it concealed.

Hardly, I don't expect them to roll out the red carpet, and I don't expect any special treatment. The point was made that the restaurants that tolerated carry before the ruling shouldn't be avoided because they had supported my rights prior to the ruling.

There is a big difference between tolerating my right, and SUPPORTING my right. I've not seen many restaurants that supported that right. Its not a reward to protect my family, its a right.....just not one I can exercise there, so therefor......I won't go there.

[TGO David]

Hardly, I don't expect them to roll out the red carpet, and I don't expect any special treatment. The point was made that the restaurants that tolerated carry before the ruling shouldn't be avoided because they had supported my rights prior to the ruling.

There is a big difference between tolerating my right, and SUPPORTING my right. I've not seen many restaurants that supported that right. Its not a reward to protect my family, its a right.....just not one I can exercise there, so therefor......I won't go there.

So you wanted... what exactly? If a restaurant chose not to post, they supported you. Wish granted!

If you were expecting them to hang a big banner across the front of the restaurant that said "GUNS WELCOME HERE!" you had unrealistic expectations. I admit, it would have been nice but it'd be nice if I had a million dollars in my bank account right now too. Since I don't, I work with what I have and am glad that I have it.

Same should have been said in the situation of being able to eat at a restaurant that chose not to post.

[Guest 70below]

So you wanted... what exactly? If a restaurant chose not to post, they supported you. Wish granted!

If you were expecting them to hang a big banner across the front of the restaurant that said "GUNS WELCOME HERE!" you had unrealistic expectations. I admit, it would have been nice but it'd be nice if I had a million dollars in my bank account right now too. Since I don't, I work with what I have and am glad that I have it.

Same should have been said in the situation of being able to eat at a restaurant that chose not to post.

It was simply my point that they ALLOWED my carry.....they didn't SUPPORT it. In my opinion there is a difference. If they had supported my carry, they would have made some attempt to make it known that they supported our right. Are they required to do that, of course not, they could allow or refuse me as a customer......that was their right. But if they want to SUPPORT our right, then it requires more than disinterest.

[analog_kidd]

I may be misinterpreting some of the posts here, but I read a few as saying that if a restaurant did not send letters of protest or represent us at this last judgment, then they are against us and we shouldn't support them now.

IF that is the case, my comment to that would be that these restaurant owners have a lot to do just keeping their business running. Why should they have to go out of their way to support our rights. If we wnat our rights supported, it is up to us to act.

That said, how many of US went to bat for this particular issue? Did any attend the hearing, or even show up to the court house? Did any protest outside? Did any write letters to our representatives, or the judge? Did any contact the media and offer up an interview or a letter to the local newspaper editor?

If we can't even take action when it is our rights in jeopardy, how can we blame a restaurant owner?

[Guest 70below]

I may be misinterpreting some of the posts here, but I read a few as saying that if a restaurant did not send letters of protest or represent us at this last judgment, then they are against us and we shouldn't support them now.

IF that is the case, my comment to that would be that these restaurant owners have a lot to do just keeping their business running. Why should they have to go out of their way to support our rights. If we wnat our rights supported, it is up to us to act.

That said, how many of US went to bat for this particular issue? Did any attend the hearing, or even show up to the court house? Did any protest outside? Did any write letters to our representatives, or the judge? Did any contact the media and offer up an interview or a letter to the local newspaper editor?

If we can't even take action when it is our rights in jeopardy, how can we blame a restaurant owner?

I agree fully with your statement. My only point is, if they did not act, they are not SUPPORTING us. There is a difference between allowing us to come to their restaurant and carry, and supporting our right to carry there.

Edited November 22, 2009 by 70below
spelling...

[Guest mikedwood]

I didn't honestly expect them to do 20% specials, that was a bit of sarcasm.....but I would expect them to do SOMETHING, to indicate that they were "welcoming" carry holders if they are genuinely "supporting" our rights. Otherwise, there is no distinction from the ones that are just lazy. How are we to recognize the ones that are for our right and which are not. Simply posting or not posting is not an actual measure of that. I hardly think segregation in a good comparison here either.

I think that is the legislators fault not the resturants. By that I mean if they say carry is unwelcome they lose out to those that carry. If they say it is welcome they will scare some off as well. I would say 90% of the resturants would in reality just like to sweep it under the rug and serve food.

Like the opt in, opt out they put on the city and counties.

We have a right that was turned into a privilage that requires training and money. If I passed the test I should be able to carry everywhere I go, if I so choose. Matter where or when that might be. But it's not that way. I can carry here and not there and it just gets confusing. Imagine that. politicians making something confusing.

I will join the boycott because I always carry. Despite my previous posts I think these two said it best in respect to my personal reality. And I really like AreSeeFiddyWon's comment.

I'm not leaving my gun in the car if I don't have to, and I don't have to eat in a restaurant that serves alcohol. I don't drink, so their loss. Net result, a family of 5 will be directly or indirectly boycotting restaurants that serve.

I intend to write/call the legislature and maybe some restaurants that are members of this Hospitality Assoc.

I won't be boycotting, I'll be following the law.

I carry, therefore establishments that serve alcohol for on site consumption ban me, not the other way around. If that hurts the restaurant owners, they need to take it up with the state legislators.

When my boycott will kick in per se is when the family wants to eat at a resturant that serves and I am not allowed to carry. My family knows and respects that I carry and will work with me to make sure I stay within the law. Good bad or indifferent they like Craker Barrel just as well as Appleby's or Red Lobster (not pointing these two out as anti-gun, just as places that serve alcohol and are once again off limits while carrying)

[Guest 70below]

I think that is the legislators fault not the resturants. By that I mean if they say carry is unwelcome they lose out to those that carry. If they say it is welcome they will scare some off as well. I would say 90% of the resturants would in reality just like to sweep it under the rug and serve food.

Like the opt in, opt out they put on the city and counties.

We have a right that was turned into a privilage that requires training and money. If I passed the test I should be able to carry everywhere I go, if I so choose. Matter where or when that might be. But it's not that way. I can carry here and not there and it just gets confusing. Imagine that. politicians making something confusing.

I will join the boycott because I always carry. Despite my previous posts I think these two said it best in respect to my personal reality. And I really like AreSeeFiddyWon's comment.

When my boycott will kick in per se is when the family wants to eat at a resturant that serves and I am not allowed to carry. My family knows and respects that I carry and will work with me to make sure I stay within the law. Good bad or indifferent they like Craker Barrel just as well as Appleby's or Red Lobster (not pointing these two out as anti-gun, just as places that serve alcohol and are once again off limits while carrying)

I agree for the most part. Very well said.

[TGO David]

That said, how many of US went to bat for this particular issue? Did any attend the hearing, or even show up to the court house? Did any protest outside? Did any write letters to our representatives, or the judge? Did any contact the media and offer up an interview or a letter to the local newspaper editor?

Know who from TGO went out of their way to attend the hearing earlier in the year? Me, Daniel, Fallguy, Nikki Goeser... maybe one or two others that I personally did not see who may have been in the satellite room.

Not many.

[dralarms]

It was simply my point that they ALLOWED my carry.....they didn't SUPPORT it. In my opinion there is a difference. If they had supported my carry, they would have made some attempt to make it known that they supported our right. Are they required to do that, of course not, they could allow or refuse me as a customer......that was their right. But if they want to SUPPORT our right, then it requires more than disinterest.

Ok, I've read this whole thing again and I must say that I was wrong about the boycott thing, we still need to petition out reps. and get this crap fixed.

And 70below, I have to disagree, if a resturant did NOT post the in fact they were supporting us.

I'm going back to life before this whole fiasco. I'm going back to what I was doing before we were able to carry in a resturant. That's all I'm saying about it.

[Guest 70below]

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. Everyone is going to do what they feel is right for them and their families. That's part of what makes our country the best on earth.