arma virumque cano (et alia)
Allowing guns in your grocery stores will do Nothing for your business @kroger. #GroceriesNotGuns #UniteBlue pic.twitter.com/OoEuuSJnWM— Turn Texas Blue (@UniteBlueTX) August 18, 2014
Allowing guns in your grocery stores will do Nothing for your business @kroger. #GroceriesNotGuns #UniteBlue pic.twitter.com/OoEuuSJnWM
If he can't go grocery shopping without his gun he needs professional help for his irrational fear.
"Kroger said it does not want to put its employees in a position of having to confront a customer who is legally carrying a gun, so its long-standing policy has been to follow state and local laws."We know that our customers are passionate on both sides of this issue and we trust them to be responsible in our stores," the company said without elaborating. " So, no double meaning statements (yet). The MOMs haven't been very successful in this area for quite a while. They haven't even been able to get many of their claimed "victories" to go to the trouble to post any bans in accordance to local laws.
The point of the post is that carrying a rifle over your shoulder while grocery shopping does the gun-rights movement more harm than good. Do you agree?
That I do agree with Mike.
But you don't think it should be illegal, right?
The legality of open carry of firearms varies from state to state Mike. In Minnesota for example, you can get a carry permit and there is no requirement to conceal. I personally don't normally carry openly, but some do, and it hasn't been a problem here. Much like it not being a problem in most other states.
Was that an answer? Do you mean, "no, I don't think it should be illegal?"
Many other pro gun blogs have taken OCT to task for carrying in private businesses."Following public backlash after open-carry activists brought long arms into popular restaurants, four open-carry groups issued a directive to their members Wednesday asking them to halt the practice."http://www.guns.com/2014/05/23/open-carry-groups-call-to-stop-carry-of-long-arms-into-private-businesses/"So again we see that some Open Carriers in Texas are confirming the initial suspicions that they are just…assholes.""The only thing these Open Carriers had to do was stand pretty, smile and wave. Apparently being polite is something akin to being weak among them and an attitude of “Kill Them All, let God Sort Them Out” is the prevalent attitude."http://gunfreezone.net/wordpress/index.php/2014/05/30/will-they-stop-helping-apparently-they-cant/
Polite is not bringing a gun to the dinner table, especially a public restaurant dinner table. But gun loons have no sense of propriety, manners, or what's correct behavior. No surprise since their irrational fear is driving their need to bring their gun anywhere.
"Polite is not bringing a gun to the dinner table, especially a public restaurant dinner table." When you eat at a restaurant, the dinner table becomes yours, while you are eating there. The places I go are those that both don't require me to conform to a dress code, nor disarm to eat there. Using a database available to list places that ban guns, (yes, there's an app for that) there is only one restaurant in each of the two cities I regularly frequent. In Minneapolis, there are nine that ban guns. Certainly not a big limitation in Minnesota.
Did we ever clarify how you handle those places that ask you to not bring a gun but do not post the sign making it legally binding?
If you want to be a no class ass that's just shows your character. SS has said if it's not posted he will bring his gun in even if the CEO has announced publicly that he should not.
If a woman's gun remains holstered, what's the problem? The only thing disarming a woman does is perpetuate rape culture.
Bullshit. You guys love to trot out the old rape nonsense for its dramatic and evocative effect. Guns do more harm than good, for both men and women. The more people who carry guns around in their purses and pockets the more misuse of those guns we have. Any honest reckoning of truly legitimate DGUs cannot touch the numbers of gun misuse.
Here's a recent op-ed I just ran across that seems to illustrate things quite well."But the other side also has its irrational tendencies. The latest evidence of that surfaced this week when the gun-control group, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, launched an advertising campaign aimed at pressuring the Kroger grocery store chain to ban customers from openly carrying guns in its stores.Of all the issues that Moms Demand Action could target, is banning firearms in the produce section really a public safety priority? A representative of the organization wrote in an op-ed in the Cincinnati Enquirer that “at least 16 shootings and demonstrations by gun extremists carrying firearms” occurred in or near Kroger stores in the past two years.Note that the statistic, cited without documentation, doesn’t break out the number of actual crimes from “demonstrations by gun extremists.”Now, I’m not a fan of the gun-rights folks who show up in public places carrying AR-15s and other heavy firepower. But however extreme they may appear, almost all of them are law-abiding citizens. Barring these people from Kroger wouldn’t make you or me any safer while buying a loaf of bread."http://www.indystar.com/story/opinion/2014/09/04/gun-ban-kroger-get-real/15077665/
The open carry idiots give tacit support to the unqualified and dangerous gun owners who are responsible for the misuse of guns. All gun rights fanaticism is interrelated with the misuse of guns whether done by law abiding gun owners or criminals. You're all in this together. So banning open carry in chain stores sends a sensible message. Guns do more harm than good.
What's it matter? You don't comply with their rules not to carry in their stores anyways.
"You don't comply with their rules not to carry in their stores anyways." Not true Anon, they have but to comply with the laws in force wherever I happen to be,(my permit is currently honored in 24 other states) just as I am expected to comply with local laws in my manner of carry. In Minnesota, they must either post a sign, or tell the person carrying to leave. Too easy.
You really sound like you're playing hard to get on this one. They can post a sign, or they can ask you to leave OR they can issue a statement that they don't want you to bring your guns there.What's so hard about that?
"OR they can issue a statement that they don't want you to bring your guns there." Sorry Mike, signage requirements are the legal requirement since there is no other way to insure everyone gets the message. It keeps people from saying "I hadn't heard". This is especially important when there is potential prosecution for failing to obey the ban. Minnesota legally defines the size and wording, including rules to insure that the sign isn't easily overlooked. Even with these rules, mistakes can be made. I took the kids to the Chuckee Cheese one day, and while I'm pretty good at spotting the required signs, They put their sign in the entryway where people entering automatically look to the inner door and away from the sign. The sign was legal, but easily missed. I made a note of that on the database of businesses that ban guns so others would have a heads up in the future. As for the issued statement, the ones that have been put out can in no way be construed to be a clear. They go to great pains to say that its not a ban and they are going by local laws, most likely hoping that they wont lose the business of gun owners. I've seen statements on pro-gun blogs from frequent customers saying that they wont be going back ever. And as I said earlier, I've never been to a Panera that I can recall.
Why do you resist so insistently. The three reasons I gave for not bringing a gun into a certain establishment should be enough for you. Are they not?We're not talking about legally binding or getting the message out there in a better way, we're talking about YOU. Would you continue to carry in places like this one or not?
I tend to look at their statements and act proportionally. I don't normally frequent any of these places that have been in the news recently, so it doesn't really affect me directly. These recent decisions to "request" someone not doing something is just that, a request. When they say in the same statement that its not a ban, but a request, I can but determine that it's perfectly ok for me to say no. They could quite easily legally post in accordance with local law and the vast majority including me will respect the posting and vote with our wallets. Their reasoning that they don't want to require an employee to confront an armed person is easily resolved by having them call the police if they're uncomfortable. My personal belief is that these venues are just trying to placate the annoying MOMs by throwing them a meaningless bone, while trying hard not to tick off a much larger group of permit holders, to say nothing of gun owners in general.
How can you say "it's perfectly ok for me to say no?" When you say "no" to a polite request you are being discourteous and offensive, in the very least. That seems inconsistent with your personality as it comes across in our discussions.
Right, some teenage clerk is going to ask a gun loon to take his gun outside and risk a gun loon nut going ape about his rights and causing a confrontation. Typical military idiot who can't think for himself about proprieties and can only be civil if he reads the rules at the front door. You are not civil enough to just be asked, you have to be forced. There is not a courteous bone in your body.