A Rude Pro 2nd Amendment Supporter Harassed My Daughter - Page 11

calmp9 · September 5th, 2008, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waynesan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My 26 year old daughter had an unpleasant experience with a rude pro gun guy and his wife yesterday in the store where she works and I thought I would relate to this board what went down and get your opinions on what transpired and your thoughts on what happened.

My daughter works in a regionally successful eyewear company with stores throughout the midwest including Tennessee. She is a sales person who helps customers pick out frames and get their glasses and contacts made. She works for commission and her time is valuable.
Yesterday Mr. and Mrs. X came into the store. Upon entering, they passed by an obvious sign that states "No Guns or Weapons Allowed on These Premises." ( Not a legally enforcable sign per Tenn. statute but that's not germane to what happens later.)

Upon entering, my daughter asks Mr.& Mrs. X if she could help them. They said yes and proceeded with the normal routine of purchasing two pairs of glasses. My daughter spent over an hour helping them with their purchase.

Upon completing all the details of the purchase they all proceeded to the register where the transaction would be finalized and the bill was totaled to about $800.00. At this point Mr. X asks my daughter why her store does not support 2nd Amendment rights. (Let me say at this point that my daughter is about as unpolitical as one can be. She has absolutely no interest in politics and no interest in guns or 2nd Amendment issues and has no opinion, one way or another, on what the laws or store rules should be). When asked the question by Mr. X, she asked him what he meant. He said "that sign on the door says no guns are allowed in this store." My daughter, being taken a little off guard by the question, jokingly said "well there are a lot of thugs that come in here and we don't want them bringing their guns in." (I know, bad answer if it was one of us, but coming from her in this situation I understand her saying it).

At this point Mrs. X speaks up and says "I don't think your Dad would buy anything from this store if he knew their anti 2nd Amendment policy."

(I am only vaguely familiar with these people. Mr.X and I were involved in a minor fender bender about 30 years ago where no one was charged and no hard feelings. Our paths have crossed occasionally over the years and we have never spoke more than to say "hi, how's it going" or some such greeting. I guess if you are into firearms like I am, word gets out around the community.)

My daughter then explained to the X's that the manager is who they should talk to but he was off yesterday. They thought for a minute and then said they would go home and think about it and decide if they could purchase from that store, since they don't support 2Amdndment rights, and they would let her know. Then turned and walked out.

Needless to say, when my girl swung by my house to tell me about this she was really upset. She came in to where I was at and half jokingly asked me, "What's the matter with you gun people?" (She likes to jab at me when she can and she took this opportunity to dig it in.) These people had taken over an hour of her time - after seeing the sign that upset them so much - and kept her from helping other customers for which she could have been earning a commission. She is a struggling Mom and every penny is important to her. She doesn't make the store rules. Now she, along with all the others who work at that store have a very negative opinion of those pro 2nd Amendment folks. And I think, by implication, the rest of us as well.

I think it is important to pick our battles wisely. But to pick a battle with a lowly store clerk over the policies of a multi-state eyewear conglomerate does not sound like prudent battle picking to me.

What do you all think of the actions of Mr. & Mrs X?
Did they do a good job of defending 2nd Amendment rights?
Would you do the same as they did?

The problem with political issues, such as the 2A, is that it's rare that someone's opinion is going to be changed in an argument or confrontation. While I agree with the couple's philosophy on gun rights, I don't agree with pushing it on other people. When it comes to gun rights, we have to be very careful how we voice our opinions and concerns. We don't want to end up looking like gun crazy yahoos just waiting to shoot somebody. If I were not pro 2A, this is exactly what I would have thought about these people. Just because we have a right to do things, it doesn't mean that we should rub people's faces in it either. There's a right way and a wrong way and theirs was the wrong way. Why take it out on a girl in a store? If she's like me, all she's caring about is working in a peaceful environment with the least amount of hassles. All it takes is for people like that to ruin your day and it ruined your daughters.

Dgydad · September 5th, 2008, 05:38 PM

Guys, perhaps his words were poorly chosen, but Tubby45 is right. His personal property rights DO trump your 2A rights, as far as his property is concerned. It has to be that way to afford the same protection & respect to every citizen. And the reverse of this example is true as well; your property rights trump his 2A rights on your property. Context is important......................

Hopyard · September 5th, 2008, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calmp9

T Just because we have a right to do things, it doesn't mean that we should rub people's faces in it either. There's a right way and a wrong way.

You just hit the nail right on the head. Great post. With everything in life there is a right way and a wrong way.

David in FL · September 5th, 2008, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dgydad

Guys, perhaps his words were poorly chosen, but Tubby45 is right. His personal property rights DO trump your 2A rights, as far as his property is concerned. It has to be that way to afford the same protection & respect to every citizen. And the reverse of this example is true as well; your property rights trump his 2A rights on your property. Context is important......................

Correct.....oftentimes there is conflict between competing "rights" of individuals. But just because a private property owner has the right to refuse to let you carry a gun on his property, that doesn't mean that "your constitutional rights end because you happen to be on private property".

I know that it makes for a good sound bite, but it's incorrect, potentially inflammatory, and serves no purpose but to stir the pot.

In my ever so humble opinion.....

nedrgr21 · September 5th, 2008, 06:49 PM

Tell your daughter the next time someone doesn't agree with store policy she should say she doesn't agree with the policy (if she has no opinion it's not lying) and explain that she works on commission and at that in dropping the sale at the last minute they would only be hurting her, not the store - maybe that will help her keep the sale.

rodc13 · September 5th, 2008, 06:52 PM

The couple described by the OP didn't violate the store's policy, misguided though it is. They just let them know why they weren't going to do business with them.

As we see, lots of folks here think that's a) none of their business; b) a waste of time; and c) will do more harm than good; d) was mean to the poor salesperson.

On the other hand, it's their community, and they're trying to make it better. And frankly, a 26-year old ought to be better informed. And a person trying to make a living in sales ought to be more savvy about customer relations. I mean, really, the sign is there so that "thugs" won't bring their guns in? If she'd given an intelligent answer that showed she was the least bit thoughtful on the topic of the 2A, she might very well have gotten the sale.

HKtexas · September 5th, 2008, 09:08 PM

She's there to make a living not debate store policies with customers, and she wasn't hired for her knowledge on concealed carry issues. If you don't like it don't go there its that simple.

ccw9mm · September 5th, 2008, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by calmp9

The problem with political issues, such as the 2A, is that it's rare that someone's opinion is going to be changed in an argument or confrontation.

That assumes the goal was change of the clerk's opinion right then and there, as opposed to notification of the owner of the reason for leaving. There's a difference. We, here, are all guessing at what the reasoning might have been.

In the few instances I have noted a store's policy and decided to leave because of it, it has usually been after having decided on a product or service for purchase. I, too, have notified someone I thought could pass along the info to the owner. Stated simply, it was (in my case) merely for purposes of informing the business that they're missing out on me as a customer and, hopefully, to give them food for thought about how many others they might be missing out on. If they choose to ultimately change direction, fine. For my part, my purpose isn't ever to change the opinion of the clerk.

Guaranteed, if businesses new 10% of the cause of sales swings, they'd adjust behavior to benefit sales. In the long run, that's the whole point. Ain't gonna happen via clerks, no. But the more the message gets back to the owner about reasons for loss of sales, the more rumination goes on about how to stop that flood. The trick is: to make it a flood. Every little bit helps. Doesn't need to be snotty; doesn't need to be rude. But without it, nothing changes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HKtexas

If you don't like it don't go there its that simple.

The customer determined he'd not purchase due to the policy. Unknown when that determination was made. Might well have determined that inside the store. It might well have been as simple as you say.

SelfDefense · September 5th, 2008, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ccw9mm

That assumes the goal was change of the clerk's opinion right then and there, as opposed to notification of the owner of the reason for leaving.

I assume the goal was to irritate the clerk and try to make an unwanted political statement. They were successful. The clerk was irritated and her time was stolen.

Quote:

In the few instances I have noted a store's policy and decided to leave because of it, it has usually been after having decided on a product or service for purchase.

As long as you don't waste other's time while you ruminate about your political strategy.

Quote:

I, too, have notified someone I thought could pass along the info to the owner. Stated simply, it was (in my case) merely for purposes of informing the business that they're missing out on me as a customer and, hopefully, to give them food for thought about how many others they might be missing out on. If they choose to ultimately change direction, fine. For my part, my purpose isn't ever to change the opinion of the clerk.

I still don't understand the arrogance of the people that think the business will make more money if they remove a no guns sign. Maybe, just maybe, they have done the analysis and came to the conclusion that they make more money by enticing sheep into their store. A singular anecdotal story is warm and political here but doesn't necessarily represent the world of business, where carrying gun owners are a tiny minority.

Quote:

Guaranteed, if businesses new 10% of the cause of sales swings, they'd adjust behavior to benefit sales. In the long run, that's the whole point. Ain't gonna happen via clerks, no. But the more the message gets back to the owner about reasons for loss of sales, the more rumination goes on about how to stop that flood. The trick is: to make it a flood. Every little bit helps. Doesn't need to be snotty; doesn't need to be rude. But without it, nothing changes.

This particular incident was more than snotty. It was more than rude. It was an unwelcome political statement and balatant misrepresentation of intentions. It was unethical behavior and does nothing for our cause. In fact, it hurts our cause.

Quote:

The customer determined he'd not purchase due to the policy. Unknown when that determination was made. Might well have determined that inside the store. It might well have been as simple as you say.

Since the sign was at the entrance the intentions were clear. Are you saying the couple was so slow it took them hours to understand the policy?

Tom357 · September 5th, 2008, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waynesan

...Upon completing all the details of the purchase they all proceeded to the register where the transaction would be finalized and the bill was totaled to about $800.00. At this point Mr. X asks my daughter why her store does not support 2nd Amendment rights...When asked the question by Mr. X, she asked him what he meant. He said "that sign on the door says no guns are allowed in this store." My daughter, being taken a little off guard by the question, jokingly said "well there are a lot of thugs that come in here and we don't want them bringing their guns in."...At this point Mrs. X speaks up and says "I don't think your Dad would buy anything from this store if he knew their anti 2nd Amendment policy."...My daughter then explained to the X's that the manager is who they should talk to but he was off yesterday. They thought for a minute and then said they would go home and think about it and decide if they could purchase from that store, since they don't support 2Amendment rights, and they would let her know. Then turned and walked out...What do you all think of the actions of Mr. & Mrs X? Did they do a good job of defending 2nd Amendment rights?
Would you do the same as they did?

I know you wanted the X's to be the focus, here, but I can't help but wonder how the close of the sale would have played out, if this 26-yr old sales clerk had answered the question honestly by admitting that she didn't know?

These people weren't there on an impulse buy. Glasses are not something you just decide to do on impulse. You have to have prescriptions for the lenses, and the lenses can be expensive, even if the frames are not. They went all the way to the register. I think the sale may have hinged on her answer, and the fact that the manager wasn't on site.

I don't have any way of knowing whether Mr. X intended to buy glasses or was just going through the motions to make a point. If he was trying to make a point, then his effort was wasted once he learned that someone in authority to affect store policy wasn't present. At that point, his choices were to patronize the store, or walk out.

Given what we were told about the encounter, it doesn't sound like Mr. X defended 2A rights, at all, nor did he attempt to educate or persuade.

I would not have done the same as they did.

September 5th, 2008, 05:38 PM	#102
Dgydad Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 27	Regarding Post #95 (Tubby45) Guys, perhaps his words were poorly chosen, but Tubby45 is right. His personal property rights DO trump your 2A rights, as far as his property is concerned. It has to be that way to afford the same protection & respect to every citizen. And the reverse of this example is true as well; your property rights trump his 2A rights on your property. Context is important......................

September 5th, 2008, 06:52 PM	#106
rodc13 VIP Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 2,390	The couple described by the OP didn't violate the store's policy, misguided though it is. They just let them know why they weren't going to do business with them. As we see, lots of folks here think that's a) none of their business; b) a waste of time; and c) will do more harm than good; d) was mean to the poor salesperson. On the other hand, it's their community, and they're trying to make it better. And frankly, a 26-year old ought to be better informed. And a person trying to make a living in sales ought to be more savvy about customer relations. I mean, really, the sign is there so that "thugs" won't bring their guns in? If she'd given an intelligent answer that showed she was the least bit thoughtful on the topic of the 2A, she might very well have gotten the sale. __________________ Cheers, Rod "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

September 5th, 2008, 06:49 PM	#105
nedrgr21 Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: MO Posts: 57	Tell your daughter the next time someone doesn't agree with store policy she should say she doesn't agree with the policy (if she has no opinion it's not lying) and explain that she works on commission and at that in dropping the sale at the last minute they would only be hurting her, not the store - maybe that will help her keep the sale.

September 5th, 2008, 09:08 PM	#107
HKtexas Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: texas Posts: 42	She's there to make a living not debate store policies with customers, and she wasn't hired for her knowledge on concealed carry issues. If you don't like it don't go there its that simple.