Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 98 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
748 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Wife and I went to Smashburger for lunch (great food). When we pulled up, my wife noticed a strange gunbuster sign. I was about to suggest that we go somewhere else, when I looked at it and realized it was a "No Open-Carry" sign.

Well, that's interesting, I thought to myself. Wonder how they came to that decision? Since I CC, it wasn't a big deal to me and we went in. A little while later, the manager stops by our table and asks how everything is. I decided to ask about the sign.

According to him, there was an incident somewhere with an OC customer. Corporate decided that was it, and they banned OC from their stores.

Now, this leaves in two minds. First, once incident causes a universal ban? That seems like a pretty big overreaction to me. However, in the age of lawsuits, I guess I can understand it, reluctantly. On the other side of the equation, I'm impressed that they didn't just go ahead and ban all guns from their store. Whether I like the policy or not, I have to admit that at least it seems like they gave it some thought and sought a middle-ground. From their perspective, I can understand the difference, and it makes me wonder if the issue wasn't the person OC'ing, but rather, someone else freaking out about it when somebody carried into the restaurant, then calling the police.

Regardless, I've decided that it's a place I will continue to eat at because I'm happy with the fact that they didn't full-kneejerk into a no-carry restaurant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,247 Posts
I know that I "feel" that I should not support a business that only partially supports the 2A. We will be allowed open carry here 1July. I am expecting that to cause more no firearms signs. I only know of one sign so far. To add more confusion, if you have been through training the sign means nothing, if you haven't been through training and carry in a posted place it is a felony.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,068 Posts
This is to the OP, what makes you think they would allow you to eat there if they knew you CC??

Lots of places make great burgers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carracer

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
I'd still eat somewhere else. I prefer not to eat where the owners don't think rationally :hand1:
It is more rational then most. What if the owner just put up the sign so the uneducated anti-gunners would keep their mouth shut and keep buying his burgers? What if he is really pro gun, but is trying to make ends meet and wants to stay in business? This is theoretical obviously, but I would gladly trade all the "no guns at all" signs for "no open carry" signs. Just consider that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
748 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
This is to the OP, what makes you think they would allow you to eat there if they knew you CC??

Lots of places make great burgers.
The sign was SPECIFICALLY, no OPEN CARRY.

They could care less about CC'ers. It is a lot easier to get a normal gunbuster sign than it is a no open carry sign, especially in this state since Smashburger sells beer. Arizona will provide them with gunbuster signs for free. So, just the fact that they specified no open carry tells me a lot.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,512 Posts
The sign was SPECIFICALLY, no OPEN CARRY.

They could care less about CC'ers. It is a lot easier to get a normal gunbuster sign than it is a no open carry sign, especially in this state since Smashburger sells beer. Arizona will provide them with gunbuster signs for free. So, just the fact that they specified no open carry tells me a lot.
Yep, tells me a lot also. Like they believe "a little bit of infringement" is allowed. If your going to allow carry, you allow carry. If your going to ban carry then band it. They need to get their corporate butts off the fence and decide which side of the line they're on!
 
  • Like
Reactions: FTG-05

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Well, that's interesting, I thought to myself. Wonder how they came to that decision?
Well, at least they fully appreciate that a well-defended citizenry is in everyone's best interests, including theirs. But they're giving the nod to the contemporary realities of openly carrying, not least of which is (a) ornery carriers, (b) ornery customers disliking carriers. If that's their stance, to support both camps, this choice seems a good one. Carry is supported for all the right reasons, but OC is discouraged ... for all the right reasons. Not a bad way to do it, really. I agree they should get off the fence and decide, if they're to truly be seen as supporters. Amongst some, this can smack of waffling.

Though, of course, I'd prefer in a strongly 2A/carry type state like AZ, one that clearly strongly supports OC, that business of this sort would take a strong stance in support of fully-armed citizen carry. But then, I'm not running that business. (Neither are they; corporate decided.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,871 Posts
I'm staying on the fence on this one. I can see where this looks like bull chips, and I can see where it looks almost reasonable.
Sticky wicket.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rockratt

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
Yep, tells me a lot also. Like they believe "a little bit of infringement" is allowed. If your going to allow carry, you allow carry. If your going to ban carry then band it. They need to get their corporate butts off the fence and decide which side of the line they're on!
You know, I see posts like this on DC all the time, and I am curious. What exactly would you prefer? Would you rather the government mandate that everyone MUST allow CC and OC on their PRIVATE property that they are paying good money for? [Sarcasm]That certainly doesn't sound like a dangerous precident to me at all. I am sure that politicians would stop at mandating just carry rights on private property and that it wouldn't extend to other forms of regulation.[/sarcasm]

I realize that this is probably a banable offense around here, but I would like to point out that the right to keep and bear arms is not the only, nor is it explicitly listed as the most important right afforded the American citizenry.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,210 Posts
People lets let forget about the food . Jemsaal said it was good . :danceban:
But on a serious not i would still eat there , they found a good balance IMO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,916 Posts
" First, once incident causes a universal ban? "

In the litigation world, that translates to, "You mean it happened before and the company didn't take appropriate action? Your Honor, I declare that the company was negligent in its security and rest my case."

If the burgers are that good, I'm eating--gun or no gun. Life is too short to pass up a good burger.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,512 Posts
You know, I see posts like this on DC all the time, and I am curious. What exactly would you prefer? Would you rather the government mandate that everyone MUST allow CC and OC on their PRIVATE property that they are paying good money for? [Sarcasm]That certainly doesn't sound like a dangerous precident to me at all. I am sure that politicians would stop at mandating just carry rights on private property and that it wouldn't extend to other forms of regulation.[/sarcasm]

I realize that this is probably a banable offense around here, but I would like to point out that the right to keep and bear arms is not the only, nor is it explicitly listed as the most important right afforded the American citizenry.
I say it again, they need to decide which side of the fence they are on. If they chose to allow carry, then allow it (open or concealed). If they don't want carrying, then ban it, but be consistent with your position.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,501 Posts
Pics or it's not real.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,342 Posts
Can they do that type of selective gun rules in AZ... I guess it's like No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,916 Posts
A private business is free to do whatever it likes. It also free to suffer the consequences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ogre

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,313 Posts
Actually I think it's perfectly rational. They had an incident, they did something about it that's not terrible. And they have to take into account that some of their customers might not want to eat where there are open guns. Frightened people like burgers too.

I completely understand that OC advocates are exercising their rights. However, THEY have to understand that not everybody likes what they do, and a business owner ALSO has rights. If you're going to openly do something that many people fear and dislike, don't be surprised when you get anxious looks and start seeing signs. You don't have a right to the approval of others.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,512 Posts
Actually I think it's perfectly rational. They had an incident, they did something about it that's not terrible. And they have to take into account that some of their customers might not want to eat where there are open guns. Frightened people like burgers too.

I completely understand that OC advocates are exercising their rights. However, THEY have to understand that not everybody likes what they do, and a business owner ALSO has rights. If you're going to openly do something that many people fear and dislike, don't be surprised when you get anxious looks and start seeing signs. You don't have a right to the approval of others.
So if I don't like to have to eat around people with long hair and tattoos, they should be made to wear a hat and shirts that cover the tattoos so I feel comfortable?
 
1 - 20 of 98 Posts
Top