Interesting experience at a "no firearms allowed" restaurant

[vito]

This past week I had an interesting experience while visiting my son in Madison, WI. We went out for dinner, and as we entered the restaurant I saw the "No firearms allowed" sign in the window (I was not carrying), so I asked to speak with the manager.

I asked him why the sign was there, since he surely knew that a criminal, intent on doing harm, was not going to obey the sign, and that all the sign accomplishes is to discourage lawfully carrying patrons from being prepared to defend themselves and others should the need arise. He seemed really confused, stating several times that the sign was intended to keep guns out of the restaurant, thus making it "safer" for everyone. I again asked him if he really believed that the sign would stop a criminal, and he hemmed and hawed and then said, "well, having a no gun policy makes the customers feel safer, knowing that the person sitting at the next table is not carrying a loaded gun". So I again asked him, what is more important, actual safety, i.e., where law abiding citizens are able to stop a criminal, or the false perception of safety of having everyone make believe that a sign stops thugs were coming into the restaurant? He just kept repeating, it makes customers feel safer.

I also asked him if he was aware that most of the multiple-shooting incidents that have occurred in recent years have taken place is supposedly safe, "gun-free" zones, and that this might not be a coincidence. Maybe criminals actively choose such settings, hoping to be able to create mayhem unopposed. He did not respond to this comment at all.

I ended the conversation by telling him that I can legally carry in his state, and that had I been armed I would have obeyed his sign and taken the family to another restaurant. That didn't seem to faze him at all.

What was really discouraging about the whole incident was that my son, who is in law enforcement, seems to agree with this manager that having a "no guns allowed" policy makes him, and likely other customers "feel" safer. Amazing and sad.

 

[Don 73]

I will have a comment on this, but it will have to wait, I just got off work and I've had my fill for the day dealing with idiots (The Store Manager, NOT the OP)

 

[hudsonvalley]

The sheeple like to eat in peace....they think a sign on the fence that reads NO WOLVES will keep the critters out....vote with your wallets guys...send a letter and let them know how you feel....have all your like minded, cash carrying, food eating friends sign it too....

 

[hangnoose]

I AGREE IN THEORY

In reality you are never gonna change a real anti's mind, just like they aren't gonna change our minds. Neither really appreciates a sermon on why we should flip sides. If/when the owner/corporate realize the sign may actually be endangering/losing customers as well as costing them $, then they might see the light. My 2 cents.

 

[Arik]

Man I sure would hate it if people kept coming up to me and telling me how to run my business.

It's his problem not yours. He can have a sign if he likes and you can eat where you like

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[budster]

Luby's in Texas had the same sign and was shot up a number of years ago. The witnesses stated it was like a "slaughter house".

 

[cracker57]

Madison, WI. I unfortunately live here and that's the way the sheeple think. I like the no wolfs allowed on the fence comparison, funny how that makes no sense to the sheeple.

 

[Arik]

Luby's in Texas had the same sign and was shot up a number of years ago. The witnesses stated it was like a "slaughter house".

Yea but didn't that guy drive through the restaurant first? He might have been going to fast to see the sign

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyj]

Hi:
At my age my eye sight is somewhat limited, so I NEVER observed the "No Guns Allowed" signs. CONCEALED means out of sight.

 

[walkin' trails]

The manager is not likely the owner, and the sign may not be his policy - abd he's probably not a gun person or a WI hunter so he can't see the dangers of that mentality. Arguing with people like that is a waist of good air, and it's better to spend your money at businesses that appreciate your patronage.

 

[SMSgt]

"I ended the conversation by telling him that I can legally carry in his state, and that had I been armed I would have obeyed his sign and taken the family to another restaurant. That didn't seem to faze him at all. "

Unfortunately, that's the case in the vast majority of business owners' feelings. To them, it's better to lose one gun-carrying customer than dozens of gun-fearing customers.

 

[BrianE]

Hi:
At my age my eye sight is somewhat limited, so I NEVER observed the "No Guns Allowed" signs. CONCEALED means out of sight.

I follow Jimmy ..... what sign? :what:

 

[LoboGunLeather]

You are certainly within your rights to make your opinions known to the manager. The manager is certainly within his rights to ignore you if he so chooses.

Every restaurant I know of is private property, open to the public only for the conduct of business under the terms and conditions set and controlled by the owners.

The point here is that I must respect the rights of others if I am to have any reasonable expectation that they must respect my rights.

I do not engage in confrontations with those who post their premises as "gun free zones". I simply take my business elsewhere. Whenever possible I make sure that they see me taking my business elsewhere, such as the day that I closed a bank account with a sizable withdrawal (refusing a check and insisting on cash) and carried it across the street to another bank.

I like to send a simple card in the mail announcing my intention to take my trade elsewhere because of their policies. No need to make a scene, engage in a confrontation, or try to force an argument.

 

[RobzGuns]

Here in TX, unless it's an official "30.06", or "51%" sign, a simple 'No Guns' sticker (or sign) is nothing more than 'Management's Request'. If truly carrying concealed, Management would not know if you're carrying. If they DID properly identify a concealed weapon, they could only ask you to leave and charge you for trespassing if you did Not leave when requested.

I no longer bother to confront business owners about the issue.
If the establishment has something I like enough to enter for, I ignore the unofficial sign and carry anyway. If the establishment does NOT have anything I like enough to enter for, I simply turn around and don't give them any of my money.

The only question I have for the OP is... Why WEREN'T you carrying that day? Was it the Wolves' Day Off?

 

[zonker5]

Luby's in Texas had the same sign and was shot up a number of years ago. The witnesses stated it was like a "slaughter house".

I don't know why the Luby's would have had such a sign, at that time Texas did not have concealed carry.

 

[SgtLumpy]

Don't the majority of restaurant shootings occur when a customer's gun goes off accidentally while he's enjoying a plate of wings?


Sgt Lumpy

 

[Arik]

I have never seen one of these signs and I'm not making a joke...I really have never seen one

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[thebeamanater107]

No gun policies also makes the business insurance cheaper. Lowering operating cost makes higher profits.

I personally would take money from whoever decides to shop at my store. My policy would be no open carry. If it's concealed, keep it concealed. When people start shooting I have no control, and a threat of a lifelong ban from my store won't even be considered if you're defending your life or family.

the original point and click interface, by Smith and Wesson

 

[Lockback]

This past week I had an interesting experience while visiting my son in Madison, WI. We went out for dinner, and as we entered the restaurant I saw the "No firearms allowed" sign in the window (I was not carrying), so I asked to speak with the manager.

I asked him why the sign was there, since he surely knew that a criminal, intent on doing harm, was not going to obey the sign, and that all the sign accomplishes is to discourage lawfully carrying patrons from being prepared to defend themselves and others should the need arise. He seemed really confused, stating several times that the sign was intended to keep guns out of the restaurant, thus making it "safer" for everyone. I again asked him if he really believed that the sign would stop a criminal, and he hemmed and hawed and then said, "well, having a no gun policy makes the customers feel safer, knowing that the person sitting at the next table is not carrying a loaded gun". So I again asked him, what is more important, actual safety, i.e., where law abiding citizens are able to stop a criminal, or the false perception of safety of having everyone make believe that a sign stops thugs were coming into the restaurant? He just kept repeating, it makes customers feel safer.

I also asked him if he was aware that most of the multiple-shooting incidents that have occurred in recent years have taken place is supposedly safe, "gun-free" zones, and that this might not be a coincidence. Maybe criminals actively choose such settings, hoping to be able to create mayhem unopposed. He did not respond to this comment at all.

I ended the conversation by telling him that I can legally carry in his state, and that had I been armed I would have obeyed his sign and taken the family to another restaurant. That didn't seem to faze him at all.

What was really discouraging about the whole incident was that my son, who is in law enforcement, seems to agree with this manager that having a "no guns allowed" policy makes him, and likely other customers "feel" safer. Amazing and sad.

Excellent post.
And, yes, discouraging on a couple of levels.

 

[Krell1]

With concealed carry, a lot of thought has to go into when and if you ever need to draw the weapon. I like to think I'm protected when I carry however, with the laws in place these days, the law seems many times to be on the side of the criminal.
I tend to agree with those who commented that the gun is concealed and no one would know you were carrying. The management and other patrons would never be aware that you're doing so. If you did, in fact, need to draw your weapon to protect your life, as well as others, you should be thanked for your action. The law however, may see it otherwise.

 

[chud333]

I'm also like Jimmy, My eyesight is'nt what it used to be and i
am sure i have "missed" a couple of these signs.
Carry it concealed and there are no problems fellas.
End of story/problem. While confronting the manager makes
you feel better it will do no good most of the time.
Vote with your feet if your so inclined. Then tell your friends
of the business with the backwards policy of this store.
They won't get dime one from me if they post this sign.

Chuck

 

[44 Mag Fan]

Don't have that problem here in Alabama. Almost everyone is carrying..

 

[shouldazagged]

My policy would be no open carry. If it's concealed, keep it concealed.

I understand how open carry would agitate people who are afraid of guns or angered by seeing them. What they can't see should be of no concern.

But having said that, I'll add that I will neither waste my breath arguing with a no-guns store or restaurant manager nor patronize his or her establishment. I haven't the patience for the former or the inclination for the latter.

 

[thebeamanater107]

I understand how open carry would agitate people who are afraid of guns or angered by seeing them. What they can't see should be of no concern.

But having said that, I'll add that I will neither waste my breath arguing with a store or restaurant manager nor patronize his or her establishment. I haven't the patience for the former or the inclination for the latter.

I'd agree. Anti gun people and pro gun people both have rights to their opinions, and they both have the freedom to run their store/business however they choose. The issue is when someone tries to take one of my hobbies and freedoms away.

I was at a gun store recently looking at a gun. I pulled mine out to compare it. After maybe 30 seconds the employee asked if I could holster mine since it was loaded and out. I understand the theory that the employee is in control of any and all guns that are in my hands that I haven't paid for, and I understand the safety deals with him not knowing how intelligent or safety minded I am. So, obeying simple rules is all fine and good, but I'm against a no guns policy, especially those zero tolerance deals

the original point and click interface, by Smith and Wesson

 

[walkin' trails]

I have yet to see a fat antigunner who would even notice the lack of a "no guns" sign on the front door of a food establishment, let alone let that get in between him and food anymore than a malcontent bent on mayhem would let the presence of said sign stop him from the intended crime.

 

[Fastbolt]

This past week I had an interesting experience while visiting my son in Madison, WI. We went out for dinner, and as we entered the restaurant I saw the "No firearms allowed" sign in the window (I was not carrying), so I asked to speak with the manager.

I asked him why the sign was there, since he surely knew that a criminal, intent on doing harm, was not going to obey the sign, and that all the sign accomplishes is to discourage lawfully carrying patrons from being prepared to defend themselves and others should the need arise. He seemed really confused, stating several times that the sign was intended to keep guns out of the restaurant, thus making it "safer" for everyone. I again asked him if he really believed that the sign would stop a criminal, and he hemmed and hawed and then said, "well, having a no gun policy makes the customers feel safer, knowing that the person sitting at the next table is not carrying a loaded gun". So I again asked him, what is more important, actual safety, i.e., where law abiding citizens are able to stop a criminal, or the false perception of safety of having everyone make believe that a sign stops thugs were coming into the restaurant? He just kept repeating, it makes customers feel safer.

I also asked him if he was aware that most of the multiple-shooting incidents that have occurred in recent years have taken place is supposedly safe, "gun-free" zones, and that this might not be a coincidence. Maybe criminals actively choose such settings, hoping to be able to create mayhem unopposed. He did not respond to this comment at all.

I ended the conversation by telling him that I can legally carry in his state, and that had I been armed I would have obeyed his sign and taken the family to another restaurant. That didn't seem to faze him at all.

What was really discouraging about the whole incident was that my son, who is in law enforcement, seems to agree with this manager that having a "no guns allowed" policy makes him, and likely other customers "feel" safer. Amazing and sad.

Well, looking at it from the perspective of ND's that have occurred when folks carrying concealed handguns have experienced problems with their holsters, manipulation/checking of their weapons, or have otherwise engaged in some type of inappropriate conduct which has resulted in a ND in some restaurant (including in the restrooms), it probably makes sense to some management/owners.

In risk management it's known as "predictable is preventable."

When you consider that there's a dismaying number of folks in the general public who can't seem to walk, push a shopping cart or drive their motor vehicles without needlessly endangering others, it's not hard to see how the owner of a private business might want to cater to the perception of increased safety from firearm accidents/ND's in an environment intended to encourage family presence.

Can a person of criminal intention still decide to break the law in such an establishment? Of course.

I can also easily see some owner(s) deciding that more potential patrons may feel "safer" from accidental/careless gun handling, and give their patronage to the business, than those who may take umbrage at some perceived "slight" against their RTKBA in public (albeit on private property).

Freedom of choice, right?

If one "side" wants to prohibit firearms from their business (and it's permitted within local/state laws), and another "side" wants to take their business elsewhere if they're disallowed from bringing a gun into the business ... it's not hard to argue that both sides are right, from their perspectives within our free society.

If you don't want to join a nudist colony or visit a lawful nude beach ... you're free not to do so, right?

 

[RobzGuns]

If you don't want to join a nudist colony or visit a lawful nude beach ... you're free not to do so, right?

Hmm... I would not be able to join a Nudist Colony, nor visit a Nude Beach, because I would not be able to Conceal Carry. I have no orifice large enough to conceal my carry piece.
Wait a sec... couldn't that be considered discrimination of some sort??

 

[SgtLumpy]

There are restaurants in Arizona that give you a discount if you're carrying.

I don't think there any in New York or Calif that offer that...


Sgt Lumpy

 

[KLYDE]

Hi:
At my age my eye sight is somewhat limited, so I NEVER observed the "No Guns Allowed" signs. CONCEALED means out of sight.

My thoughts exactly!!!

 

[Mydogmax]

You are certainly within your rights to make your opinions known to the manager. The manager is certainly within his rights to ignore you if he so chooses.

Every restaurant I know of is private property, open to the public only for the conduct of business under the terms and conditions set and controlled by the owners.

The point here is that I must respect the rights of others if I am to have any reasonable expectation that they must respect my rights.

I do not engage in confrontations with those who post their premises as "gun free zones". I simply take my business elsewhere. Whenever possible I make sure that they see me taking my business elsewhere, such as the day that I closed a bank account with a sizable withdrawal (refusing a check and insisting on cash) and carried it across the street to another bank.

I like to send a simple card in the mail announcing my intention to take my trade elsewhere because of their policies. No need to make a scene, engage in a confrontation, or try to force an argument.

I think that Lobo's got the best answer on this one.
I guess my best analogy would be all the restaurants in Minnesota that ban smoking. I am a smoker and have to respect the fact that I can not smoke in those places. Instead I go to places with outdoor patios that allow smoking. I do not bother to debate the ban on indoor smoking with managers. Why cause the hassle? And yes I know, no bad guy is going to come into a restaurant and start to shoot up the place with his cigarettes and I have to defend myself by throwing my cigarettes at him. Sorry, best analogy I could think of.