The response of nationwide stores to Open Carry Texas...

[ShooterMcGavin]

Without delving into the topic of what the members of OCT should be doing or refraining from doing, one of the more annoying things surrounding this situation is the response of the stores and the support they receive from members of this site for declaring "no guns in our stores". This post is not to discuss what OCT members should/n't do, nor what should be proper OC etiquette, nor what should be the law.

Because I know this will come up... I fully support private property laws. I feel that a property owner has the right, for any reason or no reason at all, to ask me or a subset of folks to leave and not return.

This thread is about the response (reaction) taken by the stores which were used as podiums for this movement. I think it was misguided. I understand their decisions and I totally support their reasons for doing so. However, I think they could have gotten the same results without drawing that polarizing line in the sand - "no guns". I think each store/chain should focus more on the issue of speech rather than guns. Carrying a long gun in public or into a store is irregular. The people are doing it to make a statement (speech). The carrying of the guns isn't hurting the stores; the statement is hurting the stores (or so the management believes, and that is what matters). My right to carry a gun ends when it harms or threatens to harm another person (not just causes fear). My right to "speak" ends when it harms or threatens to harm another person. I don't believe the people of OCT are actually causing physical danger to anyone, but if they are, they should be arrested.

The stores which are making sweeping statements about where they stand on gun rights need to stop being put on the front pages, not only by people carrying long arms, but by people using their stores as a stage to protest any movement that the management finds disruptive or harmful to their business. Rather than stating "no guns in our stores", I believe the proper stance is "no political movements within our stores". Had stores taken that approach, I would still be a customer of several local establishments. Since they have instead asked for "no guns", I will avoid them, whether I am concealed, OC, or unarmed.

Now... For those of you who I consistently hear supporting these stores for saying "no guns", because their establishments were used as a speaking platform for this movement, do you still think they made the ideal decision?

 

[SuperNaut]

I don't think it was misguided at all. This "demonstration" crap and the pushing by these OCT clowns has forced my employer to restate their position on CC and OC. We are in a different state, completely different industry, don't have a retail presence, we haven't had any protests or requests from employees one way or another, and my employer STILL felt it was necessary to make policy based on this nonsense.

Misguided? In this liability ridden and litigious society a response is necessary.

 

[hso]

Ideal, no, but about the best they could make.

They've asked people coming on their property to not bring firearms into the stores, but they've not posted them. By not posting their establishments they've avoided making carry on the premises against the law. By asking they've placated Michael Bloomberg's organization publicly (which was able to gather enough support to move the needle with these businesses while we sat around complaining).

Is it ideal by anyone's standards? Not by Bloomberg's and not to us, but as a compromise it is about as inoffensive as possible.

 

[gulogulo1970]

This is what happens when you have in your face open carry demonstrations. They are going about this in the wrong way. The general public is rejecting their methods as are many gun owners. The will end up reaping the opposite of what they want.

The stores are reacting to the reaction of the general public and I cannot blame them. I don't like it, I don't support it, but I understand their position.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

I don't think it was misguided at all. This "demonstration" crap and the pushing by these OCT clowns ...

The two statements you made seem to contradict each other. First, you said that the response of "no guns" was not misguided, and continue on to say "This demonstration crap...". In the first part, you support a request to leave guns, all guns, outside of stores (those were the requests, no exceptions to CC). Then, it sounds like you disapprove of the demonstration, which was exactly my point. It could have been a demonstration using big knives, gay rights, abortion, the tax rate, military action, ... anything. It was the demonstration that should have been dealt with harshly.

It also sounds like you dislike the sweeping decision made by your employer, and then say it is necessary. I can't totally disagree with your final statement, because there are many factors that could come into play, such as insurance agreements... However, you are now talking about employees, and not customers.

 

[Hurryin' Hoosier]

I wonder why some people can't seem to understand that merely being "legal" does not necessarily mean that something is a good idea. Then again, some people are big on getting attention.

I'd rather just continue to march with my little P-64 or my vz.70 in my pocket and make no issue about it.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

Ideal, no, but about the best they could make.
They've asked people coming on their property to not bring firearms into the stores, but they've not posted them. By not posting their establishments they've avoided making carry on the premises against the law. By asking they've placated Michael Bloomberg's organization publicly (which was able to gather enough support to move the needle with these businesses while we sat around complaining).

Is it ideal by anyone's standards? Not by Bloomberg's and not to us, but as a compromise it is about as inoffensive as possible.

Ok. You are telling me that it is less offensive to everyone to label the store "no guns", nationwide (I use "label" because that is their policy now, not a physical label), rather than label the store "no political speech campaigns here"? I am surprised that you find the latter more offensive to all, but I suppose we just have to disagree.

 

[SuperNaut]

The two statements you made seem to contradict each other.

No, not contradictory at all.

You asked if the response from these companies was misguided, and I stated that I believed it was not. Where is the contradiction?

Unless you used the word "misguided" in a different way, did you mean disproportionate, or unwarranted? Because misguided means "having improper goals or values" and the responses from these companies is not misguided, but the OCT "activists" are most definitely misguided.

However, you are now talking about employees, and not customers.

Yes, that was exactly my intent. The consequences of the OCT "demonstrations" have mostly negative effects, even on employees of companies that are completely disconnected from any of the "demonstrations."

 

[TennJed]

However, I think they could have gotten the same results without drawing that polarizing line in the sand -

The stores didn't draw a line in the sand. The OCT people drew the line. They approached the store owners and told them to make a decision to support them or not. The stores just reacted to the line drawn by others and a demand by a small percentage of gun owners who demanded they go public with a political stance.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

No, not contradictory at all.

You asked if the response from employers was misguided, and I stated that I believed it was not. Where is the contradiction?

Unless you meant "misguided" in a different way, did you meant disproportionate, or unwarranted? Because misguided means "having improper goals or values" and the responses from these companies is not misguided, but the OCT "activists" are most definitely misguided.



Yes, that was exactly my intent. The consequences of the OCT "demonstrations" have mostly negative effects, even on employees of companies that are completely disconnected from any of the "demonstrations."

When I used the word "misguided", I suppose I was defining things like this... A policy change might get the desired results, but it will be misguided by excluding other customers who don't need to be dealt with. Unless, the policy was meant to remove all guns from their stores, OC, CC, etc. In that case, it was not misguided. I expect a perfect policy change to have the desired effect, and NOT exclude other people who are not causing a problem, people who CC for example. A perfectly "guided" policy will offend the least number of people and maximize business revenue. It was also misguided in that it doesn't make the store actually safer, but that might be my own opinion and I haven't seen all the pictures of dangerous acts that you all might have seen.

If I go fishing with explosives and I blow up property and more fish than I can use, I would argue that my efforts were effective in fishing (technically), but they were quite misguided I suspect that the policy to ask for guns to be left at home did not come about from a problem in states where OC is illegal. The people who CC are now asked to leave guns out of the store, so their policy has greater effects than were necessary.

Regarding the second part, I see that your discussion went to an employer making policies for employees. No complaint or disagreement there. I just made the statement to illustrate that there are too many variables there for me to make a valid argument - if it would have been warranted.

 

[Old Fuff]

Unfortunately these days if someone enters a business (particularly a retailer that is not associated with firearms) with a slung rifle with a long magazine; those who are present have no way of knowing if they represent a peaceful demonstration or about to open fire and kill as many people as they can.

Under such circumstances most individuals would depart as quickly as they could, and his sense of situational awareness would likely cause the Old Fuff to do likewise. Understandably most business owners/operators/managers would not greet the self-appointed gun-carrier with open arms.

They're is a time and place for responsible demonstrations, and they should be organized and conducted in a manner that will attract support for their cause rather then start a public panic followed by a demand for additional legislation to undercut or prohibit whatever the demonstrators are trying to accomplish.

In this instance the unannounced open carrying of firearms under conditions where they would not be expected is clearly nonproductive in expanding or supporting the RKBA. I fully understand while many if not most business would solidly object.

I have been actively involved in the up and down battle to advance firearms rights since about 1963, and frankly I wish that this small sub-set of open carry advocates would go and jump off a high cliff. :banghead:

 

[Kleanbore]

Good for the Old Fuff!

 

[BSA1]

Here we go again. I guess it is this or another .22 ammunition hoarding thread.

FYI. In my area Wal-Mart and other businesses have not banned open carrying their stores.

 

[moxie]

Old Fuff nails it on this one!!

I'm a Texan and I don't know anyone who approves of OCT.

 

[hso]

rather than label the store "no political speech campaigns here"

They could have adopted such a policy, and most do regardless of the issues, but the laws in the individual states that permit OC of a long gun provide a place for these so-called OC activists to disingenuously hide from that provision by claiming that they're "just following the law for OC" instead of practicing political speech on the private business's property.

There is no win for the business when people abuse the conventions even 2A advocates support.

 

[razorback2003]

These guys would have been better of planning a protest at their state capitol instead of just walking into a department store with rifles.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

This post is not to discuss what OCT members should/n't do, nor what should be proper OC etiquette, nor what should be the law.

This thread is not the same that we have gone over many times, discussing what OCT is doing, should do, etc. This is about the response by the nationwide chain stores.

 

[barnbwt]

Couple Points:
-There is a philosophical division within the shooting community between pro and anti OC, nearly as vocal as pro/anti gun and for many of the same reasons; denying this is blindness
-No one was carrying openly in these places in significant numbers before these latest demonstrations...
-...Because they assumed they'd be asked to leave
-None of these stores' policies is legally binding, and stores are simply asking OC'ers to leave (we think; I'm not sure there have been any examples of it actually happening yet)
-A lot of what the OC guys are doing actually could be prosecuted as brandishing, but police/stores are not pushing this in a misguided attempt to appease us

So, what has actually happened and what have we learned? We didn't carry openly in Target because we assumed we'd upset people, some jerks did exactly that (and often while illegally brandishing), and we've been formally asked not to do it again. What is needed is a consequence for this unacceptable behavior, if we agree it is to be unacceptable (i.e. prosecute them for brandishing and they'll stop doing it )

TCB

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I don't live in Texas but OCT is the name of an organization not a general name for open carry advocacy in Texas and they have issued statements such as this one in opposition to carrying long arms in restaurants outlining a much different position than that which many people here and elsewhere are attributing to them.

It seems there are a lot of people claiming to represent OCT.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – Come and Take It Texas, Texas Carry, Gun Rights Across America and Open Carry Texas Joint Statement on OC of Long Arms – May 21, 2014

Over the past year, our members have done what no other organization has been able to do – put open carry at the forefront of the fight to restore gun rights for all Texans. As we have grown, we have had to adjust our efforts based on lessons learned through hundreds of open carry events, big and small.

Looking back, it has become clear that there is one area in which we have gotten the most resistance and suffered the largest setbacks: open carry of long arms into private businesses. This is not a new phenomenon. Early on, because of our efforts, the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission (TABC) sent a message to all TABC licensees warning them about allowing our members to open carry into their businesses. This resulted in places like Smashburger asking us to leave our guns at home. Since then, Starbucks, Wendy’s, Jack In The Box, Applebees and most recently, Chipotle have come out asking we not carry our firearms into their establishments.
Whereas, our mission is to get open carry of handguns passed in Texas, we must once again adjust in a way that shines a positive light on our efforts, our members, and our respective organizations. We are humbly and emphatically imploring our members to cease taking long arms into corporate businesses unless invited. Black Powder revolvers have proven to be very effective and align with our goal of legalizing open carry with a handgun. We do understand that not everyone will be able to afford one, but if you can, we are requesting you do so. Almost every leader has gone to Black powder for a reason. It works.

For all further open carry walks with long guns, we are adopting the following unified protocol and general policy to best ensure meeting our respective legislative mission to legalize open carry:

1) Always notify local law enforcement prior to the walk, especially the day of.
2) Carry Flags and signs during your walk to increase awareness.
3) Carry the long gun on a sling, not held.
4) Do not go into corporate businesses without prior permission, preferably not at all.
5) If asked to leave, do so quietly and do not make it a problem.
6) Do not post pics publicly if you do get permission and are able to OC in a cooperate business.
7) Do not go into businesses with TABC signs posted with a long gun (Ever).
8) If at all possible, keep to local small businesses that are 2A friendly.

We ask that members take a step back and make an objective assessment of what we are trying to accomplish and help us to get open carry passed for everyone. We must be willing and able to recognize what works and what doesn’t, but we need your help to make these efforts a success. It will be very difficult to spin holstered, black powder revolvers into a negative story. This is the goal we are currently striving for, open carry of handguns. We know everyone is working hard for this cause. It is simply time to focus on what has been proven to work. The conversation has shifted from open carry of handguns to rifles in businesses, negating our efforts and distracting us from our mission.
We are winning. Because we are winning, we have come under increased scrutiny by media and politicians. Let’s use that spotlight and make the most positive impact we can!
Carry on!

CJ Grisham, Terry Holcomb, Sr, Murdoch Pizgotti, Eric Reed
Open Carry Texas, Texas Carry, CATI-TX, GRAA

Mike

 

[Nom de Forum]

Could these Open Carry Fools actually be conspiring members of an anti-gun organization wanting to inflict the most damage to the pro-gun movement with the least expense and greatest potential for nation wide publicity? If they are, they have definitely succeeded. If they are not, isn’t time we all stop politely trying to reason with them and begin savagely and unmercifully ridiculing them? Before these guys do irreversible damage should we threaten them with ostracism? Perhaps if they know that they will not be tolerated in our presence and will have no social contact with the vast majority of shooters they will stop behaving so foolishly. I used to CCW in Target, but now Target will post signage that will make that illegal all because of a few fools.

 

[Freakshow]

A lot of what the OC guys are doing actually could be prosecuted as brandishing, but police/stores are not pushing this in a misguided attempt to appease us[/]

Just a quick observation....
In Texas, where OCT is located, the open carry of a rifle is completely legal.
So how could ANYONE be arrested, detained or whatever when what they (OCT) is doing is perfectly legal?
I curious because that statement of "brandishing" seems to me that you don't understand what is going on.

 

[Freakshow]

I warned you guys a couple of posts ago that MDA is trolling FB to find pictures to use against us!
Hence number 6 in the official OCT press release ....

"6) Do not post pics publicly if you do get permission and are able to OC in a cooperate business."

They are well aware of the fact that photos are being taken out of context and used by the antis as fuel for their gun control campaign.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

I don't live in Texas but OCT is the name of an organization not a general name for open carry advocacy in Texas and they have issued statements such as this one in opposition to carrying long arms in restaurants outlining a much different position than that which many people here and elsewhere are attributing to them.

It seems there are a lot of people claiming to represent OCT.



Mike

Mike, thanks for posting that. That makes the official policy of OCT pretty clear. They do not advocate nor support the OC of long arms into businesses. I appreciate their stance on this matter.

Mike, more to the point, you brought up some very on-topic ideas... It seems that the TABC puts the burden (or some of the burden) on licensed establishments to remove patrons who are carrying in any method. That makes it easy for a Texas policy to be misconstrued, by the policy makers or by customers. It's easier to have one, simple policy.

Secondly, some chain stores sell liquor in Texas while they don't sell alcoholic beverages in other states. That means that policy makers could, ideally, spend a lot of time/money making policies that relate to each of the 50 states... but to do it quickly and efficiently, that is not feasible.

I still don't totally agree with the quick reaction of these chain stores, but some of those ideas make sense.

 

[barnbwt]

Over the past year, our members have done what no other organization has been able to do – put open carry at the forefront of the fight to restore gun rights for all Texans.

I suppose that's one way to put it.

In Texas, where OCT is located, the open carry of a rifle is completely legal.
So how could ANYONE be arrested, detained or whatever when what they (OCT) is doing is perfectly legal?
I curious because that statement of "brandishing" seems to me that you don't understand what is going on.

I live in Texas, I supported the idea of what ya'll were doing until it became apparent that too many of ya'll didn't know what the hell you were doing, or talking about regarding this issue. The carrying of arms into TABC establishments, at any point, indicated insufficient research of statutes was done. The carrying of gun in hands is far too close to brandishing, by any definition, to be something that should have ever been tolerated.

TX does not permit the open carry of a long arm in a manner calculated to cause alarm. The very fact that people are reliably alarmed enough to call in police/take pictures/tell the newsmedia should indicate that what you are doing is wrong, and very likely prosecutable if your local authorities are so inclined. TX is mostly a pro-gun state, so most local authorities are fairly accommodating of good-natured hijinks so long as no one gets hurt. That doesn't make your activity proper, nor legal, however.

You guys are carrying guns, the embodiment of mortal fear for many people. Be at least understanding, if not respectful, of that fact, and realize that you need to go out of your way to remove any and all factors that could possibly reinforce those bad vibes in people. Trashy clothes, smug/hostile/goofy demeanor, intentionally 'scary looking' guns (see again that "calculated" part; you aren't choosing to carry long arms in order to elicit an expected public response for a political reason, now are you ? ), and a lack of respect for others' reaction to your presence & activities all serve to harden their hearts to conspire against you. And honestly, as "offensive" as it may sound, asking your scarier looking members with scraggly beards, gargantuan proportions, or naturally menacing facial expressions to avoid the photo-ops would not be a bad idea either; we're talking representation, here, and you get to control the terms of the encounter as much as you are willing to. Why would you not put your best foot forward at all times?

TCB

"They are well aware of the fact that photos are being taken out of context and used by the antis as fuel for their gun control campaign."
So why were they made or posted in the first place? :banghead:

 

[hso]

Excellent points about TABC requirements and the response from retailers.

From their website http://www.tabc.state.tx.us/home/press_releases/2013/20130906.asp

Reminder: "Long guns" prohibited in TABC-licensed businesses.
With the recent publicity surrounding the open carrying of rifles and shotguns, the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission (TABC) would like to remind the public of the following:

Although an individual may have the legal authority to openly carry certain firearms in public, a business that is licensed to sell or serve alcoholic beverages is prohibited by state law from allowing rifles or shotguns in the building.

Specifically, Section 11.61(e) of the Alcoholic Beverage Code says that TABC shall, after the opportunity for a hearing, cancel a permit if the permittee knowingly allowed a person to possess a firearm in a building on the licensed premises. There are some exceptions included in this law, including licensed concealed handguns.

If an individual does choose to carry a rifle or shotgun into a TABC-licensed business, the individual is placing the business owner's TABC license at risk. Also remember, a business owner may ask a patron to leave the premises. If the patron refuses, that individual may be subject to criminal trespassing charges under Texas Penal Code Section 30.05.

We ask that Texans, while exercising individual rights, please respect the obligations of business owners under state law.

I travel quite a bit and while my home state hasn't permitted anything more than beer sales in mass market retailers I've stopped in at plenty of WalMarts and Targets to replace some forgotten item and saw that the state permitted sales of beer and wine or beer, wine, and spirits.

Does anyone know what other states have TABC like requirements for the retailer to keep firearms out of the establishment? I'm sure that TX is a large enough market all on its own, but if other states have the same restriction then the retailer faces an additional need to make a national policy, as Shooter has pointed out, to respond promptly and efficiently to the local, regional, and national attention.