Chipotle: Don't bring guns in our stores
- Thread starter Ringo
- Start date
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Why is every one of these discussions always about you? This happened in Dallas, TX, and the people pictured had permission from store management to be there doing what they were doing. An employee took the picture that's causing all the uproar. You're not a restauranteur, you're not a Texan, you're not inclined towards OC, and you regularly take the law enforcement side of controversies that they're involved in (though not always, I'll give you that), so why do you think that what you would do in the business you were in, while in NY where OC is rare, if legal at all(?), and in a situation for which no LE was ever involved and the only "controversy" was manufactured by a Bloomie side-project - would be of any interest to anybody discussing this story?
Punch
New member
Nobody personally, or I would have quoted the post in question. Also, this is not the only gun forum that I am on. In fact, the people here are among the smartest I have seen. The problem that I have with some posts is that there seems to be a connection between Second Amendment and personal choice. I have seen it go so far as to make it look like if you don't think that every living life form has the God given right to carry a thermonuclear device any place they want to at any time, they are Godless Communists that hate America and the Constitution. Sorry, but these people are retarded. I think that I have the right to tell someone carrying a tactidouche rifle at the ready on my property to GTFO without in any way or form believing that the Federal or State Government has the right to prevent him from owning or carrying said rifle in public.
BluesStringer
Les Brers
And your point is?
Maybe it's the store manager who invited them in who's retarded. Maybe it's the Bloomberg-affiliated Mommies who trolled the Open Carry Texas FaceBook page for pictures they could manufacture a controversy where none existed before who's retarded? Nah. Gotta be the OC'ers, right?
With 2nd Amendment "supporters" like you, who needs the Mommies?
That's going to be difficult considering it's one of your (hypothetical) employees taking pictures of the guys. Or are you going to fire the photog for taking pictures of people your manager invited into your store?
One might wonder why someone who equates a modern semi-auto military pattern rifle with a thermonuclear device so as to emphasize the level of mockery he is foisting towards folks who were invited into a place they had every legal right to be, and then refer to the rifles as "tactidouche" to the readers of a forum that probably 80% or better of the members (your readers) own one or more nearly identical pieces of personal property, would feel qualified to judge others as being "retarded." Perhaps not being qualified and passing such judgments in spite of that fact is actual evidence that such a person is, himself, retarded?
Governments in America don't have "rights," they have authorities. They are supposed to be extremely limited to specific powers delineated in the Constitution, both federal and state. Every state has something approximating the verbiage in the 2nd Amendment in their own constitutions, and many have verbiage that leaves much less room for interpretation than does the federal Constitution/2nd Amendment. So to the extent that a right defined and then limiting government intrusion in the exercise of by saying, "shall not be infringed," is being infringed, it is a usurpation of the authorities granted to government by We, The People. In other words, F government, especially the usurping, law-breaking, corrupt and illegitimate government that simply by trolling websites like this to put people on lists that can adversely effect their rights to travel freely, are proving that they're all those things.
Speaking in terms of any American government having "rights" is also evidence of either a lousy education, or an inability to learn what was taught at a decent school, the latter of which may be the result of retardation also.
Blues
Firefighterchen
OC for Tactical Advantage
I think you misread my reply...I agree there is more money to lose if the anti gun or gun phobic stop eating there...then if gun owners stopped eating there...only because the moms would actually stop eating there...not so much with gun supporters...gun supporters is a losing battle...could bucks to the N R A and they are done.
Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
telpinaro
New member
Link Removed
Hmm.
I get the point, I guess. It might get you hassled less if you notify the police in advance, and they can save time by not going to check out calls if they already know you're there, especially if they are open carry friendly (not that you should have to, but if you want the option...). And increasing awareness is always good, though my sign would be liable to say "if you want me to stop OC-ing this, legalize OC for handguns." And forcing businesses to take a stand and either publicly ban or allow OC whether they want to or not is a nasty game the Mom's Demand people play, so I can see not posting public pictures without the permission of the business. Besides, if someone were to post a picture of me online without permission, I'd be furious.
Whole thing still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, though. What's with the black powder revolvers? I don't know Texas law; are they legal to open carry? Or are they trying to get them to be legal? If so, they're aiming very low...
Hmm.
I get the point, I guess. It might get you hassled less if you notify the police in advance, and they can save time by not going to check out calls if they already know you're there, especially if they are open carry friendly (not that you should have to, but if you want the option...). And increasing awareness is always good, though my sign would be liable to say "if you want me to stop OC-ing this, legalize OC for handguns." And forcing businesses to take a stand and either publicly ban or allow OC whether they want to or not is a nasty game the Mom's Demand people play, so I can see not posting public pictures without the permission of the business. Besides, if someone were to post a picture of me online without permission, I'd be furious.
Whole thing still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, though. What's with the black powder revolvers? I don't know Texas law; are they legal to open carry? Or are they trying to get them to be legal? If so, they're aiming very low...
BC1
,
When I use the term "me" or "I" I'm talking about anyone. A general opinion.
BC1
,
Correct. State laws provide for the rights of property owners to be free of the stench of others presence. That includes kicking anyone and their gun out for whatever reason or for no reason at all. And when such person resists they may be ejected physically... in complete compliance with the law. OH castle doctrine too. That's the real beauty of America. Show me a state and I'll show you a law that protects the privacy and property of the owner. The issue of carrying a gun on private property is a moot point. Before one can argue they have a right to posses the gun they must first have the right to be there at all... which they don't.
.
The BOR limits the power of the government. The 2nd is between the people and their government, not between the people. If the law required me to allow someone on my property armed, castle doctrine would be quite different wouldn't it?
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Only antique black powder or fully authentic modern replica-designed handguns can be open carried. The antique or replica has to be circa 1898 or older. That date may have changed recently. I read somewhere, maybe here I don't remember, that ATF made the date later to 1913 or somewhere in that neighborhood. Transfers of weapons of that age don't require FFL involvement, and I imagine TX just adopted that standard from NFA34 or GCA68, whichever controls that particular issue (GCA68 I think).
Blues
E
ezkl2230
Guest
Let's see if this is going to be as effective for Chipotle as it was for Jack in the Box and The Pit:
10 days after declaring themselves "gun free," one Jack in the Box was hit by armed robbers - twice, and the newest location of The Pit (featuring a custom made no weapons/no concealed firearms sign
, which had just opened, was the scene of an armed robbery in which the employees were assaulted. The original Pit was host to one of Gabby Gifford's anti-gun stops last year.
Link Removed
Link Removed
10 days after declaring themselves "gun free," one Jack in the Box was hit by armed robbers - twice, and the newest location of The Pit (featuring a custom made no weapons/no concealed firearms sign
Link Removed
Link Removed
mappow
New member
Yea, that about sums it up. Thanks for that quality input, brother! Ever reply to someone's posts in less then three paragraphs? Just cause you believe in a point doesn't mean you can force feed all your opinion. No disrespect, I've "liked" many of your posts but don't you should not dictate or force your ideas or even belittle someone because they don't agree with you. THAT is the Liberal trait you seem to preach against. You see through your eyes, I see through mine.
We both respect and fully support the COTUS. Put your ego aside and accept your not the President, Congressmen, Senator or possible the County Councilmen. You are merely a poster on a web site. Prove that you're totally engaged or not. PM me if needed. BUT don't beat me up because I have a difference of opinion. Be ENAGED in the process or screw and complain about the process. Pick a side.
I'm sure there will be a ten paragraph response. I ask to keep it pithy. OR NOT. Still Love Ya Brother!!!!!
telpinaro
New member
Oh. Fun. Cause I'd totally carry around an antique that was likely difficult to acquire. Not keep it in a pretty display case or anything like that. That's only for valuable pieces of history. :sarcastic:
Sent from my SCH-I545 using USA Carry mobile app
gunnerbob
PEW Professional
Hmm, I've never eaten at a Chipolte... and I never will. Without getting into the particulars of this incident (or lack of one, I guess)... if Chipolte wants to ban the carry of weapons in their restaurants, okay... cool beans! Don't like it? Don't go there....
Me personally, I would love to see an environment where citizens could carry their long guns, hand guns or what ever other type of gun they chose to carry out in public and people not freak out. I have zero issue with people carrying SKSs, ARs, AKs or whatever around me... in fact, I feel right at home! Perhaps my opinion is formed from experiences that many members here don't share... in fact, I'm sure that's the case. I hate not having a long gun on me... I feel the most safe when I've got my AK with me. IDK, maybe some of you should spend some time getting shot at to appreciate my opinion.
Anyway, Blues is right... all of us 2A supporters (or supposed supporters) are spending minutes and minutes b!tching amongst ourselves about how these guys carried, what they carried and how they're "morons", "@ssholes" and "idiots". Seems to me, some of us here are those things more often than not when it comes to defending the thing we claim to love so much. The way I see it, if you're not considered "extreme" in your opinions by the Socialists, Communists, Fascists, Progressives and/or Liberals when it comes to weapons Rights... I'm probably not going to like you very much, a fact of which nobody should give a sh!t about.
Oh, the things we argue about here...
Me personally, I would love to see an environment where citizens could carry their long guns, hand guns or what ever other type of gun they chose to carry out in public and people not freak out. I have zero issue with people carrying SKSs, ARs, AKs or whatever around me... in fact, I feel right at home! Perhaps my opinion is formed from experiences that many members here don't share... in fact, I'm sure that's the case. I hate not having a long gun on me... I feel the most safe when I've got my AK with me. IDK, maybe some of you should spend some time getting shot at to appreciate my opinion.
Anyway, Blues is right... all of us 2A supporters (or supposed supporters) are spending minutes and minutes b!tching amongst ourselves about how these guys carried, what they carried and how they're "morons", "@ssholes" and "idiots". Seems to me, some of us here are those things more often than not when it comes to defending the thing we claim to love so much. The way I see it, if you're not considered "extreme" in your opinions by the Socialists, Communists, Fascists, Progressives and/or Liberals when it comes to weapons Rights... I'm probably not going to like you very much, a fact of which nobody should give a sh!t about.
Oh, the things we argue about here...
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Yeah, all the time. The one just two posts before this gem that I'm replying to was one appropriately short paragraph. I respond to what people say - verbatim - I don't go off on tangents that no one has even said a word about, which brings up one of the many questions I asked of you that you refused to answer, what anti-cop stuff was anyone "spewing" in this thread?
So we've come full circle, huh mappow? The first exchange that I remember having with you was when you argued for several posts that I should "put my money where my mouth is" by becoming a contributing member. Of course the fact that you are not now, nor were you then, a moderator of any kind, didn't stop you from telling me to "temper" my posts about a poster who was eventually banned because he posted outright lies, never sourced anything, and stubbornly and actively refused to ever disclose where he got the tripe he posted when asked specifically about his sourcing.
The other day you scolded me and at least one other poster (maybe more, don't remember) about feeding a troll, and now you're telling how I can or cannot express my opinions. What's up with you? Who do you think you are to tell others who haven't done anything but respond to what you yourself say - verbatim - how to post, when or if to become a financial contributor to the site, whether or not toy with idiot trolls?
As I said in one of my replies to you in the linked thread, "I wasn't aware that I was under any obligation to adjust my posting style, such as it is, to your liking. Actually, I don't think I am, and therefore, won't. Get over it."
So freakin' get over it. If you don't like my posting style, just scroll on by. If you want to call OC'ers idiots, expect to get push-back from OC'ers on this site, including this OC'er. Put on your freakin' big-boy pants and worry about what you say instead of what I say or how I say it.
Uh...yeah sure.
Sure, I should take this advice from the guy who said, "Totally inane action which gives more fodder to the anti's. IMO, friggin idiots" about people who sought and received permission to be there carrying their rifles. And you said it because you would never carry a long gun into a business, so who's "dictating" or "forcing" their ideas on people here, mappow? Not me. I'm just doing the research that most people don't care enough about the subject to go to the trouble to find, or they'er just too lazy to find the circumstances before they go off half-cocked calling people friggin' idiots and such.
No, the liberal trait that I "preached" about earlier in this thread was the obvious trend that you and others displayed towards being manipulated into slamming other gun owners rather than the Bloomberg-affiliated Mommies who manufactured the controversy that you fell for hook, line and sinker. I "preached" that Alinsky saw you guys comin' decades ago, and he most certainly did.
Yep. And I respond to what you say you see through yours. It's called a "discussion forum" for a reason.
Un-freakin'-believable! This from the same guy who thought he was qualified to basically tax me for the privilege of posting on this site! And you have the gall to talk about my inflated ego???? Buy a freakin' clue, mappow.
What the heck does that even mean? Why would I PM you, and what would it "prove" if I did? Is this like a "I'll-meet-you-in-the-playground-after-school-and-we'll-settle-this-thing" kind of nonsense?
Stop with the phony "love ya man" BS. And let me guess, after two years since the last election season, you're still talkin' about whether or not I *should* vote, right? Otherwise, to what "process" do you refer? And if I'm right, just add that to the list of you forcing your opinions about not only what and how I should say things, but you have no ability to stifle yourself from forcing your opinions on me about what I should do!
Go pound sand.
Blues
mappow
New member
Yadda, yadda, yadda.
-
The Anti-cop was not necessarily this thread but other posts on other threads. I stated it only because there is a lot of anti-LEO's posts. Never said or stated it was you, but if the shoe fits or if your conscience scrams rebuttal, hell spew.
As for other issues you seem to have problems with, know that I don't agree with you. Get over it, all don't consider you the guru of the COTUS or an almighty dictator of truth and freedom.
Again hard to understand that IF you're so articulate in your post you would not have run for office. You project this KNOW-ALL-SEE ALL but your engagement OTHER than from a keyboard is apparently non-existent. Hench I asked about PM'ing me if you're engaged in your community or just spewing krapt because it helps you feel superior. OR maybe that Cialas thing with a continual four hour erection.
Still love ya brother........
-
The Anti-cop was not necessarily this thread but other posts on other threads. I stated it only because there is a lot of anti-LEO's posts. Never said or stated it was you, but if the shoe fits or if your conscience scrams rebuttal, hell spew.
As for other issues you seem to have problems with, know that I don't agree with you. Get over it, all don't consider you the guru of the COTUS or an almighty dictator of truth and freedom.
Again hard to understand that IF you're so articulate in your post you would not have run for office. You project this KNOW-ALL-SEE ALL but your engagement OTHER than from a keyboard is apparently non-existent. Hench I asked about PM'ing me if you're engaged in your community or just spewing krapt because it helps you feel superior. OR maybe that Cialas thing with a continual four hour erection.
Still love ya brother........
Rhino
New member
Certainly your prerogative. I was just pointing out that opposition to long guns, or to the open display of guns at all, wasn't the impetus for the decision by Chipotle. Long guns were prohibited by TABC regulation and handgun OC isn't legal in Texas. The decision by Chipotle was political caving to an outside instigator who wasn't their customer, who wasn't even present the day the picture was taken, and who manufactured a controversy that never even existed. Guns would no longer have been displayed in that restaurant without any decision on their part, and they would have avoided alienating a large portion of their customer base if they had done nothing but cite the TABC regs. There's a big difference between the 'average person' in Texas and the 'average person' in Connecticut. People in Texas generally aren't bothered very much by the sight of a gun. They are however, generally bothered when they feel someone tramples their gun rights without good cause, and this situation would fit that description in their eyes. Yes, some customers don't want to see guns. But the existing TABC regulations mean they weren't going to see them anymore anyway. Chipotle went a step further by saying they also don't want the guns that people can't see. In Texas, that's going to alienate far more customers than the sight of the long guns did, especially when the ban serves no purpose whatsoever. You cite customer service and reputation as they apply to what the customer sees in the store, but the decision by Chipotle doesn't affect what's seen in the store, so that customer service and reputation don't apply in this case.
Rhino
New member
The moms can't stop eating there because they were never there in the first place. They found the picture on the internet and took offense to it. Nobody at the restaurant had a problem with them carrying the rifles. And in Texas, there is not more money to lose if the anti gun or gun phobic stop eating there. Quite the contrary.
Rock_Castle
New member
^^^^^^This is the money post.
r1derbike
New member
Nothing to add of substance to the fray, but one observation about one of the businesses mentioned; I will never eat a taco I may see through.
My wife is Hispanic, and her whole family loves-the-lard or whatever brand of motor oil those tortillas are cooked in. The meat? Chihuahua maybe?
Heart attack in a sack. I usually sit and watch them eat, trying to determine who ingested the greatest amount of liquid death by how much is left on each plate.
Back on topic; how do we collectively show "Moms Demand Action" that they have misrepresented and embellished their "take" on the business in question? Or, is blatant stupidity part of their DNA which cannot be modified?
Show them their ignorance and knee-jerk emotional hysteria, and they still don't get it. I can't imagine such a myopic, ill-informed body of hand-wringers still exists in this age of instant information gathering...
...unless that is their modus operandi to snare like-minded, hysterical followers? I suppose being clueless has become a national disability?
My wife is Hispanic, and her whole family loves-the-lard or whatever brand of motor oil those tortillas are cooked in. The meat? Chihuahua maybe?
Heart attack in a sack. I usually sit and watch them eat, trying to determine who ingested the greatest amount of liquid death by how much is left on each plate.
Back on topic; how do we collectively show "Moms Demand Action" that they have misrepresented and embellished their "take" on the business in question? Or, is blatant stupidity part of their DNA which cannot be modified?
Show them their ignorance and knee-jerk emotional hysteria, and they still don't get it. I can't imagine such a myopic, ill-informed body of hand-wringers still exists in this age of instant information gathering...
...unless that is their modus operandi to snare like-minded, hysterical followers? I suppose being clueless has become a national disability?
BluesStringer
Les Brers
Look dude, I don't swing that way, and I already asked you to stop, so now you're just flat out trolling.
Run for office? Participate in the government that I believe to my core is as corrupt and tyrannical as Rome or any other once-great power that fell under the weight of its own usurped core principles? Not on your life. I thought about becoming a cop for about one hot second, and realized that I support freedom for everybody and despise the mindset that thinks authoritarianism trumps peoples' ability to be left alone by government. I don't tell people what to do, don't want to tell people what to do, and I'm not hypocritical enough to run for office, "win," and then participate in the corrupt system that passes illegitimate laws telling cops what more they can get away with while trampling The Peoples' rights. This is not hyperbole - I think people who participate in government these days unequivocally prove that they're mentally ill.
A "dictator of freedom." Now there's a turn of a phrase. You disagree with some belief I espouse about the Constitution or any other subject, challenge it with counter-point on the subject you're challenging. I'm no "guru." But I damn sure do do a ton of reading, and can nearly always present a rational basis for what I say. And I'm happy to admit it if I'm shown to be wrong, but people like you just make personal judgments and never even research a post before deflecting from your ignorance for as long as it takes to keep from having to research a post. These arguments like you have constantly leveled towards me for around two years now, that my posts are too long, or you don't like the way I say things, or you don't like that I don't trust or want to deal with cops at all, or that you think I should become a contributing member - blah blah blah frickin' blah - none of these posts give a counter argument to anything I say. Total deflection to avoid having to admit to yourself that my posts are well-researched, usually sourced, many times with citations to court rulings or law or whatever policy is at issue. You don't fool me. You just want to rant at me because you have nothing substantial to offer. Busted!
Now again, go pound sand.
Blues
