Called local mall about gun free zone


Puppy

New member
I received this answer to my questions after I sent an e-mail today. I sent them another e-mail and told them their policy to keep shoppers safe does not work, that Omaha and the mall in AZ was a test testimony to that.


[email protected] wrote: Thank you for contacting us with your inquiry regarding company policy on the possession of firearms on mall property.

Possession of any weapon at Grapevine Mills, whether concealed or displayed openly, is in violation of mall policy. This policy is intended first and foremost to maintain a safe, secure and comfortable environment at Grapevine Mills, which has always been our top priority, and to avoid any situation that could potentially place at risk the safety of our shoppers and employees.

Grapevine Mills is private property, and like virtually every other facility in the community that is accessible by the public, ownership/management has the right to prohibit the possession of weapons, both displayed or concealed, other than licensed weapons carried by law enforcement personnel.

We recognize that everyone does not endorse such a policy. However, it is the one our company embraces and enforces at each of our properties and which we believe is in the best interest of those who work and visit there.

"This policy is intended first and foremost to maintain a safe, secure and comfortable environment at Grapevine Mills, which has always been our top priority, and to avoid any situation that could potentially place at risk the safety of our shoppers and employees."

And in spite of overwhelming evidence of how wrong they are with four examples in just the past week, they are still so ^&*$%^ dumb they can't begin to comprehend the extent of their stupidity. It boggles the mind! :eek:
 

PascalFleischman

New member
I received this answer to my questions after I sent an e-mail today. I sent them another e-mail and told them their policy to keep shoppers safe does not work, that Omaha and the mall in AZ was a test testimony to that.


[email protected] wrote: Thank you for contacting us with your inquiry regarding company policy on the possession of firearms on mall property.

Possession of any weapon at Grapevine Mills, whether concealed or displayed openly, is in violation of mall policy. This policy is intended first and foremost to maintain a safe, secure and comfortable environment at Grapevine Mills, which has always been our top priority, and to avoid any situation that could potentially place at risk the safety of our shoppers and employees.

Grapevine Mills is private property, and like virtually every other facility in the community that is accessible by the public, ownership/management has the right to prohibit the possession of weapons, both displayed or concealed, other than licensed weapons carried by law enforcement personnel.

We recognize that everyone does not endorse such a policy. However, it is the one our company embraces and enforces at each of our properties and which we believe is in the best interest of those who work and visit there.

In Memphis, there are (3) Simon operated malls. The only "posting" they have is a sign of approximately 10 rules of the mall. Line 4 states "No weapons of any kind are permitted on the premises." For one, that's not a legal posting. So the worst a carrier can face would be criminal trespass if you get outed, but refuse to leave. Secondly, even if you decided to trust unarmed rent-a-cops with your safety, you'd still be in violation if you left your piece in the vehicle.
 

ecocks

New member
There you go

So, if it is not legally posted, then you know what to do.

By the way, wasn't there a shooting at Wolfchase a couple of years ago? <<Added: A shooting victim's car was found in their parking lot but the victim had been killed at another location.>> It also seems like the level of security at Raleigh Springs and Oak Court would be of interest - how have Simon's policies contributed to the safe, secure and comfortable environment maintained at those locations?
 
Last edited:

boris

New member
our local

walmart allows ccw. we don't have many probs there. except for the time the sheriff's office had a undercover drug bust that didn't go exactly according to plan?{ do they ever?!:eek:} my wife made sure that that no one "obtained" the opeator's weapon after it came out of the holster. she didn't touch it, but neither did anybody else. she did good.
 

KimberPB

New member
I received this answer to my questions after I sent an e-mail today. I sent them another e-mail and told them their policy to keep shoppers safe does not work, that Omaha and the mall in AZ was a test testimony to that.


[email protected] wrote: Thank you for contacting us with your inquiry regarding company policy on the possession of firearms on mall property.

Possession of any weapon at Grapevine Mills, whether concealed or displayed openly, is in violation of mall policy. This policy is intended first and foremost to maintain a safe, secure and comfortable environment at Grapevine Mills, which has always been our top priority, and to avoid any situation that could potentially place at risk the safety of our shoppers and employees.

Grapevine Mills is private property, and like virtually every other facility in the community that is accessible by the public, ownership/management has the right to prohibit the possession of weapons, both displayed or concealed, other than licensed weapons carried by law enforcement personnel.

We recognize that everyone does not endorse such a policy. However, it is the one our company embraces and enforces at each of our properties and which we believe is in the best interest of those who work and visit there.

So they just put, in writing, that they take all legal responsibility for your safety while on there property, right? May want to hang on to that email for later use!

Just food for thought. I read on the glocktalk forum that after the shooting the mall took down all the signs that say no guns allowed. You think their attorney informed them by posting they may be held responsible for the safety of all that were on the property?
 

PascalFleischman

New member
So, if it is not legally posted, then you know what to do.

By the way, wasn't there a shooting at Wolfchase a couple of years ago? <<Added: A shooting victim's car was found in their parking lot but the victim had been killed at another location.>> It also seems like the level of security at Raleigh Springs and Oak Court would be of interest - how have Simon's policies contributed to the safe, secure and comfortable environment maintained at those locations?


I believe you're confusing Wolf-hell with an incident maybe 15 years ago at Oak Court. I'm sure their run & hide rent-a-cops have DRASTICALLY contributed to their safe environment.
 

JC40

New member
The local mall here is owned by simon properties and i have never noticed any signs prohibiting CC.Not that i have looked that close either,but i have always carried when at this mall.I am going to check the entrance to the mall the next time i am there to see if there are signs posted or not.If there are,i will politely call the office and let them know that i will no longer do business there while they enforce such ridiculous and unsafe policies regaurding the publics safety.
 

JC40

New member
I believe you're confusing Wolf-hell with an incident maybe 15 years ago at Oak Court. I'm sure their run & hide rent-a-cops have DRASTICALLY contributed to their safe environment.
I would have to agree with the statement concerning the rent a cops.The guys at our mall would have a hard time running anywheres without a tank of oxygen strapped to their backs.It`s a feel good tactic used by the mall to make the sheeple feel at ease. Some people see the uniform and assume they are safe.others live in the real world and realize that when TSHTF,these rent a cops will be invisible.
 

ecocks

New member
Wolfchase, Oak Court

No, the incident I was thinking of was the fireman who was killed by his co-worker and the car dumped at Wolfchase in 2000. No matter though. Did they own Oak Court when that other shooting happened?

Good point on the reverse implication of their prohibition and claim that this is to make them safe, secure and comfortable. I did notice that several of their malls do in fact contain sporting goods stores which, I am pretty sure, sell firearms. Maybe they are required to have an external door for these items to be immediately removed from the premises? But then, doesn't their policy prohibit their tenants from having them on hand to sell as well as the customers? Or is it you can buy it there, but not have it there? IANAL but this sounds like an interesting discussion topic.

Below is the letter I sent on Monday to Simon Properties' RCesare, DSimon (CEO) and RSolotov (COO). Unanswered for a full day and part of Monday as well. They had responded quickly to the previous letter (I think HK sent it) so I was hoping for a fast response back.


******************************************

Dear Sir:

I was a bit surprised and, frankly, concerned, to read an excerpt
from a letter you sent recently (December 10th, 2007) reaffirming
Simon Properties' position prohibiting possession of firearms on your
premises. While this is certainly your right as a property owner in
most, if not all states, it is equally my right to wonder whether
your policy stems from a different source than a desire "...to
maintain a safe, secure and comfortable environment...and to avoid
any situation that could potentially place at risk the safety of our
shoppers and employees."

I would be curious as to whether your company actually has any
factual studies or even any sort of rational indication that
prohibiting lawful carrying of weapons on your properties has any
effect whatsoever in reducing gun fatalities in your facilities.
Please feel free to cite any instances where policies similar to
yours have in any way inhibited firearms-related violence. I can only
recall incidents such as have occurred at Virginia Tech University,
Appalachian School of Law, Trolley Square (a former Simon Property),
Tacoma Mall (Simon Property), the recent Westroad Mall shooting
(Simon Property) and several other gun-free zone locations such as
public schools. Are there per capita customer numbers somewhere
which indicate that similar policies have, in fact, slowed or reduced
these types of occurrences?

Your letter went on to state the following: "We recognize that
everyone does not endorse such a policy. However, it is the one our
company embraces and enforces at each of our properties and which we
believe is in the best interest of those who work and visit there."
At some point you might want to provide some proof that your
rationale has any substance and justify your claim as to a "safe,
secure and comfortable environment" because I would not feel any of
those three emotions given your lack of success in meeting this
objective.

Sincerely,

Edward Cocks
 

calvin

Benevolent Overlord
I would have to agree with the statement concerning the rent a cops.The guys at our mall would have a hard time running anywheres without a tank of oxygen strapped to their backs.It`s a feel good tactic used by the mall to make the sheeple feel at ease. Some people see the uniform and assume they are safe.others live in the real world and realize that when TSHTF,these rent a cops will be invisible.

I think even this could be too generous. The security guards I see tend to be there to protect the stores from shoplifters not you personally.

Or maybe they are protecting you from high prices due to excessive shoplifting? :D
 

HK4U

New member
security

I think even this could be too generous. The security guards I see tend to be there to protect the stores from shoplifters not you personally.

Or maybe they are protecting you from high prices due to excessive shoplifting? :D


Most places that have security only want an "appearence" of security. They are not willing to pay the price to have "real" security. I have always felt that the term unarmed security is a contridiction in terms.
 

hpj3

New member
Many would say, "Oh NO! Don't call the business and ask or they will post and then what will you do?" QUOTE]...

Not sure what you're getting at here... this is exactly what should should not be done IF the business is not posted or not legally posted IAW the laws in your state. Bringing this to the attention of the owner/manager/whom ever could result in it becoming legally posted. Know the laws in your state... and remember - silence can work on our behalf.
 

kwo51

New member
What are excepted loses . How much will the litagation cost. How much to replace lost resourceres. Lost sheep to a fight are ok as long as it is not to many. If your guards were to shoot and kill a by stander the cost would sky rocket. + you might have to train them.more $ it's all the bottom line .
 

ecocks

New member
What I am saying

Many would say, "Oh NO! Don't call the business and ask or they will post and then what will you do?" QUOTE]...

Not sure what you're getting at here... this is exactly what should should not be done IF the business is not posted or not legally posted IAW the laws in your state. Bringing this to the attention of the owner/manager/whom ever could result in it becoming legally posted. Know the laws in your state... and remember - silence can work on our behalf.

While I respect your right to be silent, it is my opinion that being silent while our rights are eroded has gotten us to the place we are now. One business that sees another posted, even improperly, can assume it doesn't cost anything and adopt a similar policy. When I see a place improperly or ambiguously posted or am told by an employee that it is not allowed, I ask the management to clarify and then verify with the corporate office. This is particularly appropriate at Wal-Marts where there are so many situations where the employees haven't got a clue about their corporate policy. At least one Best Buy has also had this occur. I also make it very clear that they have decided they do not want my business.

If there is neither attempted signage nor any employee comments, then I don't inquire as there would be no need to verify that they are NOT posted. Also note that in at least one state you have to notify the homeowner before entering their residence that you are carrying a firearm and obtain their specific acknowledgement/permission.
 

seeker

seeker
posted malls

I live in a state(Wisc.) that does not allow any ccw,i am in the process of selling my house to move to Fla,as i have a CCW permit there,but on pondering all the comments on this subject,i think the shortest way to corp enlightenment is to inform them via registered letter that in the future you are assuming by banning your right to self defense even though you have a legal right to carry,they are assuming responsebility for your safety and that you are holding them and their officers legally reponsible for any and all injuries incured on the premises and you are filling a notorised copy of the letter w/your attorney,Scott
 

ecocks

New member
It would be interesting

to see the results of the litigation if a CCW permit holder was one of the ones (God-forbid) injured or killed. Has this ever been tried in the US Court system?

My suspicion is that since you entered the facility without coercion, the court would find you accepted the risk. You were not forced to shop there and had other options for shopping for similar merchandise.

I really think we can only vote with our dollars and make our position known to owners that we are not shopping where we are not welcome. Until enough of us cast those votes, businesses just believe there is no cost to posting their property.

Now, I would like to see some folks sue these places who have failed so miserably to provide "safe" shopping environments. Hopefully a factor in the case (one of many) would be the denial of 2A rights.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,505
Messages
624,408
Members
74,349
Latest member
ellejohn
Top