Chipotle: Don't bring guns in our stores

[Axeanda45]

There is a difference between rape and willingly going into someone's property knowing that sexual intercourse is a requirement. It's easy to not have sex with a property owner with that requirement, it's easy to not risk your life on private property, it's easy to keep your Right to defend yourself, DON'T GO ON THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

All they have to do is NOT invite the public, and then the PUBLIC wont show up....... An inanimate object on your hip or in your pocket absolutely does NOT in any way shape or form infringe on ANYONES rights at all....

 

[Axeanda45]

Blues and Firefighter, we have had this discussion before many times, and I see no need for us 3 to go at it again in this thread, but I WILL continue with punch if he insists on pressing the issue....

 

[2bit]

It doesn't matter what you think, if they have the right to bear arms, they can choose however they want to carry. Unless of course you want to control how, what, when, and why some one can carry...I believe that's called gun control though...is that what you want?

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

Since you and a few others are making it so black and white, I thought I'd point out that keeping guns from felons is also gun control. Maybe it's not so black and white.

As to carrying an ak in to a food joint for the world to see, why? You're just being an a tool IMO. More importantly, if chipotle made more money because of it, they would embrace it. Business 101.

 

[maestromsv]

I'm in luck, we don't have one in Mississippi!

Lock 'n Load, Tapatalk!!

 

[BC1]

It doesn't matter what you think, if they have the right to bear arms, they can choose however they want to carry.

Only, the right doesn't exist on someone's private property. The 2nd is between you and your government not you and I.

 

[Blackthorn]

This morning on a local radio show (KNUS DENVER / Dan Caplis) they were able to contact the head of the Texas Open Carry group.

He stated that they asked and received permission to hold their get together in Chipolte. So they didn't just show up unannounced. He also stated that the picture was taken from their Facebook page by MDA folks probably surfing social media just for pictures like that so they can start their anti gun campaign.
He commented that they are a fairly new group that has 25,000 members and growing. They are trying to draw attention to the fact they cannot open carry a pistol but can carry a rifle.
He was impressed with the fact of being such a small group drawing the ire of Bloomy and his minions... Maybe not the best press for their group but it does bring their name to the forefront.

 

[vernsimpson]

When people on gun forums keep insinuating that the Second Amendment applies within private property, are they just stupid, or is there some part of the Constitution that I somehow missed when I read it? Now, I do not like supporting a business that does not allow me to protect myself while I am within their walls. However, having been required to write out the US Constitution, as well as all ammendments, by hand during my high school civics class, I do realize that a private property owner has more right to tell me not to carry on his property than I do under the Second Amendment to do so. So, this is NOT a Second Amendment issue. It is an issue of whether or not I choose to do business with someone who's beliefs are different than my own. In this case, the answer is no for me. However, it is a matter of choice, both on his part and mine, and not a matter of the Constitution.

I agree with this! I was taught in school, many years ago, that my rights end where another's begin! That to me means that a property owner or business has the right to set rules. They sometimes do not allow smoking on their property and other rules. IMHO they do have the right to ban guns from their property or business. I will defend their right to do this but that does not mean I have to do business or visit any place that set rules that I find some what offensive! The 1st Amendment protects free speech but it does not say that you or I must be heard!

I have many friends who are liberal. They are nice people but some do not like guns. Knowing that, I would never insult them by bringing a gun into their home. I feel that a man's house is his castle. (I have other ways of getting my Conservative values across!) :smile: Anyone is welcome to bring a gun into my home. I only ask that they tell me that they are carrying.

 

[BluesStringer]

Blues and Firefighter, we have had this discussion before many times, and I see no need for us 3 to go at it again in this thread, but I WILL continue with punch if he insists on pressing the issue....

It ain't no thang.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Since you and a few others are making it so black and white, I thought I'd point out that keeping guns from felons is also gun control. Maybe it's not so black and white.

As to carrying an ak in to a food joint for the world to see, why? You're just being an a tool IMO. More importantly, if chipotle made more money because of it, they would embrace it. Business 101.

Two things about felons:
1. You can have your rights oppressed by due process. That means all your Rights, not just bearing arms.
2. Felons should not be free, if a felon is freed their Rights should be restored.

Only, the right doesn't exist on someone's private property. The 2nd is between you and your government not you and I.

Totally agree. That quote is referring to carrying long guns vs handguns, not private vs public property.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[BluesStringer]

Only, the right doesn't exist on someone's private property. The 2nd is between you and your government not you and I.

When the picture in question was taken, Chipotle had not asked that no guns be brought into their stores yet. There were no property rights violations in that case.

 

[ezkl2230]

Interesting:

We always welcome the exchange of ideas and opinions: it is one of the many things that make our country such a special place. But this issue is not central to the operation of our business, and we do not feel that our restaurants should be used as a platform for either side of the debate.

With that being the case, it would seem that the best decision for Chipotle to make would be to take no position. But while they say their restaurants shouldn't be used as a platform by either side, they have themselves used their restaurants to choose a side.

A little inconsistent, don't you think?

 

[ezkl2230]

After another read... the statement was only about "display of firearms" in their stores. Guess they don't count concealed carry (but would no doubt further cave to pressure and say that theirs is a blanket statement concerning all firearms). However, I would argue that carrying a gun on my hip open is not a "display." I'm not calling attention to it.

Actually, that is incorrect. Here is the entire statement, posted on the Moms Demand web site:

Statement From Chipotle Asking That Customers Not Bring Guns Into Restaurants

May 19, 2014 By Link Removed

The issue of gun ownership or gun rights has become one of the most contentious debates in the country. Chipotle has never taken a position on this issue, as we focus instead on our mission to change the way people think about and eat fast food.

Recently participants from an “open carry” demonstration in Texas brought guns (including military-style assault rifles) into one of our restaurants, causing many of our customers anxiety and discomfort. Because of this, we are respectfully asking that customers not bring guns into our restaurants, unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

Historically, we felt it enough to simply comply with local laws regarding the open or concealed carrying of firearms, because we believe that it is not fair to put our team members in the uncomfortable position of asking that customers refrain from bringing guns into our restaurants. However, because the display of firearms in our restaurants has now created an environment that is potentially intimidating or uncomfortable for many of our customers, we think it is time to make this request.

We acknowledge that there are strong arguments on both sides of this issue. We have seen those differing positions expressed in the wake of this event in Texas, where pro-gun customers have contacted us to applaud our support of the Second Amendment, and anti-gun customers have expressed concern over the visible display of military-style assault rifles in restaurants where families are eating. The vast majority of gun owners are responsible citizens and we appreciate them honoring this request. And we hope that our customers who oppose the carrying of guns in public agree with us that it is the role of elected officials and the legislative process to set policy in this area, not the role of businesses like Chipotle.

We always welcome the exchange of ideas and opinions: it is one of the many things that make our country such a special place. But this issue is not central to the operation of our business, and we do not feel that our restaurants should be used as a platform for either side of the debate.

Chris Arnold
Communications Director


Chipotle

It isn't about openly displaying firearms, they have just become gun free zones.

BTW, does it look like the Starbucks and Chipotle letters were written for these companies by the same shadowy group? Look at the similarities between them - there are MANY:

An Open Letter from Howard Schultz, ceo of Starbucks Coffee Company

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Posted by Howard Schultz, Starbucks chairman, president and chief executive officer

Dear Fellow Americans,

Few topics in America generate a more polarized and emotional debate than guns. In recent months, Starbucks stores and our partners (employees) who work in our stores have been thrust unwillingly into the middle of this debate. That’s why I am writing today with a respectful request that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas.

From the beginning, our vision at Starbucks has been to create a “third place” between home and work where people can come together to enjoy the peace and pleasure of coffee and community. Our values have always centered on building community rather than dividing people, and our stores exist to give every customer a safe and comfortable respite from the concerns of daily life.

We appreciate that there is a highly sensitive balance of rights and responsibilities surrounding America’s gun laws, and we recognize the deep passion for and against the “open carry” laws adopted by many states. (In the United States, “open carry” is the term used for openly carrying a firearm in public.) For years we have listened carefully to input from our customers, partners, community leaders and voices on both sides of this complicated, highly charged issue.

Our company’s longstanding approach to “open carry” has been to follow local laws: we permit it in states where allowed and we prohibit it in states where these laws don’t exist. We have chosen this approach because we believe our store partners should not be put in the uncomfortable position of requiring customers to disarm or leave our stores. We believe that gun policy should be addressed by government and law enforcement—not by Starbucks and our store partners.

Recently, however, we’ve seen the “open carry” debate become increasingly uncivil and, in some cases, even threatening. Pro-gun activists have used our stores as a political stage for media events misleadingly called “Starbucks Appreciation Days” that disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of “open carry.” To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores. Some anti-gun activists have also played a role in ratcheting up the rhetoric and friction, including soliciting and confronting our customers and partners.

For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

I would like to clarify two points. First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Why? Because we want to give responsible gun owners the chance to respect our request—and also because enforcing a ban would potentially require our partners to confront armed customers, and that is not a role I am comfortable asking Starbucks partners to take on. Second, we know we cannot satisfy everyone. For those who oppose “open carry,” we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.

I am proud of our country and our heritage of civil discourse and debate. It is in this spirit that we make today’s request. Whatever your view, I encourage you to be responsible and respectful of each other as citizens and neighbors.
Sincerely,

Howard Schultz

 

[ezkl2230]

From the OP article:



Has anyone else heard this story before? It's the first time I heard it. I recall the letter that the CEO, Schultz, wrote and just took another look at it to see if I had forgotten any references to closing a Newtown store. There are none. Yahoo! and AP may be making chit up out of whole clothe on that little tidbit.

Blues, it did happen, and the event was noted on the Starbucks web site:

Early store closure in Newtown, Connecticut | Starbucks Coffee Company

[h=1]Early store closure in Newtown, Connecticut[/h]Friday, August 09, 2013

Posted by Chris Carr., executive vice president, U.S. Retail

Dear Customers,

At Starbucks we are proud that our stores serve as gathering places for thousands of communities across the country and we appreciate that our customers share diverse points of view on issues that matter to them. We also believe in being sensitive to each community we serve.

Today, advocacy groups from different sides of the open carry debate announced plans to visit our Newtown, Connecticut store to bring attention to their points of view. We recognize that there is significant and genuine passion surrounding this topic, however out of respect for Newtown and everything the community has been through we decided to close our store early before the event started. Starbucks did not endorse or sponsor the event. We continue to encourage customers and advocacy groups from all sides of the debate to contact their elected officials, who make the open carry laws that our company follows. Our long-standing approach to this topic has been to comply with local laws and statutes in the communities we serve.

Thank you for your understanding and respect for the Newtown community.

Sincerely,
Chris Carr
executive vice president, U.S. Retail
(bolding added)

 

[telpinaro]

...
BTW, does it look like the Starbucks and Chipotle letters were written for these companies by the same shadowy group? Look at the similarities between them - there are MANY:

...

Meh. They probably just copied Starbucks. If they were written at the same time I'd be suspicious. I love how they are careful to refrain from an outright "ban," instead simply "requesting." They're trying so desperately to keep from appearing like they are picking a side! Not that I can blame them for just wanting to make the Mom's Demand people to be quiet and go away... I bet they are all sorts of fun to deal with.

 

[Firefighterchen]

All they have to do is NOT invite the public, and then the PUBLIC wont show up.......

Inviting the public is not an all inclusive deal.


Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Stan45]

I ate there once, food sucks. Not a big deal.

 

[telpinaro]

Inviting the public is not an all inclusive deal.


Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

Very true... they didn't invite the entire public. They invited everyone who doesn't have a gun.

 

[BluesStringer]

Blues, it did happen, and the event was noted on the Starbucks web site:

Early store closure in Newtown, Connecticut | Starbucks Coffee Company

Thanks ezkl. New one on me, but I was wrong once before....I thought I was wrong and I wasn't! HA!

Blues

 

[VT Patriot]

I view this as the bad result of a very stupid set of events. No one at the store called the cops, although I'm sure a few were 'perplexed'. The morons with their AR's (not AK's) had their pictures taken for their own hero worship. "Look at that cooool picture of my and Rufus, man aren't we looking cool?". Ok, so a few grandmas taking the kids out for a burrito peed their pants. That's their problem because they've not spent their life studying the bill of rights. Why should they be upset that a couple of fine looking young nuclear physicists carried AR's into a taco joint.

Then the pics went viral. First to pick them up was the 'moms' who had a heyday with them. They got over 10,000 thumbs up within an hour. They jumped all over the company hqtrs screaming about how they were afraid of these young genius's. The company replied by REQUESTING that people not carry guns in their stores. For those who haven't seen the pics, I suggest you take a minute and check them out. I firmly believe that the way this action was carried out, that more harm was done to 2A supporters than just about anything else I've seen in recent years. This did not in any way improve the public perception of 'those crazy gun nuts'. These pictures will be around for a long time, and they'll be used against us for years to come. I believe this was a bad example of poking the alligator with a sharp stick and expecting good results.

I don't blame the Co. at all. If these 2 idiots had their picture taken inside my small business like this, I'd put up a 'gun free zone' sign in about 2 minutes. Me? I'd still have my S&W strapped on my hip with a loose shirt hanging over it.

 

[Axeanda45]

I agree with this! I was taught in school, many years ago, that my rights end where another's begin! That to me means that a property owner or business has the right to set rules. They sometimes do not allow smoking on their property and other rules. IMHO they do have the right to ban guns from their property or business. I will defend their right to do this but that does not mean I have to do business or visit any place that set rules that I find some what offensive! The 1st Amendment protects free speech but it does not say that you or I must be heard!

I have many friends who are liberal. They are nice people but some do not like guns. Knowing that, I would never insult them by bringing a gun into their home. I feel that a man's house is his castle. (I have other ways of getting my Conservative values across!) :smile: Anyone is welcome to bring a gun into my home. I only ask that they tell me that they are carrying.

Ok, please, please, please show me where an inanimate object infringes on someones RIGHTS mr genius.... And do NOT make the fatal mistake of thinking someones RULES are RIGHTS....