Intercontinental Hotels Group (Holiday Inn, etc)

[leavitron]

ICH includes the following hotel chains: Intercontinental, Crown Plaza, Indigo, Holiday Inn, Holiday Inn Express, Staybridge Suites, and Candlewood Suites.

I submitted and e-mail to find out their position on concealed carry hotel stayers. I expected an e-mail response. What I got was a phone call from a corporate customer care rep. Needless to say I was surprised! The guy had been doing this for several years but had never had the question come up. He said he was actually excited to get the question and to have to go dig for the answer. The answer is two-fold.

1) The corporate "policy" is that if you are within the law then they have no issues whatsoever. That is of course good news. But one must consider #2 as well.

2) 95%+ of their hotels are franchises and not corporate owned. As such, each hotel might write it's own policy. He didn't think they would deviate from corporate "policy" but suggested that you contact the individual hotel to be certain.

I make my reservations through Priority Club hotline because I am platinum and therefore get really good service. (Maybe that is why I received a phone call instead of an e-mail back.) But, after every reservation I always call the hotel directly to make sure it came through to their local system. That would be a good time to confirm carry okay as well.

It's nice to see a huge chain with an international reach that actually cares about people's rights.

 

[Tucker's Mom]

The Hilton Hotel Group (DoubleTree, Hilton, etc.) is a friendly one...at least here in MO. They are to be commended too.

 

[robstid]

Maybe its just me but if I'm paying to stay in a room, that room is MY residence therefore the same rules/laws would apply as if I was staying at my own home. Am I wrong?

 

[Tucker's Mom]

Maybe its just me but if I'm paying to stay in a room, that room is MY residence therefore the same rules/laws would apply as if I was staying at my own home. Am I wrong?

No you are not wrong, at least not here in MO. Our castle law here (SYG) includes even your car or your RV or your hotel/motel which is considered "your home" even if it is temporary. This is something good here in MO, not everything is really bad, even if we are one of America's poorest place. At least we have a good SYG laws and illegal immigration laws.

 

[leavitron]

Maybe its just me but if I'm paying to stay in a room, that room is MY residence therefore the same rules/laws would apply as if I was staying at my own home. Am I wrong?

As Tucker's Mom implied it depends upon your state. What I think the overriding factor is going to be is how the state treats private property (the hotel) that has a public interest (you the customer). This is a very sensitive topic with people very strongly on both sides. But the issue of private property/public interest should be discussed elsewhere and not in this thread.

 

[Treo]

I have to ask, why would you even ask them? I carry my gun into my room and it's no of the management's business

 

[leavitron]

Actually you don't have to ask that. If you do enough reading you know that state laws vary and that some states allow businesses to restrict carry. If you carry anyway then you are assuming an element of risk that many do not want.

1) If you are involved in a deadly encounter then you are now criminally liable.

2) If your concealment fails then you are now criminally liable.

For you it's obviously a risk you're willing to accept. For some it is not.

Further, some wish to "vote with their wallets" as the expression goes. So asking is the only way to be informed for the purposes of being able to "reward" those who are understanding of our rights. This isn't about whether our rights should be taken away or not. That the right is not to be infringed is self evident to us. This is about finding out those who do not understand it thusly, and attempting to educate them.

 

[Treo]

1) If you are involved in a deadly encounter then you are now criminally liable.

2) If your concealment fails then you are now criminally liable.

For you it's obviously a risk you're willing to accept. For some it is not.

Or I live in Colorado where none of the above are true

 

[leavitron]

Or I live in Colorado where none of the above are true

But they are in some states. And those restrictive states is the context in which I framed my example. So frankly your rebuttal isn't pertinent.

More to the point - Colorado isn't an island. Surely you'll travel out of it at some point. When you do, you're more than likely to want to carry. As such, you need to be informed about the laws in the other states in which you will travel. Ignorance is certainly not bliss in that case. You will have to make a choice to either inform yourself of the laws and abide by them or ignore them and assume that risk. Which lo and behold circles back to my original point - gift wrapped and with a bow on top.

 

[Treo]

More to the point - Colorado isn't an island. Surely you'll travel out of it at some point.

Not unless I absolutely have to.

That said, after some thought I do agree that there are states in which a gun buster sign has the force of law. I'm still fairly certain I wouldn't ask

 

[Dennis1209]

I treat hotels / motels as if they are my private safe dwelling, which they are, however... They are different from your own home because you normally know who, if anyone is occupying adjacent rooms. In motels you have occupants in every direction so, best be aware of bullet penetrations if the need arises. I've found one of those floor door stoppers you can purchase with the loud noise gives me some piece of mind when in the room.

Off topic but... You're a thousand times more likely to be accosted and transport home "Bedbugs". You take home bedbugs and you're in big, big trouble. Seriously!

 

[leavitron]

Not unless I absolutely have to.

That said, after some thought I do agree that there are states in which a gun buster sign has the force of law. I'm still fairly certain I wouldn't ask

Fair enough and obviously your choice.

I would like to understand one thing, if you will humor me. This is a serious question, not trying to be a jerk. So if I understand you correctly you place the highest priority on feeling safe through carrying. So much so that you don't care what the policy and/or law is you are going to carry anyway? And you are not going to concern yourself with (to the extent reasonable) only doing business with those businesses that don't want to restrict your rights? Because you are going to do business where ever you feel like it, the business rules be damned? Or is it something different that I am not seeing?

 

[Treo]

Fair enough and obviously your choice.

I will assume you've never been to Colorado otherwise you'd understand why we don't want to leave

I would like to understand one thing, if you will humor me. This is a serious question, not trying to be a jerk. So if I understand you correctly you place the highest priority on feeling safe through carrying. So much so that you don't care what the policy and/or law is you are going to carry anyway? And you are not going to concern yourself with (to the extent reasonable) only doing business with those businesses that don't want to restrict your rights? Because you are going to do business where ever you feel like it, the business rules be damned? Or is it something different that I am not seeing?

If you check my log of back posts you'll find that I believe it is the shooter's responsibility to know local laws where you are going. I promise you I would know before I got to my destination what the relevant statutes were.

Having said that, I am fairly certain the FOPA recognizes a hotel room that I've rented as my residence and as such I am legally able to carry a gun there and to use deadly force to defend myself.

In Colorado those signs have no force of law and I don't even look for them.

 

[leavitron]

I will assume you've never been to Colorado otherwise you'd understand why we don't want to leave

Woops. You misunderstood my response which is my fault. My "your choice" reply was meant to be in response to your "I'm still fairly certain I wouldn't ask" comment.

If you check my log of back posts you'll find that I believe it is the shooter's responsibility to know local laws where you are going. I promise you I would know before I got to my destination what the relevant statutes were.

Duly noted.

Having said that, I am fairly certain the FOPA recognizes a hotel room that I've rented as my residence and as such I am legally able to carry a gun there and to use deadly force to defend myself.

Reading FOPA outright, I believe you are misunderstanding the Safe Passage provision. If you can cite case law I'm all ears.

In Colorado those signs have no force of law and I don't even look for them.

Instead of answering my question you've just restated what you want to say. The hypothetical was of those states where there are such restrictions. I'm not interested in the Constitutionality. I'm not interested in what you do in CO. I want to know what you would do when in a state like TX where those signs have the force of law. What would you do then?

Further, I'll ask again. Do you see any merit in refusing to patronize businesses that won't allow gun owners to exercise their Constitutional rights?

 

[Treo]

Woops. You misunderstood my response which is my fault. My "your choice" reply was meant to be in response to your "I'm still fairly certain I wouldn't ask" comment.

I wouldn’t ask because I try not to ask stupid questions. IMO if you ask a question like that no matter what the policy is they’re going to tell you no so I don’t bother asking.

Reading FOPA outright, I believe you are misunderstanding the Safe Passage provision. If you can cite case law I'm all ears.

I'm willing to accept your interpretation all though I will look it up again

Instead of answering my question you've just restated what you want to say. The hypothetical was of those states where there are such restrictions. I'm not interested in the Constitutionality. I'm not interested in what you do in CO. I want to know what you would do when in a state like TX where those signs have the force of law. What would you do then?

Sorry, I misunderstood you. Under no circumstance would I knowingly break the law, I'd find another hotel. That said, if those signs weren't the proper Texas 30.06 signs I would ignore them as they wouldn't have any force of law.

Further, I'll ask again. Do you see any merit in refusing to patronize businesses that won't allow gun owners to exercise their Constitutional rights?

Short answer, yes.

Long answer: Refusing to patronize a business does no good unless you inform the business why you are refusing to patronize them. I would send a polite letter explaining my position to the company’s headquarters and find another store to do business with.

That said, I have never seen a gun buster sign on any business I’ve ever gone into so it’s never been an issue

 

[johnmed3]

In Colorado those signs have no force of law and I don't even look for them.

Instead of answering my question you've just restated what you want to say. The hypothetical was of those states where there are such restrictions. I'm not interested in the Constitutionality. I'm not interested in what you do in CO. I want to know what you would do when in a state like TX where those signs have the force of law. What would you do then?

Further, I'll ask again. Do you see any merit in refusing to patronize businesses that won't allow gun owners to exercise their Constitutional rights?[/QUOTE]

In TX these signs have no force of law. Only the 30.06 signs have the force of law.

 

[leavitron]

First, thank you for taking the time to answer at length.

IMO if you ask a question like that no matter what the policy is they’re going to tell you no so I don’t bother asking.

That's a pretty cynical opinion to hold. Also, I believe it is reasonable to conclude that this forum category "Businesses For Firearms & 2nd Amendment" rather proves that your opinion is inaccurate. Not sure what else to say there.

I'm willing to accept your interpretation all though I will look it up again

And I am more than happy to accept that I am wrong if some case law that clarifies can be found.

Sorry, I misunderstood you. Under no circumstance would I knowingly break the law, I'd find another hotel. That said, if those signs weren't the proper Texas 30.06 signs I would ignore them as they wouldn't have any force of law.

Your apology wasn't necessary because IMO it was my fault for not being clearer. Regardless, we're cool here.

The point of me creating this thread was an answer to your statement just above. Knowledge is a tool. I am sharing the knowledge that I have so that others may be equipped with an option. If I weren't already using ICH places exclusively, this would be reason enough for me to actively switch to them.

Long answer: Refusing to patronize a business does no good unless you inform the business why you are refusing to patronize them. I would send a polite letter explaining my position to the company’s headquarters and find another store to do business with.

This is exactly what I was getting at. Your initial post actually made me think the opposite. That you didn't care about this because you were going to patronize the store you wanted to and would carry even if they disallowed. (Which also ties into the legal angle.) So I am glad I asked for clarification. I had a very different understanding of you until I did.

FWIW, I agree with you 100% on both. I am not going to carry where it is illegal to make a point. Instead I'm going to fight to get those exemptions changed. I am also not going to patronize businesses that attempt to disarm me. But I am going to let them know that rather than just go away.

That said, I have never seen a gun buster sign on any business I’ve ever gone into so it’s never been an issue

Understood.

 

[leavitron]

In TX these signs have no force of law. Only the 30.06 signs have the force of law.

I couldn't recall the statute number but knew it was specific. I was short for time and didn't want to look it up so I described it generically knowing full well that Texas had very specific regs but it was the first state that came to mind that had actually enforceable signs. MI is very different. Signs can be posted but are not enforceable as a gun violation. They can only be enforced as a trespass if the owner/manager discovers you are carrying, asks you to leave, and you don't. And then it's still just a minor trespassing.