TexasCHLforum.com

Taypo wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

RetNavy wrote:Most times when i go to Whataburger its thru the drive thru so their policy doesn't bother me...

if i go in and make a order it will be as a CC.... if my gun is noticed by a customer and they mention it to me i will say thank you for your opinion and go on about my business...

if management notices and says something..... if after ordering and before receiving food i will ask for a refund and leave.... (that will probably be when getting drinks).... if after getting food, since i very seldom eat there it means I'm already leaving the place....

Seems fair

If the management at Whataburger spots your CC weapon, you've probably got bigger issues than where to eat.

RetNavy wrote:Most times when i go to Whataburger its thru the drive thru so their policy doesn't bother me...

if i go in and make a order it will be as a CC.... if my gun is noticed by a customer and they mention it to me i will say thank you for your opinion and go on about my business...

if management notices and says something..... if after ordering and before receiving food i will ask for a refund and leave.... (that will probably be when getting drinks).... if after getting food, since i very seldom eat there it means I'm already leaving the place....

VMI77 wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

VMI77 wrote:Massad Ayoob on open carry: http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/14/massa ... led-carry/

Concealed Means Concealed

If your local license requires concealed carry, keep the gun truly concealed. The revealing of a concealed handgun is seen in many quarters as a threat, which can result in charges of criminal threatening, brandishing and more. A malevolent person who wants to falsely accuse you of threatening them with a gun will have their wrongful accusation bolstered if the police find you with a gun where they said it was. Yes, that happens. Some jurisdictions allow “open carry.” I support the right to open carry, in the proper time and place, but I have found over the decades that there are relatively few ideal times or places where the practice won’t unnecessarily and predictably frighten someone the carrier had no reason to scare.

I agree with this. If OC is not the cultural norm, it is easier to conceal and go on about my business. Out where I hunt, it is customary and acceptable for folks to bring their rifles into the local diner instead of leaving them unattended in Jeeps and such... No one bats an eye at a guy with a long gun there. Downtown Dallas has a different reaction.

Do they provide gun racks so you don't have to prop them up by your table?

Actually, yes, there was a wooden rack over in the corner!

Now that's my kind of restaurant.

Taypo wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

Taypo wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

jmra wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote: My hope is not to call anyone a Pelosi, but when my opinion is minimized by labeling me militant or some other endearing term it's frustrating to say the least.

Are people really minimizing your opinion, or are you frustrated because the majority on this board simply do not agree with it, and tend to believe the property owner is within their right to not allow OC?

I'm from California, I haven't ever had the majority opinion on any gun issue. Any business can operate how ever they see fit, however I don't have to like it.
I just never thought I'd be to conservative for a Texas gun website

I would argue that the belief in property rights is also a conservative value. I would say that allowing the market to decide if the business made a sound decision is also extremely conservative... and in this case, it appears that the market is fine with WB's decision. Again, with only 3% of Texans being CHL holders, to have WB state that they are still going to allow CHL is still a win. They very easily could have "asked" us to leave all guns at home, or even go as far as legally posting.

Those are valid points, and I appreciate them. So let me ask this, do we know of any hamburger joints that will allow OC? That way we all win!

How I wear my firearm will not be the determining factor in where I buy a burger. The burger itself will be the determining factor. I don't go out to eat to make a political statement, I go out to eat because I enjoy the food.

Would you eat at a restaurant that was posted 30.06?

Im a member at a posted gym and I buy groceries at a posted grocery store, because the service and the food is worth it. If that makes me anti-gun, so be it.

I shop at Kroger, great service, friendly staff they make a point to hire handicapped employees and they are not a gun free zone

Congratulations?

Taypo wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

jmra wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote: My hope is not to call anyone a Pelosi, but when my opinion is minimized by labeling me militant or some other endearing term it's frustrating to say the least.

Are people really minimizing your opinion, or are you frustrated because the majority on this board simply do not agree with it, and tend to believe the property owner is within their right to not allow OC?

I'm from California, I haven't ever had the majority opinion on any gun issue. Any business can operate how ever they see fit, however I don't have to like it.
I just never thought I'd be to conservative for a Texas gun website

I would argue that the belief in property rights is also a conservative value. I would say that allowing the market to decide if the business made a sound decision is also extremely conservative... and in this case, it appears that the market is fine with WB's decision. Again, with only 3% of Texans being CHL holders, to have WB state that they are still going to allow CHL is still a win. They very easily could have "asked" us to leave all guns at home, or even go as far as legally posting.

Those are valid points, and I appreciate them. So let me ask this, do we know of any hamburger joints that will allow OC? That way we all win!

How I wear my firearm will not be the determining factor in where I buy a burger. The burger itself will be the determining factor. I don't go out to eat to make a political statement, I go out to eat because I enjoy the food.

Would you eat at a restaurant that was posted 30.06?

Im a member at a posted gym and I buy groceries at a posted grocery store, because the service and the food is worth it. If that makes me anti-gun, so be it.

cyphertext wrote:

jmra wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote: My hope is not to call anyone a Pelosi, but when my opinion is minimized by labeling me militant or some other endearing term it's frustrating to say the least.

Are people really minimizing your opinion, or are you frustrated because the majority on this board simply do not agree with it, and tend to believe the property owner is within their right to not allow OC?

I'm from California, I haven't ever had the majority opinion on any gun issue. Any business can operate how ever they see fit, however I don't have to like it.
I just never thought I'd be to conservative for a Texas gun website

I would argue that the belief in property rights is also a conservative value. I would say that allowing the market to decide if the business made a sound decision is also extremely conservative... and in this case, it appears that the market is fine with WB's decision. Again, with only 3% of Texans being CHL holders, to have WB state that they are still going to allow CHL is still a win. They very easily could have "asked" us to leave all guns at home, or even go as far as legally posting.

Those are valid points, and I appreciate them. So let me ask this, do we know of any hamburger joints that will allow OC? That way we all win!

How I wear my firearm will not be the determining factor in where I buy a burger. The burger itself will be the determining factor. I don't go out to eat to make a political statement, I go out to eat because I enjoy the food.

Would you eat at a restaurant that was posted 30.06?

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote: My hope is not to call anyone a Pelosi, but when my opinion is minimized by labeling me militant or some other endearing term it's frustrating to say the least.

Are people really minimizing your opinion, or are you frustrated because the majority on this board simply do not agree with it, and tend to believe the property owner is within their right to not allow OC?

I'm from California, I haven't ever had the majority opinion on any gun issue. Any business can operate how ever they see fit, however I don't have to like it.
I just never thought I'd be to conservative for a Texas gun website

I would argue that the belief in property rights is also a conservative value. I would say that allowing the market to decide if the business made a sound decision is also extremely conservative... and in this case, it appears that the market is fine with WB's decision. Again, with only 3% of Texans being CHL holders, to have WB state that they are still going to allow CHL is still a win. They very easily could have "asked" us to leave all guns at home, or even go as far as legally posting.

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote: My hope is not to call anyone a Pelosi, but when my opinion is minimized by labeling me militant or some other endearing term it's frustrating to say the least.

Are people really minimizing your opinion, or are you frustrated because the majority on this board simply do not agree with it, and tend to believe the property owner is within their right to not allow OC?

G.A. Heath wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

G.A. Heath wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:I love the names for the OCT crowd, militants, not normal, and a few other endearing names. Is everybody ok with calling non-militants, Pelosi's? As long as it's with the same love and respect as the otherside has been using?

I love the names that the OCT crowd applies to gun owners who don't agree 100% with their position and methods: Butters, Anti-gun (I have been called this), Anti-Constitution[al] (I have been called this as well), Hater[s] (I have been called this also), Turncoats, and more than a few other endearing names. The funny thing is OCT along with other groups have done, and continue to do, more damage than the anti-gunners could by themselves. So exactly who do you want to call a Pelosi, other progun activists who are getting their legislation passed without having to try and claim credit for a bill they called on their membership to oppose?

Just because we don't agree on tactics doesn't mean that we are not on the same side, but I've been referred to as all kinds of things none of them kind. I was even told I haven't been long enough to have an opinion. When a man has been denied a God given right for his whole life, he gets excited when he sees the light at the end of the tunnel. He is overjoyed when he realizes that the light at the end of the tunnel isn't a train.

you say you have been told "Haven't been long enough to have an opinion..." Who said told you this and been what long enough? Everyone has a right to an opinion, they may not have enough experience to form an a valid one by the reckoning of other folks but they can have that opinion. Again who do you want to call a "Pelosi?"

G.A. Heath wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:I love the names for the OCT crowd, militants, not normal, and a few other endearing names. Is everybody ok with calling non-militants, Pelosi's? As long as it's with the same love and respect as the otherside has been using?

I love the names that the OCT crowd applies to gun owners who don't agree 100% with their position and methods: Butters, Anti-gun (I have been called this), Anti-Constitution[al] (I have been called this as well), Hater[s] (I have been called this also), Turncoats, and more than a few other endearing names. The funny thing is OCT along with other groups have done, and continue to do, more damage than the anti-gunners could by themselves. So exactly who do you want to call a Pelosi, other progun activists who are getting their legislation passed without having to try and claim credit for a bill they called on their membership to oppose?

Dragonfighter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:... lighten up Francis.

I understand this reference!

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

I'm sorry, I'll tow the company line. OC is bad and if you have an opinion different then that you are militant and that is bad.

Open carry in and of itself is not bad... but forcing a business to take a side when they really just want to sell hamburgers, burritos, or coffee is. Think about this for a sec. Had we not had OCT carrying long arms in Starbuck's, Wendy's, Chipotle, Sonic, Applebee's, Jack in the Box, Target, etc., this probably would not be an issue. Because of the political grandstanding inside local businesses, they were forced to choose a side. Had businesses not been drug into the debate, most would probably be taking a wait and see attitude about open carry... and if as few choose to open carry as expected based on OC in other states, it probably would not be an issue at all.

Whataburger's policy is acceptable, except to the extremists on both sides of the issue...

jmra wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote: Is there any other laws that we can think of that can be denied ? It seems that 2A rights are only a right as long as all parties agree. If Whata Burger denied service to the gays, the whole world would come crashing to an crashing to an end. If Whata Burger said we will only serve the gays if they conceal thier homosexuality could you imagine the outcry ? Is it still Whata burgers right? Would the gays be as understanding as we are about denied access ?

This is just an example of politically correct nonsense

This is a poor analogy. A coworker of mine is gay, and unless you get to know him on a personal level outside of the office, you would not know it. When someone finds out and make a comment like "I never knew you were gay", his response is that he "doesn't come to work to be gay, he comes to work to work". Same thing would apply at Whataburger... He doesn't go there to be gay, he goes there to eat a hamburger.

So, in a sense, unless they are making out on a table, you probably won't know their sexuality. Sure, you may suspect, you might see something that makes you think they are, but you won't know 100%... kinda like printing when carrying concealed.

If you are going to Whataburger to eat a hamburger, conceal your firearm and enjoy. It is pretty simple. You already have the permit and have been carrying concealed for years... once you walk out, you can tuck your shirt back in and be on your way. You have not been denied access.

You and your gay friend have missed my point. I'm looking for equal protection under the law. In the end I've never been inside a Whata Burger and I don't plan on going inside, I use the drive thru like all good Americans.

So now people who go inside instead of using the drive thru are not "good Americans"?

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.