TexasCHLforum.com

anygunanywhere wrote:I like to give people a chance to redeem themselves. If and when a person validates what and who they are then that is their business. The piling on just seemed a little excessive to me. If that makes me look deficient in your eyes so be it. I am entitled to my opinion.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

mojo84 wrote:There are some inconsistencies in this story that make me wonder if this actually happened. The OP stated he went into the restaurant, a cafeteria, and 20 minutes later the cops showed up. He then said said the cops showed up before he had a chance to order. Then he said they must not have cooked his food since the manager called the police.

Too many inconsistencies here for me to believe this event actually happened. I think I took the bait and got reeled up to the boat and threw the hook as the net approached me.

Further to my previous post regarding inconsistencies within this thread by the OP, I've looked back at his prior postings which demonstrate he is adamantly against open carry.

I believe he has an anti-OC agenda and he is playing us all like cheap fiddles. I am even more convinced the event in this thread did not happen. I encourage you all to review his prior comments and consider how he can't keep his story straight, even in this one thread.

We are making a mountain out of a molehill that did not exist.

I'm convinced mojo84 is absolutely correct. I did a quick search of his posts and the one quoted below is typical of his attitude toward open-carry. Couple this with his failure to respond to any comment in this multi-page thread he started and there's more reason to doubt this event ever occurred. It appears that his dislike of open-carry coupled with a total lack of anti-OC incidents prompted him to invent this story.

Chas.

PSTL*PAKR wrote:For all you OC people, get ready to get banned from carrying in a lot of places.....Why aren't people happy with CC??????

thetexan wrote:I guess I have mixed feelings about all of this.

It irks me that one half of the parties in the contract (so to speak), the sign posting establishments, do not have to post compliant signs. If someone can call the police on OCers why isn't there a way to do something about their non-compliance?

We are expected to live by the specifics of the law, but they don't have to. And, when it comes down to a contest between the two, the establishment is given the benefit of the doubt the offender, who technically is not offending, is scolded, arrested, or worse as if the burden of fulfilling the contract (the law that specifies requirements to both parties) rest solely on the OCer.

That's a sad system.

How many of us are afraid to risk the ride rather than to insist that establishments are just as responsible to follow the compliance law as we are to follow compliant notices? Do we fear they, whoever they are, may take our freedom away from us if we protest too much?

Why should a LEO have anything to say at all to a OCer when he is being completely lawful. IN FACT, IT IS THE ESTABLISHMENT THAT IS FAILING TO ABIDE BY THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE LAW!!! Of all people the LEO should know that the OCer has done nothing wrong and rather than making him to feel like a criminal why not advise the establishment to get ITS act together?

The LEO should, if asked by the establishment, give his verbal 30.06 or 30.07 notice and be on his way. I almost want to say how dare they presume to admonish the OCer for doing nothing but following the law as written. That requires the LEO to be solidly clear on the law which most are. Fairness in the application of a law written to and for both parties is not too much to ask.

So I am torn about how to feel about this kind of situation.

To quote Hamlet...."...Thus, conscience, does make cowards of us all. And thus the native hue of resolution, is sullied ore' the pale cast of thought."

And let me add, I am one of those who would rather retreat and fight on another battlefield of legislation and try to make a point in front of a family eating their dinner at a restaurant and make life more difficult for the rest of OCers.

BUT IT TICKS ME OFF THAT IS SHOULD BE THIS WAY!!!

tex

Keith B wrote:So why did you suddenly decide you want to test the waters after your comment here? http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... 8#p1035928

mojo84 wrote:

PSTL*PAKR wrote:

mayor wrote:looks like an 8.5x11. I'd have told them i didn't notice something so small, apologized and left.

They gave me no warning when I went in. Cops got there beforwe I was able to order...

You said 20 minutes later. Was the line that long? I haven't seen a line that long in Luby's in many years.

jamminbutter wrote:I can't say what I truly wish to say without taking a chance of getting kicked from the board.

mayor wrote:looks like an 8.5x11. I'd have told them i didn't notice something so small, apologized and left.