Manager at Texas Whataburger denies service to detective because of his gun

[mojo84]

In fact, 30.07 does NOT apply to Law Enforcement. It only applies to persons carrying under LTC.

That's why I said the cop wouldn't have thought the sign applied to him and it would not have helped in this situation.

Correct, and just to be clear, my position that they should post signage was not aimed at this particular incident with a LEO, but rather was aimed generally at Whataburger’s refusal to post 30.07 signs while still insisting on their property right to bar open carry from their stores. As long as they (A) take that position, and (B) refuse to post the signs, they are (C) NOT doing the right thing.

I absolutely agree with the proposition that it is their property, and therefore their right to keep open carry out of their stores. That’s not the issue for me. The issue is their refusal to acknoledge that they have some kind of moral obligation to give their paying customers the only kind of proper notice recognized by the law BEFORE that customer sets foot inside the store. That refusal has several negative outcomes for everyone concerned:

1. It places an employee in the position of having to confront an armed person about their weapon.
2. It’s embarrassing to the person who is armed - who may, after all, not be dressed in a manner where they can simply cover it up.
3. It creates controversy in the form of bad publicity for the gun rights crowd, and good publicity for the MAIG/MDA crowd.

Thus, it shows a profound disrespect for a segment of their customer base, and a casual disregard for their employees’ safety. Frankly, it comes off as their being afraid to face the music, and it’s a turn off. Don’t want open carry? Post the darn signs. What could be more simple than that?

I understand and appreciate your position. I do not have a strong opinion one way or another about how they notify people since the law gives both options, signs or verbally or orally on a case by case basis. Also, from a practical sense, there are so few open carriers, I doubt this issue comes up very often. I also believe their decision to do it this way allows managers and operators the opportunity to use their own discretion whether to inform and not. I can see situations when there are no other or very few customers in the restaurant and the manager or operator decides to let it slide and then other times when there may be a packed house and the manager decides to notify. I do believe if they decide to inform someone, it should be done discretely so as to not embarrass the customer.

Here's a twist, I disagree with the idea that one should be required to orally or verbally as some advocate in order to have them not open carry in the place of business. I believe it should be up to the property owner to decide how they want to interact and notify the customer.

I also want to point out, I do not believe the only option is to have the open carrier leave. All they need to do is cover up their gun. If a shoulder rig is worn, all it takes is a jacket or cover shirt.

[mayor]

If they would toss me or any other citizen out for wearing a gun, why shouldn't they kick out gun-toting cops without a uniform? Cop can either cover it or leave it in the car, just like the rest of us. Seems like he is just looking for special treatment. We've known how so many of them get turned off about the "Do you know who I am?" defense. This time the shoe is on the other foot.

So because they don't respect our constitutional rights they should treat law enforcement just as poorly? I can see us having the same rights to carry as law enforcement and I don't think a LTC holder or LEO should be asked to leave especially when there is no posting. Dump Whataburger. If they don't want open carry they should post. This has been covered many times on this forum.

Sure, they have property rights, but how about they have enough respect for their customers to post 30.07 signs, to save their customers the embarrassment of being kicked out of one of their stores? This stuff cuts both ways. Whataburger does have a right to enforce its dress code, but it ALSO has a moral duty to inform its paying customers of that dress code, via the mandated-by-law signage .......then everybody is happy, no employee is placed in the position of having to eject an armed person, and no LTC holder will be publicly embarrassed. There’s rights, and then there’s “the right thing to do”. Whataburger has rights, but they’re not doing the right thing.

In ‘N Out is better anyway.

I wasn't embarrassed by being asked to leave. I was ticked because, I'd already ordered and was there with friends. I asked for my refund and left. No drama, no rudeness. So did several of my friends. The situation could have been avoided with a 30.07 sign.

[The Annoyed Man]

In fact, 30.07 does NOT apply to Law Enforcement. It only applies to persons carrying under LTC.

That's why I said the cop wouldn't have thought the sign applied to him and it would not have helped in this situation.

Correct, and just to be clear, my position that they should post signage was not aimed at this particular incident with a LEO, but rather was aimed generally at Whataburger’s refusal to post 30.07 signs while still insisting on their property right to bar open carry from their stores. As long as they (A) take that position, and (B) refuse to post the signs, they are (C) NOT doing the right thing.

I absolutely agree with the proposition that it is their property, and therefore their right to keep open carry out of their stores. That’s not the issue for me. The issue is their refusal to acknoledge that they have some kind of moral obligation to give their paying customers the only kind of proper notice recognized by the law BEFORE that customer sets foot inside the store. That refusal has several negative outcomes for everyone concerned:

1. It places an employee in the position of having to confront an armed person about their weapon.
2. It’s embarrassing to the person who is armed - who may, after all, not be dressed in a manner where they can simply cover it up.
3. It creates controversy in the form of bad publicity for the gun rights crowd, and good publicity for the MAIG/MDA crowd.

Thus, it shows a profound disrespect for a segment of their customer base, and a casual disregard for their employees’ safety. Frankly, it comes off as their being afraid to face the music, and it’s a turn off. Don’t want open carry? Post the darn signs. What could be more simple than that?

I understand and appreciate your position. I do not have a strong opinion one way or another about how they notify people since the law gives both options, signs or verbally or orally on a case by case basis. Also, from a practical sense, there are so few open carriers, I doubt this issue comes up very often. I also believe their decision to do it this way allows managers and operators the opportunity to use their own discretion whether to inform and not. I can see situations when there are no other or very few customers in the restaurant and the manager or operator decides to let it slide and then other times when there may be a packed house and the manager decides to notify. I do believe if they decide to inform someone, it should be done discretely so as to not embarrass the customer.

Here's a twist, I disagree with the idea that one should be required to orally or verbally as some advocate in order to have them not open carry in the place of business. I believe it should be up to the property owner to decide how they want to interact and notify the customer.

I also want to point out, I do not believe the only option is to have the open carrier leave. All they need to do is cover up their gun. If a shoulder rig is worn, all it takes is a jacket or cover shirt.

That seems reasonable, but the only thing I would quibble with is this: if indeed it is Whataburger’s intention to give managers some discretion in applying the “no open carry” rule, then that should be their public position because it sows confusion otherwise. They’ve taken a public stance of disallowing open carry......but then they privately tell their managers that it’s up to them to enforce it or not? To me, that’s kind of chicken manure.

But you’re certainly right that open carriers represent a fairly small segm,ent of the overall LTC community. I do OC myself on occasion, but more often than not, I conceal. And like Jusme mentioned above, if given notice, I’d just untuck my shirt and cover up. I just don’t like it when a company has a policy which “sucks” people in, only to subject them to possible notice.....without any kind of predictability. I prefer when a company either fishes or cuts bait, instead of keeping people on tenterhooks.

[Soccerdad1995]

If they would toss me or any other citizen out for wearing a gun, why shouldn't they kick out gun-toting cops without a uniform? Cop can either cover it or leave it in the car, just like the rest of us. Seems like he is just looking for special treatment. We've known how so many of them get turned off about the "Do you know who I am?" defense. This time the shoe is on the other foot.

So because they don't respect our constitutional rights they should treat law enforcement just as poorly? I can see us having the same rights to carry as law enforcement and I don't think a LTC holder or LEO should be asked to leave especially when there is no posting. Dump Whataburger. If they don't want open carry they should post. This has been covered many times on this forum.

Sure, they have property rights, but how about they have enough respect for their customers to post 30.07 signs, to save their customers the embarrassment of being kicked out of one of their stores? This stuff cuts both ways. Whataburger does have a right to enforce its dress code, but it ALSO has a moral duty to inform its paying customers of that dress code, via the mandated-by-law signage .......then everybody is happy, no employee is placed in the position of having to eject an armed person, and no LTC holder will be publicly embarrassed. There’s rights, and then there’s “the right thing to do”. Whataburger has rights, but they’re not doing the right thing.

In ‘N Out is better anyway.

I wasn't embarrassed by being asked to leave. I was ticked because, I'd already ordered and was there with friends. I asked for my refund and left. No drama, no rudeness. So did several of my friends. The situation could have been avoided with a 30.07 sign.

Instead of asking for a refund (which meant that you did not immediately leave upon receiving verbal notice), you could have just walked out and then reported the theft of your money to the police. That would have been interesting. Or if you had paid via credit card, and didn't want the drama, a credit card charge back would have been appropriate. In any event, if someone asks me to leave, I leave. I don't stick around for any reason at all.

I agree with others in this thread that the same policy should apply to LEO's, especially plain clothes. If private property rights trump the right of a fellow citizen to carry, then why would they not also trump the rights of your employees, the local LEO's? If anything, you should have more stringent requirements for those who actually work for you.

I am split on the signage. Some sign would be nice, but it doesn't necessarily need to be a compliant 30.07 sign. A simple "please cover up your guns" gets the message across and can be followed up with verbal notice if needed.

[mayor]

If they would toss me or any other citizen out for wearing a gun, why shouldn't they kick out gun-toting cops without a uniform? Cop can either cover it or leave it in the car, just like the rest of us. Seems like he is just looking for special treatment. We've known how so many of them get turned off about the "Do you know who I am?" defense. This time the shoe is on the other foot.

So because they don't respect our constitutional rights they should treat law enforcement just as poorly? I can see us having the same rights to carry as law enforcement and I don't think a LTC holder or LEO should be asked to leave especially when there is no posting. Dump Whataburger. If they don't want open carry they should post. This has been covered many times on this forum.

Sure, they have property rights, but how about they have enough respect for their customers to post 30.07 signs, to save their customers the embarrassment of being kicked out of one of their stores? This stuff cuts both ways. Whataburger does have a right to enforce its dress code, but it ALSO has a moral duty to inform its paying customers of that dress code, via the mandated-by-law signage .......then everybody is happy, no employee is placed in the position of having to eject an armed person, and no LTC holder will be publicly embarrassed. There’s rights, and then there’s “the right thing to do”. Whataburger has rights, but they’re not doing the right thing.

In ‘N Out is better anyway.

I wasn't embarrassed by being asked to leave. I was ticked because, I'd already ordered and was there with friends. I asked for my refund and left. No drama, no rudeness. So did several of my friends. The situation could have been avoided with a 30.07 sign.

Instead of asking for a refund (which meant that you did not immediately leave upon receiving verbal notice), you could have just walked out and then reported the theft of your money to the police. That would have been interesting. Or if you had paid via credit card, and didn't want the drama, a credit card charge back would have been appropriate. In any event, if someone asks me to leave, I leave. I don't stick around for any reason at all.

I agree with others in this thread that the same policy should apply to LEO's, especially plain clothes. If private property rights trump the right of a fellow citizen to carry, then why would they not also trump the rights of your employees, the local LEO's? If anything, you should have more stringent requirements for those who actually work for you.

I am split on the signage. Some sign would be nice, but it doesn't necessarily need to be a compliant 30.07 sign. A simple "please cover up your guns" gets the message across and can be followed up with verbal notice if needed.

I was surprised by the request after I'd purchased my meal and was walking away from the counter. I was 3rd or 4th in our group to order and pay. I wanted the refund so I could go elsewhere to eat. Again, a proper sign would have avoided the situation. I agree with TAM, and feel it is impolite to treat your customers that way.

I like the idea of just leaving and report a theft.

[mojo84]

I like the idea of just leaving and report a theft.

Give this a shot and let us know how it works out for you.

[Grundy1133]

I say shame on Whataburger for having such stupid policies. For a fast food chain who is primarily known for being a Texas chain (Even tho there are whataburger restaurants in other states) it makes them look bad imo. I'll think twice before I visit a whataburger again...

[mojo84]

If it's only proper to put up a 30.07 sign if one doesn't want open carry, how about a sign stating a baker will not bake a cake for a gay couple's wedding? Should that be required? According to the Supreme Court, a baker does not have to bake a cake for someone that their actions conflict with the baker's religious beliefs.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06 ... ouple.html

The Supreme Court ruled Monday in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, in one of the most closely watched cases of the term.

In a 7-2 decision, the justices set aside a Colorado court ruling against the baker -- while stopping short of deciding the broader issue of whether a business can refuse to serve gay and lesbian people. The opinion was penned by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often the swing justice in tight cases.

[mayor]

I like the idea of just leaving and report a theft.

Give this a shot and let us know how it works out for you.

I didn't say it is a good idea.

[mojo84]

I like the idea of just leaving and report a theft.

Give this a shot and let us know how it works out for you.

I didn't say it is a good idea.

I guess I misinterpreted, "I like the idea of just leaving and report a theft."

[Soccerdad1995]

Here's a twist, I disagree with the idea that one should be required to orally or verbally as some advocate in order to have them not open carry in the place of business. I believe it should be up to the property owner to decide how they want to interact and notify the customer.

OK, just curious. How else would a property owner notify someone that they don't like open carry, if they don't post a sign and also don't tell them orally or verbally? Are you thinking about posting a notice in the newspaper or something?

I would point out that currently a property owner is NOT required to orally or verbally notify anyone of anything. If a property owner doesn't like something, they can let people know however they want. If someone misses (or ignores) the notice, the property owner can ask them to leave. But if they want to be able to use the police that we all pay for (including the person they are having arrested), then the notification requirements should be extremely clear and unambiguous.

[Soccerdad1995]

I like the idea of just leaving and report a theft.

Give this a shot and let us know how it works out for you.

It should work out the exact same way that it works out for a shopkeeper who calls 911 to report a theft (e.g. shoplifting). In this case, the business took a person's cash then refused to deliver the promised goods because they person was wearing something they disagreed with, and which they could clearly see before they took the cash.

But I agree that it might not work out as well. Unfortunately, the laws do not apply equally to us all.

[Charles L. Cotton]

. . . I agree with others in this thread that the same policy should apply to LEO's, especially plain clothes.

Are you saying you think stores should bar armed LEOs in uniform?

Chas.

[mojo84]

Here's a twist, I disagree with the idea that one should be required to orally or verbally as some advocate in order to have them not open carry in the place of business. I believe it should be up to the property owner to decide how they want to interact and notify the customer.

OK, just curious. How else would a property owner notify someone that they don't like open carry, if they don't post a sign and also don't tell them orally or verbally? Are you thinking about posting a notice in the newspaper or something?

I would point out that currently a property owner is NOT required to orally or verbally notify anyone of anything. If a property owner doesn't like something, they can let people know however they want. If someone misses (or ignores) the notice, the property owner can ask them to leave. But if they want to be able to use the police that we all pay for (including the person they are having arrested), then the notification requirements should be extremely clear and unambiguous.

Of course I do not believe a notice in the paper should be required.

My comment is in response to those that claim a sign should not be sufficient notification and the manager or operator of the business should have to verbally tell someone they are not allowed to open carry. I should not have used the word "oral" in more comment. However, you are incorrect, oral or verbal notice is required.

I believe the laws and rules are unambiguous and are very clear.

[nightmare69]

Detectives don’t wear a traditional patrol uniform. Most wear business attire with a badge and gun. That is their uniform. Since he was on-duty I’m sure his department requires him to open carry so covering it up is out of the question.

I have a training uniform that is a polo shirt with my name and department and I just wear my badge and gun on my belt.

The officer handled it correctly and I’m sure the employee now knows the correct policy on open carry.