Chipotle: Don't Bring Guns Into Our Stores!

[matefrio]

A reminder to everyone from anti gunners to the fudds that no one was harmed and this was a lawful and peaceful protest.

 

[Brains]

Seems like this has some gun owners running away from the issue like cockroaches when the light is turned on.

I would rather say it has some gun owners making the point there is more harm done than good with stunts like this. You don't witness to people by shoving a Bible down their throat, just like you don't educate the public about firearm laws/rights by waving a rifle around a restaurant. (literary embellishment added for impact). Organized protests on a street corner, with signs and such, are much better understood to be a statement. Two guys in a restaurant? Not so much.

You have to consider others, or you're no better than a gun grabber trying to force the world to succumb to their view. Believing the freedom to bear arms should be protected, means that everyone should be OK with whatever you do with a gun? That's pretty obtuse. Preserving our rights does not mean forcing the rest of society to bend to our beliefs. Some people are extremely uncomfortable around weapons in general, and do not want to be directly exposed to them. Regardless of whether they want to ban weapons or not, it is disrespectful to do something you would full well know to cause another anxiety. We want to educate people, so they aren't anxious in the first place, and this is certainly not working towards that goal.

 

[AustinN4]

But we don't judge every gun owner by the actions of a few and the OC movement shouldn't be judged that way either.

But, unfortunately, a large part of the general public does.

 

[Renegade]

I don't mean to pick on you, because I understand your point. But does anyone honestly believe that if you are dining in a typical suburban restaurant with the wife and three children, and in walks two people with rifles, that getting everyone up and walking out the door is the best solution? Based on logistics alone, I would have to disagree.

As I wrote in post #43:

I have not entered or left many a place based on ever changing situational dynamics. If I told my wife I think we are not safe and should leave, she would drop her fork and be out there door in front of me.

You may not know this, but I was on PanAm 103. I changed my flight as a result of terrorist warnings. As a result, here I am. So to me, situational awareness and taking action is as natural as breathing.

 

[Renegade]

There is a building of frustration that gun rights are being attacked and a lack of movement in the legislature to clarify and strengthen laws to protect our freedom\rights from oppression.

Then fix the lack of movement in the legislature. Idiot OC'ing is not going to change Strauss from appoint Dems to the Publix Safety subcommittee and continuing to block pro-gun laws.

 

[Mreed911]

I would rather say it has some gun owners making the point there is more harm done than good with stunts like this. You don't witness to people by shoving a Bible down their throat, just like you don't educate the public about firearm laws/rights by waving a rifle around a restaurant. (literary embellishment added for impact). Organized protests on a street corner, with signs and such, are much better understood to be a statement. Two guys in a restaurant? Not so much.

You have to consider others, or you're no better than a gun grabber trying to force the world to succumb to their view. Believing the freedom to bear arms should be protected, means that everyone should be OK with whatever you do with a gun? That's pretty obtuse. Preserving our rights does not mean forcing the rest of society to bend to our beliefs. Some people are extremely uncomfortable around weapons in general, and do not want to be directly exposed to them. Regardless of whether they want to ban weapons or not, it is disrespectful to do something you would full well know to cause another anxiety. We want to educate people, so they aren't anxious in the first place, and this is certainly not working towards that goal.

This, exactly. Equating long guns to handguns doesn't jive with most folks expectations of guns. I dare say that if they were all wearing hunting clothing (including bright orange) and carrying wood-stocked bolt-action rifles that we would see a much different reaction than camo + "black rifles." It's cognitive dissonance. If handgun OC were suddenly legal, we wouldn't see people OC'ing long guns, by and large, so seeing OC of long guns today doesn't help at ALL with promoting legal OC of handguns. Period.

The public draws a distinction between TYPES of firearms, right or wrong (often wrong, based on TV). What, specifically, are the OC protestors protesting for or against? Open Carry of long guns is already legal and that's what they're doing... so the message isn't clear. It only gets muddier when it's made known that all those long guns are "unloaded" - the public gets that. "They want to be able to carry loaded?" is what people think they're protesting for... missing the point.

Two guys in Chipotle with slung rifles in suburbia is out of place. Go eat near DPS headquarters in Austin, though, and you'll see LOTS of open carry... plus a badge... but even there nobody is fixated on the guns. I guarantee you that if you OC'ed your long gun in the same place at the same time, though, LOTS of folks would fixate. No, it's not illegal. It's just out of place and dissonant... and not helping the OC handgun cause.

 

[Mreed911]

My funny protest idea:

Everyone OC's a Kel-Tec P32/P3AT with the serialized receiver part removed. The frame, slide and barrel intact.

It's small, so it's less "offensive" but makes the point, and without the serialized part it's not a firearm so it's not illegal to carry or display... but properly holstered nobody is the wiser (until challenged by LE and proven that it's not actually a firearm).

That, or closed-bottom holsters with realistic-looking replicas. Again, makes the point.

Thoughts?

 

[Sapper740]

Groups with an agenda, no matter what it is, need to stop forcing businesses to pick a side.

Heaven forbid we have an "agenda". I'd better stop supporting the 2nd Amendment lest someone think I have an "agenda". Of course we have an agenda! Every group in the country has an agenda! The problem is, we're a bunch of pussies (young felines) at pushing our agenda and the fact that we're all afraid to OC longarms for fear of hurting some Lib's sensitivities proves that.

 

[Mreed911]

...we're all afraid to OC longarms for fear of hurting some Lib's sensitivities proves that.

Or we all understand that OC of long arms is already legal and don't see the correlation to OC of handguns, which is the real aim. We also recognize that turning what should be a quiet, two-step issue (we already have CC, now we'll progress to OC as well) into a fracas over any and all carry, period.

 

[Renegade]

My funny protest idea:

Everyone OC's a Kel-Tec P32/P3AT with the serialized receiver part removed. The frame, slide and barrel intact.

It's small, so it's less "offensive" but makes the point, and without the serialized part it's not a firearm so it's not illegal to carry or display... but properly holstered nobody is the wiser (until challenged by LE and proven that it's not actually a firearm).

That, or closed-bottom holsters with realistic-looking replicas. Again, makes the point.

Thoughts?

On college campus, they use empty holsters to show their point, I have also seen blue guns where those are allowed.

 

[rushthezeppelin]

I see and agree with somewhat both sides of the argument. While I feel that OC of long arms is a good thing and if done enough will start to teach people that someone with a rifle slung on their back isn't going to hurt them. The people that will, you won't see the gun until it's shooting at you or someone else, criminals just don't OC. I will however rail VERY hard against these people who decide to flip the gun to their front and put their hands anywhere near that bang switch. That is brandishing plain and simple and does become much more suspicious. Also I'm tired of the people thinking that their rights are violated when these places don't permit weapons or ask you to leave. Businesses have rights just as much as these OC advocates (despite what courts said about that bakery that wouldn't make a cake for a gay couple which is total BS).

Curious though, to all the people who think people should stop all OC of long guns because it scares people....how exactly do you propose teaching these ignorant liberals that someone with a gun isn't automatically a threat? If you have a legit answer I would love to see it (not trying to patronize I honestly don't know of a better way). The smarter OC advocates (read guys with rifles slung muzzle down over their backs) are simply using the exact same tactics that liberals used to get us in the spot we are in today with many subjects apart from even gun issues. I understand some people want us to take the high road, but honestly that has gotten us nowhere but this "compromise" bullshit that has been shoved at us for decades.

 

[Brains]

I see and agree with somewhat both sides of the argument. While I feel that OC of long arms is a good thing and if done enough will start to teach people that someone with a rifle slung on their back isn't going to hurt them. The people that will, you won't see the gun until it's shooting at you or someone else, criminals just don't OC. I will however rail VERY hard against these people who decide to flip the gun to their front and put their hands anywhere near that bang switch. That is brandishing plain and simple and does become much more suspicious. Also I'm tired of the people thinking that their rights are violated when these places don't permit weapons or ask you to leave. Businesses have rights just as much as these OC advocates (despite what courts said about that bakery that wouldn't make a cake for a gay couple which is total BS).

Curious though, to all the people who think people should stop all OC of long guns because it scares people....how exactly do you propose teaching these ignorant liberals that someone with a gun isn't automatically a threat? If you have a legit answer I would love to see it (not trying to patronize I honestly don't know of a better way). The smarter OC advocates (read guys with rifles slung muzzle down over their backs) are simply using the exact same tactics that liberals used to get us in the spot we are in today with many subjects apart from even gun issues. I understand some people want us to take the high road, but honestly that has gotten us nowhere but this "compromise" bullshit that has been shoved at us for decades.

I don't believe we've seen anyone in this thread say OC of long guns should cease. If we did, I missed it. I certainly believe it's fine, and I've personally done it without nary a mention by passers by (purchasing a gun in a parking lot, for instance).

But to answer your question, I firmly hold that education is the key here. By education, I do NOT mean the brandishing method displayed in this scenario. Sure, people learned something that day. They learned "some a$$#0!3 freaked everyone out by walking into a Chipotle with a rifle in his hands, and can you believe it the law lets him do that??!!?!?!?!". No, I mean one-on-one time with a person who, regardless of their political football team affiliation, is at least open to learning more about guns. Taking even one anti-gunner under your wing will do more than a demonstration ever will. You warm up one anti-gunner, and (s)he'll share with another. That is how you start a movement. That is how we reverse this course of anti gun nuttery.

 

[Younggun]

The easy solution would have been for the manager of the restaurant to simply ask the two idjits to leave.

 

[mitchntx]

Curious though, to all the people who think people should stop all OC of long guns because it scares people....how exactly do you propose teaching these ignorant liberals that someone with a gun isn't automatically a threat? If you have a legit answer I would love to see it (not trying to patronize I honestly don't know of a better way). The smarter OC advocates (read guys with rifles slung muzzle down over their backs) are simply using the exact same tactics that liberals used to get us in the spot we are in today with many subjects apart from even gun issues. I understand some people want us to take the high road, but honestly that has gotten us nowhere but this "compromise" bullshit that has been shoved at us for decades.

I'd like to see the elimination of OC reference any one has made.

To answer the education part ...
When was the last time you (or anyone else posting) invited a known-fence sitter or anti-gunner to a range for some real world enlightenment?

Be proactive in education where you have a constructive dialogue instead of the subliminal (and easy) method where you have no input as to what your audience is thinking. If you are passionate about something, put in the effort to further the cause

 

[Vaquero]

Against my nature and normal judgment, I found myself replacing "open carry" with "openly gay" throughout this thread. Carrying that theme throughout the arguments presented. Now I can't say definitively, where I stand. I always support property owners rights.

Biggest difference, if you don't allow open carry in your establishment, gun owners will bitch.
If you don't allow gays, you'll get sued.

 

[franzas]

The easy solution would have been for the manager of the restaurant to simply ask the two idjits to leave.

This. From what I've heard about TX property laws, verbal notification from proprietor supersedes signage

 

[matefrio]

I'd like to see the elimination of OC reference any one has made.

To answer the education part ...
When was the last time you (or anyone else posting) invited a known-fence sitter or anti-gunner to a range for some real world enlightenment?

Be proactive in education where you have a constructive dialogue instead of the subliminal (and easy) method where you have no input as to what your audience is thinking. If you are passionate about something, put in the effort to further the cause

I've taken fence sitters and those who are curious out on my own dime to gun ranges and promote shooting with the young folks of our church through youth programs there offering my time and guns. I've sent ammo and guns along to Appleseed shoots and offered many more times to do the same. I've debated without harsh words or yelling and have won over liberal thinkers. I've organized shoots ( about 4 a year on average), group CHL classes and even helped out women's groups with firearms. Boy Scouts I help man the shooting range during scout camp so the instructor has more time with the boys.

I'm looking at teaching 4 hour CHL classes here with a group that offers them for free.

I've gone to Austin and put my name down in favor of positive gun legislation, I've suggested new legislation and write my reps. Local, State and Federal.

I could go on.

I'm not saying everyone must support these folks. Just don't be afraid of their message and use the opportunity to educate and inform.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

It comes down to manners and perception. These guys don't "appear" to be safe.

They're also waving it in folks faces. If you had a pistol (open carry) and casually went about your business you'd probably rarely get a second look.

Stir, stir....It's like being flaming gay or gay marriage. Keep it to yourself and most folks won't care. Put on a parade and rub it in everyone's faces and they start thinking about what they should do to shut it down.


I'm not saying I agree with restricting rights. I'm just saying that this is how the world works.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Protesting inside a private business is a bad strategy. Protest somewhere out in public where people can choose to participate or not. Let them come to you.

If we can just get the stupid law passed then no ones going to open carry an AK through Chipotle.

 

[Mreed911]

This. From what I've heard about TX property laws, verbal notification from proprietor supersedes signage

For long arms and handguns this is markedly different. Different laws, different charges, etc.