Whataburger says no to Open Carry; add them to your list gun nuts

[candycorn]

I'm sure once was too many for the family....but I guess that's the price we pay for keeping a 240 year old law on the books...a motherless child, a wifeless husband, a daughterless mother.

Since we have 30 zillion guns in our society, one really has to wonder why she was carrying it to start with right? Obviously since guns make society safer and we have multiple guns for every man, woman, child and microbe in the nation, nobody should have to carry one....

Oh wait; guns make us less safe (hence why she was carrying).

240 year old RIGHT

Just like Freedom of Speech, Right to Assembly, Freedom of the Press, and Freedom of Religion.

BTW, the USA was far from being at the top of your chart, wasn't it?

Yeah, those were good ideas. The 2nd amendment wasn't one of them.

So unimportant, they made it second on a list of ten.

And still a bad idea.

Quite a few Americans disagree with you.

From BOTH sides of the aisle.

So, the founding fathers were the only group of folks who never got anything wrong? Interesting...I thought to err was human.

As for it being the 2nd Amendment out of ten (as if there was an importance given to it being #2), the 3rd Amendment was about quartering soldiers in homes. Hardly an issue today. Which, of course, lends credence to the document's time of writing influencing what they thought was important. We have cops on top of cops on top of cops backed up by the feds today. They didn't have that in 1790.

But those are facts. I don't want to bore you with them.

A kid in Phoenix plays a dangerous video game.
A kid in London plays a dangerous video game.

It gives him an idea to settle a difference as they did on the game; with a gun. After all, the guy was out of prison in 20 seconds on the game with no other ramifications.

So he looks into buying a gun.

Thanks to our 2nd Amendment, the kid in Phoenix has his choice of places to buy almost any firearm he wants; no questions asked.

Thanks to their not having a 2nd Amendment, the kid in London has almost no access to buying a firearm and if he did, the costs will be outrageous.

It is the only thing that allows the monthly slaughters that occur here.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Good for Whataburger! I would love to show my support by going there and buying a burger, but unfortunately, their burgers are terrible. At least their heart is in the right place!

 

[Auld Phart]

240 year old RIGHT

Just like Freedom of Speech, Right to Assembly, Freedom of the Press, and Freedom of Religion.

BTW, the USA was far from being at the top of your chart, wasn't it?

Yeah, those were good ideas. The 2nd amendment wasn't one of them.

So unimportant, they made it second on a list of ten.

And still a bad idea.

Quite a few Americans disagree with you.

From BOTH sides of the aisle.

So, the founding fathers were the only group of folks who never got anything wrong? Interesting...I thought to err was human.

As for it being the 2nd Amendment out of ten (as if there was an importance given to it being #2), the 3rd Amendment was about quartering soldiers in homes. Hardly an issue today. Which, of course, lends credence to the document's time of writing influencing what they thought was important. We have cops on top of cops on top of cops backed up by the feds today. They didn't have that in 1790.

But those are facts. I don't want to bore you with them.

A kid in Phoenix plays a dangerous video game.
A kid in London plays a dangerous video game.

It gives him an idea to settle a difference as they did on the game; with a gun. After all, the guy was out of prison in 20 seconds on the game with no other ramifications.

So he looks into buying a gun.

Thanks to our 2nd Amendment, the kid in Phoenix has his choice of places to buy almost any firearm he wants; no questions asked.

Thanks to their not having a 2nd Amendment, the kid in London has almost no access to buying a firearm and if he did, the costs will be outrageous.

It is the only thing that allows the monthly slaughters that occur here.

"(as if there was an importance given to it being #2)"

They obviously considered it more important than the following 8, or they wouldn't have brought it up for discussion as early as they did.

Twin Peaks at Waco?

If I had seen a large number of bikers show up where I was eating, I might have had a concern as well.

When a second group showed up, I'd be heading for an exit.

But someone walking in with a rifle slung over his back?

NO reason not to look at the dessert menu.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Of course not. Why would anyone feel that a high powered rifle would be out of place at a booby bar?....or in the Texas School Book Depository, for that matter.

 

[Mac1958]

If "the law" says a customer can carry a gun, this business must be forced to comply and allow it.

Kinda like baking a cake.

Or are we just being selective in our passion for "the law"?

Just kidding, I know the answer to that.



.

 

[Vandalshandle]

If "the law" says a customer can carry a gun, this business must be forced to comply and allow it.

Kinda like baking a cake.

Or are we just being selective in our passion for "the law"?

Just kidding, I know the answer to that.



.

Let's put it this way. Don't give up your day job to become an attorney.

 

[Mac1958]

If "the law" says a customer can carry a gun, this business must be forced to comply and allow it.

Kinda like baking a cake.

Or are we just being selective in our passion for "the law"?

Just kidding, I know the answer to that.



.

Let's put it this way. Don't give up your day job to become an attorney.

Deflection. I like it.

.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

 

[hadit]

If the crazy guy is breaking the law, you bet. Call the cops and let them interpret.

If the guy carrying a gun is not breaking the law and just standing in line to order, that is clearly quite different.

Very different.

.

Those guys were not breaking the law. You can use profanity, insult people and smell of urine.

I don't know what any given city's laws state. If the cops show up and can remove him based on some law, great. Buh-bye to that guy.

But I do know that if a business owner called the cops on a guy with a visible gun standing in line to order, they'd show up, ask him for his license or whatever, and the business owner would be told there are no laws being broken. The gun owner would then be in the same legal position as two guys ordering a cake.

And that's that.

.

Its not a matter of breaking the law or not. Its a matter of it being obviously bad for business since guns are dangerous and it's not what the law calls reasonable assumption of risk to expect to encounter loaded weapons when you go to Whataburger.

Think on this for a moment. If you "encounter loaded weapons", how have you been harmed? If the carrier was inclined to shoot random people, the establishments' reaction to him bringing a weapon is moot. If he/she is NOT, however, so inclined, simply being in the same room with the weapon poses no threat.

And very few people die bungee jumping or in those shark cages we see on Shark Week. Very few moms will sign off of their kid doing either regardless of the statistics. You simply avoid the areas where you have guns and the fanatics who think they need to bring their arsenal to Wendy's and you tend to live longer.

Remember that gunfight at Twin Peaks out in Waco.... Does that happen if guns were not involved? No. Regardless, if you value the company of those you're rolling with, you are not going to go back there due to the owner being happy that bikers are using it for target practice.

Seriously, the odds of dying in a gun battle at any fast food joint are significantly lower than the odds of dying in the trip to or from said joint.

 

[Mac1958]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

 

[hadit]

240 year old RIGHT

Just like Freedom of Speech, Right to Assembly, Freedom of the Press, and Freedom of Religion.

BTW, the USA was far from being at the top of your chart, wasn't it?

Yeah, those were good ideas. The 2nd amendment wasn't one of them.

So unimportant, they made it second on a list of ten.

And still a bad idea.

Quite a few Americans disagree with you.

From BOTH sides of the aisle.

So, the founding fathers were the only group of folks who never got anything wrong? Interesting...I thought to err was human.

As for it being the 2nd Amendment out of ten (as if there was an importance given to it being #2), the 3rd Amendment was about quartering soldiers in homes. Hardly an issue today. Which, of course, lends credence to the document's time of writing influencing what they thought was important. We have cops on top of cops on top of cops backed up by the feds today. They didn't have that in 1790.

But those are facts. I don't want to bore you with them.

A kid in Phoenix plays a dangerous video game.
A kid in London plays a dangerous video game.

It gives him an idea to settle a difference as they did on the game; with a gun. After all, the guy was out of prison in 20 seconds on the game with no other ramifications.

So he looks into buying a gun.

Thanks to our 2nd Amendment, the kid in Phoenix has his choice of places to buy almost any firearm he wants; no questions asked.

Thanks to their not having a 2nd Amendment, the kid in London has almost no access to buying a firearm and if he did, the costs will be outrageous.

It is the only thing that allows the monthly slaughters that occur here.

Wait a minute. A "kid" (by definition NOT an adult, correct?) cannot legally buy a gun in this country. Therefore, to say that he "has his choice of places to buy almost any firearm he wants; no questions asked" is fallacious.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

Mac, are you that dense? I don't allow kids to skate board in my store. I don't allow people to yell obscenities in my store. I don't allow people to enter my store with no shirt or shoes. I don't allow people remove all the merchandise of the East side of the store and put it on the West side of the store. I do not allow anyone in my store to have a gun, except me.

I really should not have to explain stuff like this, Mac. Turn off your AM radio and get real.

 

[Mac1958]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

Mac, are you that dense? I don't allow kids to skate board in my store. I don't allow people to yell obscenities in my store. I don't allow people to enter my store with no shirt or shoes. I don't allow people remove all the merchandise of the East side of the store and put it on the West side of the store. I do not allow anyone in my store to have a gun, except me.

I really should not have to explain stuff like this, Mac. Turn off your AM radio and get real.

So a business is within its rights to control what goes on inside its doors?

It can refuse service?

.

 

[Vandalshandle]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

Mac, are you that dense? I don't allow kids to skate board in my store. I don't allow people to yell obscenities in my store. I don't allow people to enter my store with no shirt or shoes. I don't allow people remove all the merchandise of the East side of the store and put it on the West side of the store. I do not allow anyone in my store to have a gun, except me.

I really should not have to explain stuff like this, Mac. Turn off your AM radio and get real.

So a business is within its rights to control what goes on inside its doors?

It can refuse service?

.

Mac, if you want a basic education in civil rights legislation, they have remedial courses at your local community college. Please. You are embarrassing yourself.

 

[Mac1958]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

Mac, are you that dense? I don't allow kids to skate board in my store. I don't allow people to yell obscenities in my store. I don't allow people to enter my store with no shirt or shoes. I don't allow people remove all the merchandise of the East side of the store and put it on the West side of the store. I do not allow anyone in my store to have a gun, except me.

I really should not have to explain stuff like this, Mac. Turn off your AM radio and get real.

So a business is within its rights to control what goes on inside its doors?

It can refuse service?

.

Mac, if you want a basic education in civil rights legislation, they have remedial courses at your local community college. Please. You are embarrassing yourself.

That's okay, I wasn't expecting a straight answer.

I never do here.

PC is always a one-way street, always.

.

 

[candycorn]

Yeah, those were good ideas. The 2nd amendment wasn't one of them.

So unimportant, they made it second on a list of ten.

And still a bad idea.

Quite a few Americans disagree with you.

From BOTH sides of the aisle.

So, the founding fathers were the only group of folks who never got anything wrong? Interesting...I thought to err was human.

As for it being the 2nd Amendment out of ten (as if there was an importance given to it being #2), the 3rd Amendment was about quartering soldiers in homes. Hardly an issue today. Which, of course, lends credence to the document's time of writing influencing what they thought was important. We have cops on top of cops on top of cops backed up by the feds today. They didn't have that in 1790.

But those are facts. I don't want to bore you with them.

A kid in Phoenix plays a dangerous video game.
A kid in London plays a dangerous video game.

It gives him an idea to settle a difference as they did on the game; with a gun. After all, the guy was out of prison in 20 seconds on the game with no other ramifications.

So he looks into buying a gun.

Thanks to our 2nd Amendment, the kid in Phoenix has his choice of places to buy almost any firearm he wants; no questions asked.

Thanks to their not having a 2nd Amendment, the kid in London has almost no access to buying a firearm and if he did, the costs will be outrageous.

It is the only thing that allows the monthly slaughters that occur here.

Wait a minute. A "kid" (by definition NOT an adult, correct?) cannot legally buy a gun in this country. Therefore, to say that he "has his choice of places to buy almost any firearm he wants; no questions asked" is fallacious.

Oh obviously....those gun show sellers are of the highest ethical standards...no doubt. But let's make it a young adult.

 

[candycorn]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

Mac, are you that dense? I don't allow kids to skate board in my store. I don't allow people to yell obscenities in my store. I don't allow people to enter my store with no shirt or shoes. I don't allow people remove all the merchandise of the East side of the store and put it on the West side of the store. I do not allow anyone in my store to have a gun, except me.

I really should not have to explain stuff like this, Mac. Turn off your AM radio and get real.

So a business is within its rights to control what goes on inside its doors?

It can refuse service?

.

If there is reasonable expectation that the persons in question are going to hurt their business. Yes.

Here is the stupidity of your position. According to you,since the State passes a law, Whataburger is violating it by saying it won't serve customers who are obviously armed and are not law enforcement. Let alone their reasoning which is clear...LE is trained on the use, the proper use, the situational awareness of when to engage/not engage etc and history has shown time and again, the background checks are pretty useless. Anyway, that is Whataburger's stance and you say they are violating the law; right?

Well, wouldn't they also be violating the law if the manager tells an employee to not bring his Uzi to work and wear it over his shoulder while ringing up a #5 combo? There is no law on any State's books stating that Whataburger employees must wear the same orange T-Shirts. If a manager sends an employee home who is wearing her bath robe, isn't he infringing on her right of the "pursuit of happiness" through working and earning money?

 

[Dot Com]

candycorn

 

[Auld Phart]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

Mac, are you that dense? I don't allow kids to skate board in my store. I don't allow people to yell obscenities in my store. I don't allow people to enter my store with no shirt or shoes. I don't allow people remove all the merchandise of the East side of the store and put it on the West side of the store. I do not allow anyone in my store to have a gun, except me.

I really should not have to explain stuff like this, Mac. Turn off your AM radio and get real.

So a business is within its rights to control what goes on inside its doors?

It can refuse service?

.

If there is reasonable expectation that the persons in question are going to hurt their business. Yes.

Here is the stupidity of your position. According to you,since the State passes a law, Whataburger is violating it by saying it won't serve customers who are obviously armed and are not law enforcement. Let alone their reasoning which is clear...LE is trained on the use, the proper use, the situational awareness of when to engage/not engage etc and history has shown time and again, the background checks are pretty useless. Anyway, that is Whataburger's stance and you say they are violating the law; right?

Well, wouldn't they also be violating the law if the manager tells an employee to not bring his Uzi to work and wear it over his shoulder while ringing up a #5 combo? There is no law on any State's books stating that Whataburger employees must wear the same orange T-Shirts. If a manager sends an employee home who is wearing her bath robe, isn't he infringing on her right of the "pursuit of happiness" through working and earning money?

Uzi?

Someone that can jump through the hoops, and afford the licenses needed to own an automatic weapon, is not going to be working at Whataburger.

As for background checks....

I'd REALLY like to see your plan for getting Crips, Bloods, Hells Angels, etc to volunteer to get background checks for their firearms.

 

[Mac1958]

The law says that I can turn right on a red light. Oddly enough, that does not give me the right to turn right into your storefront.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

Precisely what in the world does this have to do with this case?

A guy legally carrying a gun into a store is breaking no law, not in any way.

.

Mac, are you that dense? I don't allow kids to skate board in my store. I don't allow people to yell obscenities in my store. I don't allow people to enter my store with no shirt or shoes. I don't allow people remove all the merchandise of the East side of the store and put it on the West side of the store. I do not allow anyone in my store to have a gun, except me.

I really should not have to explain stuff like this, Mac. Turn off your AM radio and get real.

So a business is within its rights to control what goes on inside its doors?

It can refuse service?

.

If there is reasonable expectation that the persons in question are going to hurt their business. Yes.

Here is the stupidity of your position. According to you,since the State passes a law, Whataburger is violating it by saying it won't serve customers who are obviously armed and are not law enforcement. Let alone their reasoning which is clear...LE is trained on the use, the proper use, the situational awareness of when to engage/not engage etc and history has shown time and again, the background checks are pretty useless. Anyway, that is Whataburger's stance and you say they are violating the law; right?

Well, wouldn't they also be violating the law if the manager tells an employee to not bring his Uzi to work and wear it over his shoulder while ringing up a #5 combo? There is no law on any State's books stating that Whataburger employees must wear the same orange T-Shirts. If a manager sends an employee home who is wearing her bath robe, isn't he infringing on her right of the "pursuit of happiness" through working and earning money?

That sure is a lot of effort.

I think a business should be able to make these decisions, whether it's serving a perfectly legal gun owner or a perfectly legal gay couple. You don't.

Turns out that those all-important "public accommodations" laws are being cherry picked here, for obvious reasons.

.