TexasCHLforum.com

Vol Texan wrote:

jmra wrote:

mojo84 wrote:

Glockster wrote:

TrueFlog wrote:

fickman wrote: 2) I hope the big box and chain businesses will focus on 30.07 to avoid visible firearms in their establishment and choose to forego the 30.06 signs. They only have so much real estate at entrances and its a valuable marketing and branding location. How great would it be for them to turn it into an either/or decision instead of a both/and?

I expect that most big box stores will not be posting signage of any kind. Wal-mart has a company-wide policy of not banning guns at any of their stores - whatever local laws allow for, Wal-mart allows and does not add any additional restrictions. Keep in mind also that a few years ago, the Brady Campaign put alot of pressure on Starbucks to forbid open carry at their stores in Seattle. Starbucks stood firm and refused to give in. If a company based in a liberal town like Seattle stood up to the Bradys and refuse to outlaw open carry, I'm optimistic that other companies will be unlikely to prohibit open carry. And, of course, we haven't seen a rash of no-gun signs in other states (like Oklahoma), so I don't expect it to be an issue here.

Unless something has changed with Starbucks that I'm not aware of, I disagree with saying that they didn't give in. While they make it clear that they claim to not be anti gun or anti 2A, they have said that they do not want guns in any Starbucks:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/bus ... z/2829937/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"After months of wrangling over the highly emotional issue, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz on Wednesday announced that guns are no longer permitted in Starbucks stores — or in Starbucks outdoor seating areas."

They requested people not carry in their stores. They have not banned carry in their stores. This quote is from the same article.

"At this point we'll sit and monitor the situation," says Schultz. "We're hoping that most people will honor the request." But even if gun-carrying customers don't honor the request, says Schultz, "We'll serve them with a smile and not confront them."

Was this in response to handgun carry in other states or the long gun carry in Texas?

I believe specifically to long gun carry.

mojo84 wrote:

Glockster wrote:

TrueFlog wrote:

fickman wrote: 2) I hope the big box and chain businesses will focus on 30.07 to avoid visible firearms in their establishment and choose to forego the 30.06 signs. They only have so much real estate at entrances and its a valuable marketing and branding location. How great would it be for them to turn it into an either/or decision instead of a both/and?

I expect that most big box stores will not be posting signage of any kind. Wal-mart has a company-wide policy of not banning guns at any of their stores - whatever local laws allow for, Wal-mart allows and does not add any additional restrictions. Keep in mind also that a few years ago, the Brady Campaign put alot of pressure on Starbucks to forbid open carry at their stores in Seattle. Starbucks stood firm and refused to give in. If a company based in a liberal town like Seattle stood up to the Bradys and refuse to outlaw open carry, I'm optimistic that other companies will be unlikely to prohibit open carry. And, of course, we haven't seen a rash of no-gun signs in other states (like Oklahoma), so I don't expect it to be an issue here.

Unless something has changed with Starbucks that I'm not aware of, I disagree with saying that they didn't give in. While they make it clear that they claim to not be anti gun or anti 2A, they have said that they do not want guns in any Starbucks:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/bus ... z/2829937/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"After months of wrangling over the highly emotional issue, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz on Wednesday announced that guns are no longer permitted in Starbucks stores — or in Starbucks outdoor seating areas."

They requested people not carry in their stores. They have not banned carry in their stores. This quote is from the same article.

"At this point we'll sit and monitor the situation," says Schultz. "We're hoping that most people will honor the request." But even if gun-carrying customers don't honor the request, says Schultz, "We'll serve them with a smile and not confront them."

TrueFlog wrote:

fickman wrote: 2) I hope the big box and chain businesses will focus on 30.07 to avoid visible firearms in their establishment and choose to forego the 30.06 signs. They only have so much real estate at entrances and its a valuable marketing and branding location. How great would it be for them to turn it into an either/or decision instead of a both/and?

I expect that most big box stores will not be posting signage of any kind. Wal-mart has a company-wide policy of not banning guns at any of their stores - whatever local laws allow for, Wal-mart allows and does not add any additional restrictions. Keep in mind also that a few years ago, the Brady Campaign put alot of pressure on Starbucks to forbid open carry at their stores in Seattle. Starbucks stood firm and refused to give in. If a company based in a liberal town like Seattle stood up to the Bradys and refuse to outlaw open carry, I'm optimistic that other companies will be unlikely to prohibit open carry. And, of course, we haven't seen a rash of no-gun signs in other states (like Oklahoma), so I don't expect it to be an issue here.