TexasCHLforum.com

Thanks Vol, you articulated that way better than I could have.

While I believe some new signs preventing Open Carry will appear, I think that the majority of businesses will update their 30.06 signage to be compliant with the new law and instruct management to give verbal warnings (30.07) to prevent OC.

harrycallahan wrote:While I believe some new signs preventing Open Carry will appear, I think that the majority of businesses will update their 30.06 signage to be compliant with the new law and instruct management to give verbal warnings (30.07) to prevent OC.

You think? If you believe the media hype that would most likely result in the death of the employee.

jmra wrote:

harrycallahan wrote:While I believe some new signs preventing Open Carry will appear, I think that the majority of businesses will update their 30.06 signage to be compliant with the new law and instruct management to give verbal warnings (30.07) to prevent OC.

You think? If you believe the media hype that would most likely result in the death of the employee.

Sadly, based on some of the internet discussions I'm seeing, its not that farfetched. A whole lot of "I'm not listening to the busboy, I won't leave unless I talk to a manager."

Taypo wrote: Sadly, based on some of the internet discussions I'm seeing, its not that farfetched. A whole lot of "I'm not listening to the busboy, I won't leave unless I talk to a manager."

Also sadly, that type of attitude ("I'm not listening to the busboy, I won't leave unless I talk to a manager") is not helpful to the open carry cause in the eyes of the general public. That attitude drives us more towards the OCT/OCTC end of the open carry responsibility spectrum than the responsible CHL holder end.

Asking to speak with management is proper and sometimes required. Certainly doing so certainly doesn't equate to OCT type activities.

harrycallahan wrote:Asking to speak with management is proper and sometimes required. Certainly doing so certainly doesn't equate to OCT type activities.

How exactly is asking to speak with anyone other than the employee that informed you proper? If you speak with a mangager and they tell you the same exact thing, are you going to ask for their boss?

The potential for causing an OCT type scene increases every time someone decides they want to talk to someone more important than the person that asked them to leave. Choosing not to leave when you're asked is never a good thing, in my opinion. Rather than a simple walk out, we're getting into the potential for a 911 call, trespass, etc..

Isn't it just easier to do what the business is asking? Obviously they don't want your money - why try to force them?

I again urge everyone who decides to openly carry to be a statesman. If one is asked to leave by an owner, agent or employee of a property owner, it would be prudent to leave. If you ask for a supervisor, then you have legally refused to leave upon being asked to do so. This raises the offense from a Class C to a Class A misdemeanor. Yes, the Code provision requires that oral notice be given by the property owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, but I would never try to rely a lack of authority as a defense. OCT is going to be doing this kind of thing and responsible gun owners must be viewed in stark contrast to those tactics.

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I again urge everyone who decides to openly carry to be a statesman. If one is asked to leave by an owner, agent or employee of a property owner, it would be prudent to leave. If you ask for a supervisor, then you have legally refused to leave upon being asked to do so. This raises the offense from a Class C to a Class A misdemeanor. Yes, the Code provision requires that oral notice be given by the property owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, but I would never try to rely a lack of authority as a defense. OCT is going to be doing this kind of thing and responsible gun owners must be viewed in stark contrast to those tactics.

Chas.

Thank you, sir. I'm nowhere near as eloquent as you are.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I again urge everyone who decides to openly carry to be a statesman. If one is asked to leave by an owner, agent or employee of a property owner, it would be prudent to leave. If you ask for a supervisor, then you have legally refused to leave upon being asked to do so. This raises the offense from a Class C to a Class A misdemeanor. Yes, the Code provision requires that oral notice be given by the property owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, but I would never try to rely a lack of authority as a defense. OCT is going to be doing this kind of thing and responsible gun owners must be viewed in stark contrast to those tactics.

Chas.

No one will have to tell me twice to vamoose. The busboy is following orders & he in fact just may be on our side of the fence.

If I were asked to leave I would immediately comply, maybe drop a dollar or two on the table and pleasantly ask if the manager had time to meet me. I would then express to him/her my disappointment in the decision to ban me & explain why it is prudent to carry. I would also tell him/her that I will never do business with an establishment that doesnt respect my constitutional rights - hand him/her my business card, extend an invitation to the range, shake hands & walk.

Though the manager may not be the one to make policy, he will have the ear of those that do. It's a dollar and cents world and restaurants work on very close margins.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I again urge everyone who decides to openly carry to be a statesman. If one is asked to leave by an owner, agent or employee of a property owner, it would be prudent to leave. If you ask for a supervisor, then you have legally refused to leave upon being asked to do so. This raises the offense from a Class C to a Class A misdemeanor. Yes, the Code provision requires that oral notice be given by the property owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, but I would never try to rely a lack of authority as a defense. OCT is going to be doing this kind of thing and responsible gun owners must be viewed in stark contrast to those tactics.

Chas.

Stark contrast is a very important point. As Ronald Reagan said in 1975 in a speech to CPAC, "... raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand ..." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OznoFCZdS8

DPS records show that we CHL holders are the most law abiding demographic in Texas. The general public does not understand this. My approach, and the approach I recommend, is to do as Charles suggests ... leave when asked. Raising an issue of any kind would tend to give the impression that all of us are like OTC/OCTC.

Bold colors.

Taypo wrote:

harrycallahan wrote:Asking to speak with management is proper and sometimes required. Certainly doing so certainly doesn't equate to OCT type activities.

How exactly is asking to speak with anyone other than the employee that informed you proper? If you speak with a mangager and they tell you the same exact thing, are you going to ask for their boss?

The potential for causing an OCT type scene increases every time someone decides they want to talk to someone more important than the person that asked them to leave. Choosing not to leave when you're asked is never a good thing, in my opinion. Rather than a simple walk out, we're getting into the potential for a 911 call, trespass, etc..

Isn't it just easier to do what the business is asking? Obviously they don't want your money - why try to force them?

There will be times that in order to resolve the business transaction at hand that a manager or someone with managerial authority is required. In my mind, by asking for the manager I am not attempting to remain or dissuade them from compelling me to leave, it is so that I can leave legally by paying for services rendered.

If asked to leave by an employee of an establishment because I were wearing a firearm, I would leave. I would then write to the establishment notifying them that I was told to leave their establishment by an employee and that I nor my family will never darken their doorway again. If it were a franchise I would also inform the main office.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I again urge everyone who decides to openly carry to be a statesman. If one is asked to leave by an owner, agent or employee of a property owner, it would be prudent to leave. If you ask for a supervisor, then you have legally refused to leave upon being asked to do so. This raises the offense from a Class C to a Class A misdemeanor. Yes, the Code provision requires that oral notice be given by the property owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, but I would never try to rely a lack of authority as a defense. OCT is going to be doing this kind of thing and responsible gun owners must be viewed in stark contrast to those tactics.

Chas.

I agree with your statesman comment completely. However, I disagree with your assumption that asking for a manager creates an offense. I have no doubt you are, as I am too, tired of OCT's destructive antics and perhaps it is from there you are speaking. Respectfully I am not coming from that direction. If a busboy asks me to leave my steak dinner, I'll be happy to comply. Clearly I am not wanted. The reason I need to speak to someone in charge is not to argue my point, it is so that I may lawfully resolve the charges and leave.

MeMelYup wrote:If asked to leave by an employee of an establishment because I were wearing a firearm, I would leave. I would then write to the establishment notifying them that I was told to leave their establishment by an employee and that I nor my family will never darken their doorway again. If it were a franchise I would also inform the main office.

This. All day long.

The only way to force a business to make a change is to convince them they're wrong, and the fastest way to do that is to hurt the pocketbook.