Educational Pamphlets for Employers & Merchants

[ErnieP]

I read in the past week that a theater chain in an apparent knee-jerk response, has started posting 30.06 type signs. This may be due to a recent incident where a patron got up in a theater, walked to the front, fired a round into the ceiling, and went out an emergency exit. Every week we read on the Board about restaurant and workplace issues. It occurs to me that with the expertise on this Board, we should be able to put together two separate, well done, pamphlets that are designed to convince Employers and Merchants that when they prohibit carry they actually put their establishments at greater risk because BGs don't care about signs...that actually communicate to BGs "here's an easy target."

A project of this nature could possibly feature testimonials from other Employers and Merchants who have changed their minds and taken down their do-not-carry signs; maybe even a sample list of the "enlightened". The phamphlets could also bring home the point that CHL holders pay a considerable amount of money to secure their licenses, and likewise spend a lot more than the BGs with Merchants, i.e., "[W]ouldn't you rather be soliciting Good Guy patrons?"

Maybe someone on the board would like to undertake this project. Otherwise, maybe Charles if so inclined, could start a "collaborative" effort where a draft of each pamphlet could posted on the Board so everyone else could make suggestions for improvement, and a Moderator could make modifications as appropriate. Once completed, the pamphlets could be posted on the Board for download as .pdf(s). This could be done pretty quick, and benefit all of us. What do you think?

[lrb111]

I like this idea. I have thought the no carry = no $$ cards have not served us optimally. We also know that direct communication with some businesses have caused signs to come down.

I've tried thinking about the no carry = No $$ card information, and trying to put the information, in a more positive and more easily accepted manner. It's my opinion that the background checks and clearances we are given could be written much more positively and clearly in a handout of some type.

One example:
The card normally says, "Never convicted of a felony".
a more positive alternate:
"Has requested the F.B.I. to have his/her background researched for any traces of felonies."
"Has requested the Texas Department of Safety Criminal Division to have his/her background researched for any traces of felonies."

The same thing sort of thing about going through the process of having fingerprints done. Having a qualified official certify the person is the same as the one having the fingerprints done.

The entire process needs to be disassembled on paper, and reassembled as positive actions, and needs to avoid statements that lead to leaving a negative thought in the mind of the reader.

Also, avoid negative reinforcement. Some folks are susceptible to negative reinforcement.
An example is saying, "Don't touch that." The person told that seems not to be able to stop, instead reaching to touch.
On our topic, saying "Has not had a DWI in the past five years." may leave leave a question in the mind of the reader. It may also create a link in the mind of the reader, that the CHL holder had DWI's in the past, or just outside the 5 year window.

We should try to avoid statements that may leave negative attachments in the mind of the reader.
FWIW, I'm not claiming expertise in writing this up. I do have some training in recognizing negative reinforcement , though.

[anygunanywhere]

You are suggesting we tell people in writing how nice we are so they will let us exercise our second amendment right to arm ourselves and defend ourselves? You are suggesting that we, a small segment of society, tell business and employers how nice we are so we can carry, when those same businesses and employers will not take even the slightest effort to prevent the obvious (to me, at least) riff-raff of society to enter the same place with no explanation of what thugs they are?

That will work. I know, me and my Mr. Negativity. I can't help it.

Anygunanywhere

[Boxerrider]

I think it's a good idea. These people weren't born associating guns with people who might harm them, they were taught to do it. Retraining is going to be a long slow process. Even if you don't make converts, getting a friendly word in to the folks who aren't openly supporting either side is a step in the right direction.
Anybody remember, "You meet the nicest people on a Honda"?

Enjoy!

[anygunanywhere]

I find it interesting to note that the ones you are trying to convince that we are friendly and out to hurt no one have superior knowledge of the other rights enumerated in the BOR. They just choose to be ignorant of the second. I think you are spitting in the wind.

Anygunanywhere

[ErnieP]

I find it interesting to note that the ones you are trying to convince that we are friendly and out to hurt no one have superior knowledge of the other rights enumerated in the BOR. They just choose to be ignorant of the second. I think you are spitting in the wind.

Anygunanywhere

Maybe. However, not every CHL is equally capable of talking to his/her employer, or to on a moment's notice discuss the issue with a restaurant manager. A pamphlet such as these could help our fellow CHL's who need that extra bit of help. Without it, their/our rights simply yield to ignorance. What's to be lost vs. gained?

Sometimes it helps to think big, and out of the box. Suppose we were able to put together a couple of high quality pamphlets. Then suppose maybe we could get a few or a larger number of Chambers of Commerce, through our members/acquaintances who belong to the Chamber, to distribute digital copies to their membership. Maybe, just maybe a merchant that was on the fence, ready to do a knee jerk, might make the right choice. As it is said, "[N]othing ventured, nothing gained." Just something to think about. We can complain about infringements on our rights, lay down like a sheep, or in a dignified, cogent manner, keep presenting our case to Preserve the Second Amendment....that within a year or two depending on the results of the election.....could be lost forever.

Anybody willing to start a draft pamphlet? Much of the content for the two would be the same, so to start on one would make the second easier.

[anygunanywhere]

Go for it, Ernie. I would like to be proved wrong. Sorry I sound jaded.

Keep us posted on how things work out for you guys on this enlightenment project of yours. Printing shops are in the yellow pages.

Anygunanywhere

[aardwolf]

Many businesses aren't prejudiced. I don't bother arguing with bigots. I just spend my money somewhere else instead.

[Mike1951]

What theatre chain?

What incident?

[Excaliber]

I read in the past week that a theater chain in an apparent knee-jerk response, has started posting 30.06 type signs. This may be due to a recent incident where a patron got up in a theater, walked to the front, fired a round into the ceiling, and went out an emergency exit. Every week we read on the Board about restaurant and workplace issues. It occurs to me that with the expertise on this Board, we should be able to put together two separate, well done, pamphlets that are designed to convince Employers and Merchants that when they prohibit carry they actually put their establishments at greater risk because BGs don't care about signs...that actually communicate to BGs "here's an easy target."

A project of this nature could possibly feature testimonials from other Employers and Merchants who have changed their minds and taken down their do-not-carry signs; maybe even a sample list of the "enlightened". The phamphlets could also bring home the point that CHL holders pay a considerable amount of money to secure their licenses, and likewise spend a lot more than the BGs with Merchants, i.e., "[W]ouldn't you rather be soliciting Good Guy patrons?"

Maybe someone on the board would like to undertake this project. Otherwise, maybe Charles if so inclined, could start a "collaborative" effort where a draft of each pamphlet could posted on the Board so everyone else could make suggestions for improvement, and a Moderator could make modifications as appropriate. Once completed, the pamphlets could be posted on the Board for download as .pdf(s). This could be done pretty quick, and benefit all of us. What do you think?

I think it's a great proactive idea that takes us out of the defensive mode, which is unlikely to be successful in the long run.

[Purplehood]

One example:
The card normally says, "Never convicted of a felony".
a more positive alternate:
"Has requested the F.B.I. to have his/her background researched for any traces of felonies."
"Has requested the Texas Department of Safety Criminal Division to have his/her background researched for any traces of felonies."

I like the suggestion above, but would remove the implication that this had only been asked-for ["has requested"], and put something along the lines of, "Has had an extensive background check by the F.B.I./Tx DPS" to reinforce that it has actually been done.

[ErnieP]

What theatre chain?

What incident?

From Austin KEYETV.com dated 09/07/08:

"A man fired off a shot inside a southwest Austin movie theater Sunday morning.

It sounds like something out of a movie, a disturbing crime that could have been much worse.

Surprisingly, no one was hurt when a man fired a single round inside the AMC Theater at the Barton Creek Square Mall.

The trouble began at approximately 11 a.m.

Folks inside the theater were watching a Sunday matinee when suddenly, a real life drama took center stage and a man with a handgun fired off a shot.

“While it was playing, he got up, walked to the front of the theater, back behind the movie screen, fired one round, opened the exit door and went back to the parking lot. He was seen by a couple witnesses inside the theater, and outside a witness saw him put a gun in his waistband and continue stumbling around the parking lot,” Detective Kathy Hector said.

Detectives believe the man was intoxicated at the time he fired the gun.

Police say they don't know why he fired that shot.

Austin police are asking for help to find the gunman who is still on the loose.

They describe the suspect as a white man, about 20 years old, 6 feet tall, thin build, unshaven with shaggy blond hair."

I wasn't able to quickly locate the post (I think it was on another Forum), but the poster said a 30.06 sign had gone up. I made a mental note of it to check the next time/last time we go.