Katy Mills Mall

Mike1951 · Post by **Mike1951** » Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:24 am

I occasionally go to Bass Pro Shops, which is my only reason for visiting Katy Mills.

There are no signs entering Bass Pro or exiting Bass Pro into the mall.

Knowing the mall was posted, I went looking for the signs.

I found a sign posted on the inside wall of the entrance, not on the doors where it could be easily seen.

All of the Mills property are posted and the company is very hostile toward us. Over the years, there's been at least a couple of unproductive letter writing campaigns.

Since the sign I saw was not obvious, I would make sure the entrance you use doesn't have a similarly obscure sign.

I will continue to shop at Bass Pro, but refuse to shop elsewhere in the mall.

Cosmo 9 · Post by **Cosmo 9** » Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:12 am

I have wondered this myself. We have the same mall up here (Grapevine Mills) the main entrances are posted off on a side wall but the store entrances are not posted. Also I've heard but not seen that one entrance to the parking lot was posted as well. I had carried there several times before I saw the signage but now I don't go.

kauboy · Post by **kauboy** » Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:33 am

Ok, I've explained this before but can't find the thread, so here goes:

This question came up in my CHL class. The instructor told us exactly what Grapevine Mills intention was in posting only at main entrances. A fellow instructor for the Academy I went to was called in to give his professional opinion to the folks building the Grapevine Mills mall. In the end, they concluded that to be completely safe from litigation, they should only post at some entrances. The way they figured it, if a shooting happened, and no law abiding citizens were allowed to have their firearms and potentially stop the shooter, the mall could be held legally responsible for not allowing these "good samaritans" to help. On the flip side, if a CHL carrier happened to be the one that started the shooting, they wanted the signs up to point to and say, "See, we had the proper signs. We made a reasonable attempt to keep them out." It pretty much came down to a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" scenario. So they concluded that if they only post at main entrances, they would be covering their hides from both ends.

My conclusion to this: I carry

P.S. But to keep your hide out of trouble, only enter and exit through non-posted entrances.

Popshot · Post by **Popshot** » Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:36 am

If the business wants to restrict CHL carry, then they must comply with the law and must have the proper signage identical to 30.06, AND have the courage to post the proper signage prominently, so that anyone with CHL will be notified before entering the door. Posting 30.06 on the sidewalls, instead of at the entrance, is sneaky and underhanded.

stevie_d_64 · Post by **stevie_d_64** » Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:06 am

Popshot wrote:If the business wants to restrict CHL carry, then they must comply with the law and must have the proper signage identical to 30.06, AND have the courage to post the proper signage prominently, so that anyone with CHL will be notified before entering the door. Posting 30.06 on the sidewalls, instead of at the entrance, is sneaky and underhanded.

Like I've always said...

We are compelled to follow the law, and in most instances we are expected to honor the intent of a business owner who posts improperly, whether by ignorance or alternative motives...

I would say the intent of the law in regards to both sides of the argument that the penalties should be extended both ways...

If you're going to post 30.06, you better slap it up correctly and at EVERY entrance to the facility...

Or face fines or imprisonment (or both) for not following and complying with the law...Works for us, I believe it should work equally for them!!!

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander...

cloudcroft · Post by **cloudcroft** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:34 am

"The way they figured it, if a shooting happened, and no law abiding citizens were allowed to have their firearms and potentially stop the shooter, the mall could be held legally responsible for not allowing these "good samaritans" to help."

Now that sure is a cheap way to get security in a place, and not even have to pay for it or hire their own guards! How pathetic...

-- John D.

lrb111 · Post by **lrb111** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:36 pm

kauboy wrote:Ok, I've explained this before but can't find the thread, so here goes:

This question came up in my CHL class. The instructor told us exactly what Grapevine Mills intention was in posting only at main entrances. A fellow instructor for the Academy I went to was called in to give his professional opinion to the folks building the Grapevine Mills mall. In the end, they concluded that to be completely safe from litigation, they should only post at some entrances. The way they figured it, if a shooting happened, and no law abiding citizens were allowed to have their firearms and potentially stop the shooter, the mall could be held legally responsible for not allowing these "good samaritans" to help. On the flip side, if a CHL carrier happened to be the one that started the shooting, they wanted the signs up to point to and say, "See, we had the proper signs. We made a reasonable attempt to keep them out." It pretty much came down to a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" scenario. So they concluded that if they only post at main entrances, they would be covering their hides from both ends.

My conclusion to this: I carry

P.S. But to keep your hide out of trouble, only enter and exit through non-posted entrances.

If that is inded the case, then this is an issue worth pressing in This Instance.
They are already posted, and it is likely any CHL holder would lose in court, at the current status quo.
As another forum member has posted, the requisite signage puts the onus on the business to lose window space, or ugly signage on their doors, as part of the deal in posting against CHLs.

So, IMO, they should be told they have to post on the doors. They obviously are not posting at Bass Pro, because they don't want to offend the customers there, or turn away business.
Force their hand, all or nothing. Then let the mall take on the new fight with Bass Pro.

kauboy · Post by **kauboy** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:46 pm

I think your missing the real point. They don't wish to keep CHL carriers out. They just don't want to suffer legal reprocussions if anything did happen. Its only to cover their own backsides, not to play political peek-a-boo.

Mike1951 · Post by **Mike1951** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:53 pm

kauboy wrote:I think your missing the real point. They don't wish to keep CHL carriers out.

If you had ever spoken with their corporate offices about their posting policy, you wouldn't think that. They are one of the most vicious anti-gun companies I have ever tried to deal with.

And while I don't doubt that they consulted an instructor about specific posting issues, their policy covers their approx 40 malls across the US. I'm pretty sure the anti concealed carry policy pre-dates Texas' CHL law.

lrb111 · Post by **lrb111** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:57 pm

kauboy wrote:I think your missing the real point. They don't wish to keep CHL carriers out. They just don't want to suffer legal reprocussions if anything did happen. Its only to cover their own backsides, not to play political peek-a-boo.

No, I didn't miss the point. I realze they want to play cutesie with the law. Force them into an untenable political position.
As it stands, if you got caught with your handgun, it's a class A misdemeanor, and they could care less.
That's baloney.

Being merely upset in passing means we accept this behavior.
Peronally, I would rather point out the grounds of acceptance and get compliance.

Glockamolie · Post by **Glockamolie** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:54 pm

I don't go there often, and always enter at Bass Pro. No signage there, last time I went. If anyone wants to send a professional, well-written email, the Director of Security is Steve Smith. steve.smith@themills.com

I'm sending one.

EDIT: The email bounced. It looks like it needs a period between his first and last name, as that is the format of everyone else's email address. I added a couple of more names to the email I sent.

http://www.katymills.com/static/node634.jsp