TexasCHLforum.com

boomerang wrote:

frankie_the_yankee wrote:who knows if it was ever posted?

He said it's posted. Are you calling him a liar?

I'm not calling him anything. I was there yesterday. I looked high and low. It is not posted. The only signs present were the ones warning that the unlicensed possession of a firearm on the premesis is a felony. This kind of sign does not apply to CHL's, because we have licenses.

There were no 30.06 signs at any of the entrances, including the parking lot.

I haven't watched/listened to the broadcast. So I don't know from direct knowledge what he said. All I know is what others have said he said. Did he say it was posted 30.06, or just that it was posted "no guns" or something like that? Sometimes, people jump to conclusions and/or see things that are not there.

Like the occassional breathless "report" we get from someone who has just attended a gun show and says that there was a "no guns" sign but that it also said "Exception for CHL's". Hooray! Then we find out that what the sign really said is, "NO EXCEPTIONS FOR CHL's".

Details matter.

I was there last night. In person. There were no 30.06 signs. The place is not posted.

Feel free to go there yourself and see if I missed anything if you don't believe that my report is accurate.

DoubleActionCHL wrote: I don't know what it was, but it definitely wasn't rhetoric. We'll probably never know, but I suspect that his business was posted at one time; and he has since quietly removed the sign due to negative backlash.

Has anyone actually laid eyes on a 30.06 sign at this establishment? If not, who knows if it was ever posted?

anygunanywhere wrote:

seamusTX wrote:Can someone explain to me the difference between Edd Hendee saying on the radio that some of his customers are Very Important People that CHL holders must be kept away from, and Joaquin Jackson saying on an obscure TV show that "civilians" should have a 5-round magazine limit, or Jim Zumbo writing on his blog that hunters shouldn't use black rifles?

- Jim

Ummmmm.... no difference -individuals (antis who have not fully exited the closet) who are expressing their own thoughts on reasonable restrictions?

The objective of a radio show is to get the best possible ratings. In addition, Hendee could well have many reasons for saying what he said that have nothing to do with his opinions on reasonable restrictions. For all anyone knows, he could be getting ready to run a string of vending machines selling MP-5's as soon as the legal hurdles are disposed of.

After all, he already owns a restaurant that is not posted 30.06, even though it is obvious that he knows exactly what he would have to do to legally post it.

I was at Taste of Texas for dinner tonight.

The place was definitely not posted. So I walked in there with my Para just as cool as a cucumber.

All it had was one of those signs (like you see anywhere alcohol is sold) informing that unlicensed possession was a felony.

The staff was friendly and cheerful, and made me feel perfectly welcome.

The food (prime rib) was good, though not the best I have ever had. But quite good nonetheless. The service was also reasonably quick and efficient, in spite of the fact that the place was quite busy.

Parking lot security was highly visible, which was nice as I had some luggage in my truck including several guns.

Bottom line: Talk is cheap, and radio shows exist to get ratings. The guy said what he said for reasons that we cannot know. But where the rubber meets the road, the place is not posted. So I would say that it is as friendly to CHL's as any other place we might go that is also not posted.

boomerang wrote: He said he doesn't want us carrying there. His verbal notice was broadcast on the radio.

Nothing he said on the radio constitutes verbal notice in any binding legal sense. Hearing something on the radio is not the same, legally, as someone looking you in the eye and telling you something.

No one forced anyone to tune in to the broadcast or to listen to it.

And as I have pointed out, he could have said what he said for any number of reasons. We have no way of knowing what was in head when he said what he said.

In my view, his true intentions are more accurately revealed by whether or not he chooses to post the property.

The other thing I am thinking is that if enough people start hassling him about it, or trying to "educate" him, he just might decide to post the place to put an end to all the noise. He may not want or need to be educated.

Corona wrote:

frankie_the_yankee wrote:Maybe Ed was just running his mouth on the radio for some perceived strategic or tactical purpose....

I disagree. I heard the clip. Did you listen to it?

He makes it clear, on a public broadcast, that he's one of those "do as I say, not as i do" types of people. He doesn't want people carrying there? GREAT! We can get steak darn near anywhere in Texas.

I haven't listened to the clip. And I really see no need to. My main reason is because "talk is cheap". No matter what he said, or how he said it, if the place isn't posted it isn't posted.

Actions speak louder than words.

He could have said whatever he said for any number of reasons.

It seems pretty clear that he is fully aware of how to legally and enforceably post the place per 30.06 such that CHL's who carry there would be trespassing. For whatever reason, he has not done so.

Like I said, I'm going there next week. If the place isn't posted I'm gonna be packin' as usual. And I'm not going to worry about it.

There's another possibility. Maybe the place is never posted. Maybe Ed was just running his mouth on the radio for some perceived strategic or tactical purpose. Maybe carrying is perfectly OK there but he just did not want to say so.

AFAIK, no one has ever actually seen a valid 30.06 sign there. This whole thread is based on something heard on the radio. There are enough mountains out there already that we don't need to go building up molehills.

I'm going to visit there myself next week. If there's no sign, I'll be carrying as usual.

tx_bob wrote: Frankie_the_Yankeee, in the south, we don't give anti-gun people our money, so why would you go there and give anti-CHL Edd Hendee your money? There are plenty of good steakhouses in Houston, so why not go to one of them that doesn't post anti-CHL signs?

As of now, I do not know if the business is properly posted or not. I'v e read a lot of conflicting stuff on this thread, and as far as I can tell, no one seems to know for sure.

This does not seem to be stopping some people from doing their best to make sure it is properly posted if it is not already with what I consider to be ill-advised phone calls and letters.

If we knew for sure it was 30.06 posted that would be one thing. But I think it is bad tactics on our part to try to "educate" people who, for whatever reason, do not have proper 30.06 signs posted. All too often, we "succeed" and end up with another place that is off limits when they "correct" their signs.

I really don't care what the owner's philosophy is, even if it crosses the line into hypocrasy. If all he has is a couple of ghostbuster signs posted and a big mouth on the radio, I'll still enjoy the food if I choose to and I'll carry while I am doing it.

Maybe he is really 100% pro gun and pro CHL, and is simply assuming a posture on the radio for what he perceives to be good tactical reasons. Until I see the signs, if any, I will not know.

So I would advise everyone to take a nice big chill pill on this one until we have accurate information.

Mike1951 wrote:It is entirely possible the owner either misunderstood or misinterpreted the caller's question.

We don't need to burn our own at the stake until we know for sure.

Be nice if someone could visit there with the purpose of determining whether it is posted.

Just as long as they could resist the urge to "educate" the staff if they find that it is improperly posted.

I'll be in Houston next month and I will make it a point to go there and enjoy their prime rib. I will also check out any signs that may or may not be present and let the board know.