TexasCHLforum.com

I have been Red McCombs Toyota customer for years. I bought 3 cars from them in the last 6 years alone, and today, when I went to buy yet another car, I was directed to the 30.06.

It was NOT posted conspicuously, it was just a printed sheet of paper, taped to a window and with the lettering that wasn't quite 1" in size; but it was close enough to the real thing to make it hard to fight in court, if it ever came to that. I forgot to take a picture of it. It was clear that they did just enough research to make it appear legitimate. It appears to be some sort of a knee-jerk reaction to something, as the sign was not well made and sloppily taped to a window. Not easy to spot at all.

It was very disappointing. I tried to email them an email, expressing my concern and disappointment, as their loyal customer, but there is nothing on their website that would allow me to send a simply email.

I already made an entry on the http://texas3006.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; , but I wish there was more I could do.

I would card them and point out that their signage is not valid, and that if they want to be valid, it will have to be large and ugly and prominently posted, otherwise they are not stopping anyone from carrying.

jimlongley wrote:I would card them and point out that their signage is not valid, and that if they want to be valid, it will have to be large and ugly and prominently posted, otherwise they are not stopping anyone from carrying.

jimlongley,

Thanks for the note, but I have to respectfully disagree. I'd prefer if we never tell them that their sign is invalid. Either (a) carry on, letting them live in oblivion, thinking that they've blocked you, or (b) tell them they've lost your business (and the business of a lot of other CHL holders).

Telling them their sign is invalid may possibly educate them enough to post a valid sign, and that does none of us any good.

I would modify JImlongley's comments a bit:
Instead of point out it is not valid, I would card them and say simply, "I have purchased 3 vehicles in 6 years here, and now with this sign, my business is going elsewhere"
I would NOT let them know their sign is [possibly] invalid however.

jimlongley wrote:I would card them and point out that their signage is not valid, and that if they want to be valid, it will have to be large and ugly and prominently posted, otherwise they are not stopping anyone from carrying.

I didn't want to point that fact out, because it will make it yet one more place to keep legal carriers out for certain. I did want to express my disapproval in a well worded letter in hopes to make them reconsider the whole notion.

Teamless wrote:I would modify JImlongley's comments a bit:
Instead of point out it is not valid, I would card them and say simply, "I have purchased 3 vehicles in 6 years here, and now with this sign, my business is going elsewhere"
I would NOT let them know their sign is [possibly] invalid however.

That was my thought exactly. I just wanted to do it in a letter. The letter has a chance to reach higher than an office manager, who was, most likely, the one responsible for posting it anyway. I want that manager overruled, because I don't think I would change his mind.

Point to the sign, and tell them you don't do business with bigots, no matter whether the bigotry is centered around race, gender, rights, and whatever else you want to include.

And yes, politely, call it bigotry. They need to know we recognize that's what they're doing.

What's wrong with a call to the owner of the dealership? Politely tell him how many cars you have purchased (while being armed and no one was in danger). Now you find a sign that tells you customers like you are no longer welcome so you are saddened to have to sever a relationship that has been good up until now. If you come off as angry, that will only give an impression the decision to keep armed people with anger issues out of the area was the correct one. Leaving the impression a good customer is sad to see he must form a new relationship with a competitor on the other hand...

Vol Texan wrote:

jimlongley wrote:I would card them and point out that their signage is not valid, and that if they want to be valid, it will have to be large and ugly and prominently posted, otherwise they are not stopping anyone from carrying.

jimlongley,

Thanks for the note, but I have to respectfully disagree. I'd prefer if we never tell them that their sign is invalid. Either (a) carry on, letting them live in oblivion, thinking that they've blocked you, or (b) tell them they've lost your business (and the business of a lot of other CHL holders).

Telling them their sign is invalid may possibly educate them enough to post a valid sign, and that does none of us any good.

That argument has been mentioned to me many times over the years but I have yet to see the logic in it.

If they are "living in oblivion" then there is every chance that you could get into a situation not too dissimilar from the guy open carrying a rifle. Your argument that the sign is invalid is not going to make a great deal of difference to the average LEO, he will let you sort that out with the judge.

The often used argument that the businesses that post invalid signage are just doing it to secretly allow CHLs to carry while mollifying the anti-gun nuts is specious and unproven.

And as far as it doing none of us any good, of course it does us good, it lets us know that this business discriminates against law abiding citizens and does not want our money, and the big ugly sign, prominently posted, lets everyone know that this is the case, not just CHL holders. We have friends out there who are not CHL holders, case in point;

I have a friend who owns a revolver that she purchased within the last two years, she has shot with me and several other friends, but she has not taken the steps necessary to obtain a CHL, she does not think she would feel comfortable carrying, MPA does all she (thinks) she needs, and she thinks of it as more household protection than personal. We are working on her to get that CHL and join the ranks, if only just to improve our statistics, but so far she remains resistant.

She will not shop in a posted place, and I have a couple of others who feel the same. If each of us could develop a few friends each who do not carry but do support us by not shopping at the big ugly sign stores, then a bunch of big ugly signs would be detrimental to the bottom line of any business and they could very possibly start to disappear.

And of course the reverse argument. No one has yet been able to point out any case where an anti-gun nut shops in a specific simply because it is posted (valid or not) and I have yet to see a database dedicated to pointing out those places to the antis (although it is possible that they use our own 3006.com.)

So I do not accept the premise that informing a business that their sign is invalid will in any way harm any CHL holder and will continue to do so until convinced otherwise.

TexasGal wrote:What's wrong with a call to the owner of the dealership? Politely tell him how many cars you have purchased (while being armed and no one was in danger). Now you find a sign that tells you customers like you are no longer welcome so you are saddened to have to sever a relationship that has been good up until now. If you come off as angry, that will only give an impression the decision to keep armed people with anger issues out of the area was the correct one. Leaving the impression a good customer is sad to see he must form a new relationship with a competitor on the other hand...

A much more diplomatic, and probably more effective, way of saying what I said. But then, I have a tendency to on things from time to time, and all I wind up with is a sore forehead.

Go with TexasGal's version first. My method probably won't win any friends, although I still like it as a parting shot if the business owner can't or won't understand. Pointing out that excluding the law-abiding self-protected is akin to excluding the Catholic or Irish might give the intransigent or unwilling a bit of a mental paradigm shift without benefit of a clutch. Then again, it might just make them dig in further, but it'll let you know once and for all whether they're doing this out of a misguided sense of security provision or out of a personal or political bias.

TexasGal wrote:What's wrong with a call to the owner of the dealership? Politely tell him how many cars you have purchased (while being armed and no one was in danger). Now you find a sign that tells you customers like you are no longer welcome so you are saddened to have to sever a relationship that has been good up until now. If you come off as angry, that will only give an impression the decision to keep armed people with anger issues out of the area was the correct one. Leaving the impression a good customer is sad to see he must form a new relationship with a competitor on the other hand...

There isn't anything wrong with a call, but the chances are you won't talk to anyone with any influence or decision-making authority. There are hundreds of employees at a car dealership so getting to the right person can be quite a challenge.

I bought a new car last year and had a small issue that dragged on for a couple of months. I made numerous phone calls and emails and got all kinds of promises. I made two trips to the dealership and still didn't get my problem fixed.

It wasn't until I posted a comment on a car website that I finally got some action. Within two hours of my post I got a call from the Sales Manager. Within two days my problem was solved. They even came to work to pick up my car and left me a free loaner car.

jimlongley wrote:
(snip)
Your argument that the sign is invalid is not going to make a great deal of difference to the average LEO, he will let you sort that out with the judge.
{snip}

There it is...in a nutshell.

Given Wildbill's quick response by a car dealership after he made his case known on a car website - you could consider such an approach?

The internet can be a powerful tool.

His sales force will be happy too.

They don't want return customers NOT returning.

Abraham wrote:Given Wildbill's quick response by a car dealership after he made his case known on a car website - you could consider such an approach?

The internet can be a powerful tool.

His sales force will be happy too.

They don't want return customers NOT returning.

Thanks Abraham.

One more point I wanted to make is that I didn't have any personal problem with the people working at the dealership. I don't think that any of them were trying to lie or intentionally put me off. The real issue was that they were low-level customer service employees who performed many different functions [had too much to do] and didn't have the clout to make sure that something got done. It wasn't until the complaint reached top management that it got solved.

http://redmccombstoyota.com/Staff.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

GM (and other executives) contact information, also email info for GM Assistant.

Jim Mangano
General Manager
210-530-3000

Samantha Peacock
Asst. to General Manager
210-357-1617
speacock@redmac.net

Also consider writing to James Lentz at Toyota of NA.
Be sure to ask them how many truck they WON'T sell because of that sign.
http://pressroom.toyota.com/article_dis ... le_id=2333" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://elliott.org/contacts/toyota/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Jim Lentz
President & COO
Jim_Lentz@toyota.com
(310) 468-4000

Yoshi Inaba
Chairman & CEO – Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc.
Yoshi_Inaba@toyota.com
(310) 468-4000

Yukitoshi Funo
CEO
yuki_funo@toyota.com
(310) 468-4000