Whataburger's Gun Policy (Ugh)..........

[gljjt]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

You do not lose your right to free speech. The businesses have the right to kick you out is what happens. You can be asked to leave and you can go on bad mouthing or preaching.

You are playing with semantics. No you haven't lost your true free speech rights, but you don't have the same "rights" on private property that you have on your property or most public property.

By your argument, if the government restricts our firearms to our own homes, we don't lose our 2nd amendment rights, after all you can always go ho me!

[Jim Beaux]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

Regardless of where you do it, libel & disruptive behavior is not a right - but Im not gonna argue the point with you.

[Javier730]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

You do not lose your right to free speech. The businesses have the right to kick you out is what happens. You can be asked to leave and you can go on bad mouthing or preaching.

You are playing with semantics. No you haven't lost your true free speech rights, but you don't have the same "rights" on private property that you have on your property or most public property.

By your argument, if the government restricts our firearms to our own homes, we don't lose our 2nd amendment rights, after all you can always go ho me!

There is a big difference between what the government restricts and what businesses restrict on their property. You are playing with semantics.

[treadlightly]

I think Whataburger just needs a chance to take a deep breath. No need for commotion, just a need for a little time for soft, civilized minds not preoccupied with firearms to adjust.

Imagine yourself completely clueless about guns. Completely clueless. You aren't a mom demanding action. You aren't a student of freedom, either.

You hear the news anchor's concern about .22 gauge assault clips, whatever they are, and it seems very logical. There's a reason, for example, we keep fish hooks and teething toys separate. Why would we want to force our dear, sweet, muddled children, terrified and alone, to face AK-15's in the hands of known terrorists on every street corner? Gosh, who would want that?

And did you see the news footage with armed people, those open carry demonstrators, whatever "open carry" means, with rifles facing our police?

And so, as soft brains reacting rather than thinking, we seek compassion and involvement and do our part to save the kids. Let's draft a memo. Nope, never occurred to my mushy mind to learn about freedom or guns, the gauge of shotguns, the difference between a clip and a magazine, what guns came from the godless Rooskie or from the land of the free, or the difference between a threat and the calming, welcome effect of deterrents.

My guess is Whataburger learned of Kory Watkins and came to the same conclusion I have. He's not welcome at my establishment.

It's not because of his gun, it's because of his attitude and demeanor, and it will take time for the public to learn the vast distance between an in-your-face open carry demonstration with rifles and citizens exercising a natural right while pursuing happiness in general.

A majority will get it, if we give them a little room to adjust.

Or we can face their reactions in the polls.

[Abraham]

All of this upset because (maybe) WB doesn't want you to O.C. inside their smelly, cacophonously noisy, hectic, restaurant. (all fast food joints have this going on)

C'mon, you don't really want to go inside do you?

Drive through and quitcher bellyaching.

[John Galt]

All of this upset because (maybe) WB doesn't want you to O.C. inside their smelly, cacophonously noisy, hectic, restaurant. (all fast food joints have this going on)

C'mon, you don't really want to go inside do you?

Drive through and quitcher bellyaching.

[VMI77]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

Nothing happens. I'm a big movie buff and it's because nothing happens to these loudmouths that I quit going to movie theaters and now either stream or watch movies on DVD.

[gljjt]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

You do not lose your right to free speech. The businesses have the right to kick you out is what happens. You can be asked to leave and you can go on bad mouthing or preaching.

You are playing with semantics. No you haven't lost your true free speech rights, but you don't have the same "rights" on private property that you have on your property or most public property.

By your argument, if the government restricts our firearms to our own homes, we don't lose our 2nd amendment rights, after all you can always go ho me!

There is a big difference between what the government restricts and what businesses restrict on their property. You are playing with semantics.

Nope. You are missing the point. The point is Constitutionally defined freedoms are not absolute.

[Taypo]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

You do not lose your right to free speech. The businesses have the right to kick you out is what happens. You can be asked to leave and you can go on bad mouthing or preaching.

You are playing with semantics. No you haven't lost your true free speech rights, but you don't have the same "rights" on private property that you have on your property or most public property.

By your argument, if the government restricts our firearms to our own homes, we don't lose our 2nd amendment rights, after all you can always go ho me!

There is a big difference between what the government restricts and what businesses restrict on their property. You are playing with semantics.

Nope. You are missing the point. The point is Constitutionally defined freedoms are not absolute.

The right to OC in Whataburger is Constitutionally defined?

[Javier730]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

You do not lose your right to free speech. The businesses have the right to kick you out is what happens. You can be asked to leave and you can go on bad mouthing or preaching.

You are playing with semantics. No you haven't lost your true free speech rights, but you don't have the same "rights" on private property that you have on your property or most public property.

By your argument, if the government restricts our firearms to our own homes, we don't lose our 2nd amendment rights, after all you can always go ho me!

There is a big difference between what the government restricts and what businesses restrict on their property. You are playing with semantics.

Nope. You are missing the point. The point is Constitutionally defined freedoms are not absolute.

The right to OC in Whataburger is Constitutionally defined?

Yeah, the 28th amendment.

[drjoker]

Until they post the dreaded 30.06 sign, they're ok in my book. You have to look at it from the viewpoint of the owner of the business. If you owned Whataburger, how would posting a 30.06 sign affect business? It would decrease your business by about 3 percent. I would NEVER do this.

Allowing open carry in their restaurant would upset 0.075 percent of their customers. As a business owner, I can tell you that even losing 0.075 percent of my business would suck. So, how would I not allow open carry so as not to upset the anti-2A crowd without upsetting the much bigger 2nd A supporting crowd? I would do exactly what Whataburger is doing. I would not put ANY anti-2nd A signs up (no 30.06 and NO 30.07, anti-open carry signs). However, I would give verbal notification to open carriers to hide their gun by pulling out their shirts over their guns or secure it in their vehicles or if it is a Chinese restaurant, I would discreetly seat the open carrier in the V.I.P. section (private dining room in the back, most classy Chinese restaurants have private dining rooms so that diners could eat unusual Asian foods without freaking out their non-Asian customers). I would even smooth it over with them by giving them a box of very hard to find .22lr ammo.

Losing ANY customers is bad business.

P.S. How I determined the amount of customers lost in each scenario;
1. NRA has 5 million dues paying members.
2. Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America has 125 thousand members.
3. 125/5,000,000 = 0.025
4. 3 percent of Texans have a CHL
5. 3 percent x 0.025 = 0.075 percent

Keep in mind that this is actually a high estimate of the number of members in Moms Demand Action because over 95 percent [abbreviated profanity deleted] their members are free riders who only clicked a couple of mouse buttons. NRA members are DUES paying members that had to take out their credit cards and pay $25 to $35 per year. It is $35 per year, but if you look hard enough, there's always a special deal you can click on somewhere in the internet where you can pay for a year of membership with a $25 discounted rate and you'll even get a NRA baseball cap in the deal. I have a whole closet full of these NRA baseball caps. I'm visiting my family in California soon. I'll bring these along as gifts for all my family out there. Although it is supposed to be an "introductory" deal, their computer never catches this and has always allowed me to renew at the lower $25 intro rate. LOL.

Yes, I understand that the right to bear arms is a constitutionally guaranteed right. A similar situation existed for the civil rights ear in the 1960s, the lunch counter sit-in. Separate but equal is inherently unequal, BUT seating open carriers in VIP is not separate but equal. That's separate but BETTER. So, I think it's OK. VIP usually has a private big screen TV, prettier waitresses, plusher chairs, better food, and the chef will usually come out to say "hi" and shake your hand at the end of your meal if you're seated in VIP.

[Vol Texan]

For those of you who think that when a business opens their private property doors to the public that they lose some of their private property rights, you are 100% correct.

You are also 100% wrong in thinking that they lose control over the gun issue, however. It is all stipulated in the law. How hard is that to understand? It isn't you who is being discriminated against, but your gun. Your gun has no rights and your right to carry a gun in somebody else's business stops at the door if that is what they wish.

A business loses certain rights being open to the public and the public loses certain rights when going onto the property of another individual or entity.

Explain what rights are lost.

Free speech. Bad mouth a business on their property and see what happens. Continually have vocal outbursts in a movie theater and see what happens. Preach in mall and see what happens.

You do not lose your right to free speech. The businesses have the right to kick you out is what happens. You can be asked to leave and you can go on bad mouthing or preaching.

You are playing with semantics. No you haven't lost your true free speech rights, but you don't have the same "rights" on private property that you have on your property or most public property.

By your argument, if the government restricts our firearms to our own homes, we don't lose our 2nd amendment rights, after all you can always go ho me!

There is a big difference between what the government restricts and what businesses restrict on their property. You are playing with semantics.

Nope. You are missing the point. The point is Constitutionally defined freedoms are not absolute.

The right to OC in Whataburger is Constitutionally defined?

Yeah, the 28th amendment.

Guys...the constitution limits the power of GOVERNMENT. It is supposed to keep the government from blocking our freedom of speech, our freedom of religion, etc.

The constitution was not written to limit the power of PEOPLE or BUSINESSES. If Whataburger asks you to leave, just because they say so, then just get over it. They can stop you from preaching in their restaurant, without infringing on your right of free speech. They can stop you from open carrying, without infringing on your right to keep and bear arms. They are not bound to the same standards as the government to protect anybody's fragile ego.

Unlike the Social Justice Warriors who sue people constantly to make sure they are not excluded, we should take the higher ground, and be good ambassadors of the 2nd Amendment. Just leave if they ask you to do so. Or cover it up, and it becomes a non-issue.

Why is it that we beat each other up on semantics here on this message board? Aren't we better than that?

[Taypo]

Why is it that we beat each other up on semantics here on this message board? Aren't we better than that?

Sadly, we are not.

[Javier730]

Why is it that we beat each other up on semantics here on this message board? Aren't we better than that?

Sadly, we are not.

No one is beating on anyone. We are simply having a discussion on a policy Whataburger may or may not have in one of its restaurants. My comment on the 28th amendment was not meant to put down gljjt in any way, I simply found humor in a comment posted by Taypo. My sense of humor showed up in a discussion thats all.

[Taypo]

Why is it that we beat each other up on semantics here on this message board? Aren't we better than that?

Sadly, we are not.

No one is beating on anyone. We are simply having a discussion on a policy Whataburger may or may not have in one of its restaurants. My comment on the 28th amendment was not meant to put down gljjt in any way, I simply found humor in a comment posted by Taypo. My sense of humor showed up in a discussion thats all.

I didn't take offense, you were good for a chuckle. I thought briefly of creating a mock amendment, but didn't want to take it too far.

Additionally, Whataburger put out a very politely worded statement addressing open carry a couple days ago. They are. In fact, not OC friendly. Here's a link for ya:

http://whataburger.com/company/pressrel ... rry-policy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;