TexasCHLforum.com

cyphertext wrote:You really can't compare TX to NM, AZ, or even OK... AZ and NM have had open carry for a long time, OK is much more recent, but none of these states had a movement like OCT running around with long guns stirring folks up. And even in NM when I lived there 15 years ago, OC in the urban areas was not the social norm and you would be asked to leave businesses if you were carrying openly.

Agreed, a direct, one-for-one, comparison would be disingenuous. That was not my intent.

Rather, I was attempting to convey my faith in the majority of my fellow Texans to adjust to open carry at least as well has have the Okies.

NM gun laws have changed significantly since 2000. For instance,
"As of July 1, 2010, 30-7-3 NMSA a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun in New Mexico is allowed to legally carry into a licensed liquor establishment that DOES NOT sell alcohol for consumption on the premise. Further a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun in New Mexico is allowed to carry into a restaurant licensed to sell only beer and wine that derives no less than sixty percent of its annual gross receipts from the sale of food for consumption on the premises, unless the restaurant has a sign posted, in a conspicuous location at each public entrance, prohibiting the carrying of firearms, or the person is verbally instructed by the owner or manager that the carrying of a firearm is not permitted in the restaurant" (Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Mexico" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, 2015).

In 2013 and 2014, I visited northeastern NM. I shopped in stores, bought gas, ate (in restaurants and fast food) while carrying openly without incident. I'll do it again next week, but to the south. My route will be from Lubbock through Alamogordo and Las Cruces, NM, to Tucson, AZ. Obviously, this is anecdotal and not statistically significant. I am not trying to make a point or modify anyone's behaviour. I am simply relating my experience and hope. YMMV

jmra wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote: Is there any other laws that we can think of that can be denied ? It seems that 2A rights are only a right as long as all parties agree. If Whata Burger denied service to the gays, the whole world would come crashing to an crashing to an end. If Whata Burger said we will only serve the gays if they conceal thier homosexuality could you imagine the outcry ? Is it still Whata burgers right? Would the gays be as understanding as we are about denied access ?

This is just an example of politically correct nonsense

This is a poor analogy. A coworker of mine is gay, and unless you get to know him on a personal level outside of the office, you would not know it. When someone finds out and make a comment like "I never knew you were gay", his response is that he "doesn't come to work to be gay, he comes to work to work". Same thing would apply at Whataburger... He doesn't go there to be gay, he goes there to eat a hamburger.

So, in a sense, unless they are making out on a table, you probably won't know their sexuality. Sure, you may suspect, you might see something that makes you think they are, but you won't know 100%... kinda like printing when carrying concealed.

If you are going to Whataburger to eat a hamburger, conceal your firearm and enjoy. It is pretty simple. You already have the permit and have been carrying concealed for years... once you walk out, you can tuck your shirt back in and be on your way. You have not been denied access.

You and your gay friend have missed my point. I'm looking for equal protection under the law. In the end I've never been inside a Whata Burger and I don't plan on going inside, I use the drive thru like all good Americans.

So now people who go inside instead of using the drive thru are not "good Americans"?

I apologize, I was trying to lighten up the mood, you are all great Americans and I'm lucky to be allowed to be able to voice my opinion. Please accept my humble apologies

oljames3 wrote:

cyphertext wrote:You really can't compare TX to NM, AZ, or even OK... AZ and NM have had open carry for a long time, OK is much more recent, but none of these states had a movement like OCT running around with long guns stirring folks up. And even in NM when I lived there 15 years ago, OC in the urban areas was not the social norm and you would be asked to leave businesses if you were carrying openly.

Agreed, a direct, one-for-one, comparison would be disingenuous. That was not my intent.

Rather, I was attempting to convey my faith in the majority of my fellow Texans to adjust to open carry at least as well has have the Okies.

NM gun laws have changed significantly since 2000. For instance,
"As of July 1, 2010, 30-7-3 NMSA a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun in New Mexico is allowed to legally carry into a licensed liquor establishment that DOES NOT sell alcohol for consumption on the premise. Further a person licensed to carry a concealed handgun in New Mexico is allowed to carry into a restaurant licensed to sell only beer and wine that derives no less than sixty percent of its annual gross receipts from the sale of food for consumption on the premises, unless the restaurant has a sign posted, in a conspicuous location at each public entrance, prohibiting the carrying of firearms, or the person is verbally instructed by the owner or manager that the carrying of a firearm is not permitted in the restaurant" (Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Mexico" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, 2015).

In 2013 and 2014, I visited northeastern NM. I shopped in stores, bought gas, ate (in restaurants and fast food) while carrying openly without incident. I'll do it again next week, but to the south. My route will be from Lubbock through Alamogordo and Las Cruces, NM, to Tucson, AZ. Obviously, this is anecdotal and not statistically significant. I am not trying to make a point or modify anyone's behaviour. I am simply relating my experience and hope. YMMV

I gotcha... and my experience in NM may be outdated, as it was quite awhile back. I never tested OC in town, as I was military and was told that it wasn't welcome. However, I did always have a firearm in the vehicle, usually visible, and I did OC when outside of Las Cruces, and not on the military post.

Richbirdhunter wrote:

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

I'm sorry, I'll tow the company line. OC is bad and if you have an opinion different then that you are militant and that is bad.

Open carry in and of itself is not bad... but forcing a business to take a side when they really just want to sell hamburgers, burritos, or coffee is. Think about this for a sec. Had we not had OCT carrying long arms in Starbuck's, Wendy's, Chipotle, Sonic, Applebee's, Jack in the Box, Target, etc., this probably would not be an issue. Because of the political grandstanding inside local businesses, they were forced to choose a side. Had businesses not been drug into the debate, most would probably be taking a wait and see attitude about open carry... and if as few choose to open carry as expected based on OC in other states, it probably would not be an issue at all.

Whataburger's policy is acceptable, except to the extremists on both sides of the issue...

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

Forums without opposing views are pretty boring.

TXBO wrote:

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

Forums without opposing views are pretty boring.

In his defence the repetitive nature of the interactions on the OC threads really does get a bit trying. If he says he doesn't want to bother with it anymore then who can blame him.

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

I'm sorry, I'll tow the company line. OC is bad and if you have an opinion different then that you are militant and that is bad.

Open carry in and of itself is not bad... but forcing a business to take a side when they really just want to sell hamburgers, burritos, or coffee is. Think about this for a sec. Had we not had OCT carrying long arms in Starbuck's, Wendy's, Chipotle, Sonic, Applebee's, Jack in the Box, Target, etc., this probably would not be an issue. Because of the political grandstanding inside local businesses, they were forced to choose a side. Had businesses not been drug into the debate, most would probably be taking a wait and see attitude about open carry... and if as few choose to open carry as expected based on OC in other states, it probably would not be an issue at all.

Whataburger's policy is acceptable, except to the extremists on both sides of the issue...

I just would like to understand how much OC is acceptable at this forum.

TXBO wrote:

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.
They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.
They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies
From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.
Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.
Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

Forums without opposing views are pretty boring.

True...I agree and disagree with the OP and all 245 replies so far!

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

I'm sorry, I'll tow the company line. OC is bad and if you have an opinion different then that you are militant and that is bad.

Open carry in and of itself is not bad... but forcing a business to take a side when they really just want to sell hamburgers, burritos, or coffee is. Think about this for a sec. Had we not had OCT carrying long arms in Starbuck's, Wendy's, Chipotle, Sonic, Applebee's, Jack in the Box, Target, etc., this probably would not be an issue. Because of the political grandstanding inside local businesses, they were forced to choose a side. Had businesses not been drug into the debate, most would probably be taking a wait and see attitude about open carry... and if as few choose to open carry as expected based on OC in other states, it probably would not be an issue at all.

Whataburger's policy is acceptable, except to the extremists on both sides of the issue...

I just would like to understand how much OC is acceptable at this forum.

If you are really interested, which I doubt you are, you could spend some time perusing the Open Carry section of the forum. You will see it is very much accepted and supported. Your curiosity would be satisfied in short order.

What is generally not accepted by most on his is demeaning others that aren't interested in participating in forcing private property owners to accept open carry even if they think it may be detrimental to their business. Most also do not support the detrimental actions of people standing around on street corners action like jackwagons with their rifles.

This of course is just my honest opinion. Others may differ.

Richbirdhunter wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Richbirdhunter wrote:

Abraham wrote:We have a handful of militants OC types here, most of them new to the board stirring the OC pot.

They unfailingly reject the very reasonable, thoughtful responses in regard to OC.

They're like constantly complaining, colicky babies

From this point on, I plan to ignore their militant OC posts and hope others do to.

Perhaps, eventually they'll catch on that this forum, by and large rejects their militancy.

Perhaps, (I've never searched) there other forums that welcome their views.

I'm sorry, I'll tow the company line. OC is bad and if you have an opinion different then that you are militant and that is bad.

Open carry in and of itself is not bad... but forcing a business to take a side when they really just want to sell hamburgers, burritos, or coffee is. Think about this for a sec. Had we not had OCT carrying long arms in Starbuck's, Wendy's, Chipotle, Sonic, Applebee's, Jack in the Box, Target, etc., this probably would not be an issue. Because of the political grandstanding inside local businesses, they were forced to choose a side. Had businesses not been drug into the debate, most would probably be taking a wait and see attitude about open carry... and if as few choose to open carry as expected based on OC in other states, it probably would not be an issue at all.

Whataburger's policy is acceptable, except to the extremists on both sides of the issue...

I just would like to understand how much OC is acceptable at this forum.

The owner of the forum fought pretty hard and long to make open carry in Texas a reality. That should be your best indicator.

Lots of beating dead horses here on all sides. I think everyone who disagrees will always disagree.

I think what POed most people the most about Whataburger's decision, was their decision to politicize it - to pander to the liberal Mommies and leftists with this announcement - but yet trying to play both sides of the fence by saying CHL was OK.

I don't know about you guys and gals, but I don't much like politics, especially when it comes from a two-faced corporation who is trying to have it both ways or entertainers like the Dixie Chicks who bash our president in Europe.

This letter, as posted by ziravan on FreeRepublic, pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

My letter to Whataburger:

I normally eat at least one meal a week at one of your locations. I will not patronize Whataburger again until you officially cease your attack on gun rights in Texas.

You made a political statement with your announcement on open carry. I will make mine and exclude you from the list of businesses where I spend my hard earned money.

In some ways, I might even agree with you. I conceal carry and would not think to open carry, even after it becomes legal. I can see from where your concerns come. Nevertheless, timing is everything and by being first, loudest, and uniquely Texan, you are trading off your business model to send a political message.

Whether I agree that open carry is right for me or your business, I support it politically. The timing and nature of your statement on open carry goes beyond your private property rights; you’ve sent a political message and one where we disagree.

So, because you unilaterally decided to place politics between us, I have no choice but to respond in kind. Until you remove the politics you placed between us, we are opponents and I can no longer financially support a business who doesn’t see the common sense in keeping politics from ruining our relationship.

80 posted on 7/13/2015, 2:39:21 PM by ziravan (Choose Sides.)



As for me, their decision to announce this to the world in a patronizing move to the liberals, instead of just quietly posting a 3007 on January 1, will lose my life-long business forever. If they had been quiet and just posted a 3007 on Jan 1, but no 3006, I probably wouldn't have objected much. As for you, you can do whatever you please.

Ask me to conceal my gun...... As you wish.
Ask me to carry my gun openly....Fine, as you wish.
Ask me to leave my gun in the car..... I'll eat elsewhere.

AggieDad15 wrote:Lots of beating dead horses here on all sides. I think everyone who disagrees will always disagree.

I think what POed most people the most about Whataburger's decision, was their decision to politicize it - to pander to the liberal Mommies and leftists with this announcement - but yet trying to play both sides of the fence by saying CHL was OK.

I don't know about you guys and gals, but I don't much like politics, especially when it comes from a two-faced corporation who is trying to have it both ways or entertainers like the Dixie Chicks who bash our president in Europe.

This letter, as posted by ziravan on FreeRepublic, pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

My letter to Whataburger:

I normally eat at least one meal a week at one of your locations. I will not patronize Whataburger again until you officially cease your attack on gun rights in Texas.

You made a political statement with your announcement on open carry. I will make mine and exclude you from the list of businesses where I spend my hard earned money.

In some ways, I might even agree with you. I conceal carry and would not think to open carry, even after it becomes legal. I can see from where your concerns come. Nevertheless, timing is everything and by being first, loudest, and uniquely Texan, you are trading off your business model to send a political message.

Whether I agree that open carry is right for me or your business, I support it politically. The timing and nature of your statement on open carry goes beyond your private property rights; you’ve sent a political message and one where we disagree.

So, because you unilaterally decided to place politics between us, I have no choice but to respond in kind. Until you remove the politics you placed between us, we are opponents and I can no longer financially support a business who doesn’t see the common sense in keeping politics from ruining our relationship.

80 posted on 7/13/2015, 2:39:21 PM by ziravan (Choose Sides.)



As for me, their decision to announce this to the world in a patronizing move to the liberals, instead of just quietly posting a 3007 on January 1, will lose my life-long business forever. If they had been quiet and just posted a 3007 on Jan 1, but no 3006, I probably wouldn't have objected much. As for you, you can do whatever you please.

This was NOT a case of WB politicizing and choosing to take a public stand. This was a continuous campaign by some of the OCT type folks to pressure WB into making a public statement. The WB main office was getting daily phone calls demanding that they publicly state their policy after an internal WB document was leaked. The tactics employed following this leaked memo were identical to the methods employed by MDA. These tactics have even been denounced by Terry Holcolmb, someone who has definitely been in the OCT camp.

canvasbck wrote:

AggieDad15 wrote:Lots of beating dead horses here on all sides. I think everyone who disagrees will always disagree.

I think what POed most people the most about Whataburger's decision, was their decision to politicize it - to pander to the liberal Mommies and leftists with this announcement - but yet trying to play both sides of the fence by saying CHL was OK.

I don't know about you guys and gals, but I don't much like politics, especially when it comes from a two-faced corporation who is trying to have it both ways or entertainers like the Dixie Chicks who bash our president in Europe.

This letter, as posted by ziravan on FreeRepublic, pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

My letter to Whataburger:

I normally eat at least one meal a week at one of your locations. I will not patronize Whataburger again until you officially cease your attack on gun rights in Texas.

You made a political statement with your announcement on open carry. I will make mine and exclude you from the list of businesses where I spend my hard earned money.

In some ways, I might even agree with you. I conceal carry and would not think to open carry, even after it becomes legal. I can see from where your concerns come. Nevertheless, timing is everything and by being first, loudest, and uniquely Texan, you are trading off your business model to send a political message.

Whether I agree that open carry is right for me or your business, I support it politically. The timing and nature of your statement on open carry goes beyond your private property rights; you’ve sent a political message and one where we disagree.

So, because you unilaterally decided to place politics between us, I have no choice but to respond in kind. Until you remove the politics you placed between us, we are opponents and I can no longer financially support a business who doesn’t see the common sense in keeping politics from ruining our relationship.

80 posted on 7/13/2015, 2:39:21 PM by ziravan (Choose Sides.)



As for me, their decision to announce this to the world in a patronizing move to the liberals, instead of just quietly posting a 3007 on January 1, will lose my life-long business forever. If they had been quiet and just posted a 3007 on Jan 1, but no 3006, I probably wouldn't have objected much. As for you, you can do whatever you please.

This was NOT a case of WB politicizing and choosing to take a public stand. This was a continuous campaign by some of the OCT type folks to pressure WB into making a public statement. The WB main office was getting daily phone calls demanding that they publicly state their policy after an internal WB document was leaked. The tactics employed following this leaked memo were identical to the methods employed by MDA. These tactics have even been denounced by Terry Holcolmb, someone who has definitely been in the OCT camp.

Agree... the CEO didn't wake up one morning and decide to take a public stand on OC. He was forced to make a statement by one of two groups, either anti gun groups or open carry groups. Whataburger has locations in other states that have OC, such as OK, and they never felt the need to make a statement like this.

AggieDad15 wrote:Lots of beating dead horses here on all sides. I think everyone who disagrees will always disagree.

I think what POed most people the most about Whataburger's decision, was their decision to politicize it - to pander to the liberal Mommies and leftists with this announcement - but yet trying to play both sides of the fence by saying CHL was OK.

I don't know about you guys and gals, but I don't much like politics, especially when it comes from a two-faced corporation who is trying to have it both ways or entertainers like the Dixie Chicks who bash our president in Europe.

This letter, as posted by ziravan on FreeRepublic, pretty much sums up my feelings on this.

My letter to Whataburger:

I normally eat at least one meal a week at one of your locations. I will not patronize Whataburger again until you officially cease your attack on gun rights in Texas.

You made a political statement with your announcement on open carry. I will make mine and exclude you from the list of businesses where I spend my hard earned money.

In some ways, I might even agree with you. I conceal carry and would not think to open carry, even after it becomes legal. I can see from where your concerns come. Nevertheless, timing is everything and by being first, loudest, and uniquely Texan, you are trading off your business model to send a political message.

Whether I agree that open carry is right for me or your business, I support it politically. The timing and nature of your statement on open carry goes beyond your private property rights; you’ve sent a political message and one where we disagree.

So, because you unilaterally decided to place politics between us, I have no choice but to respond in kind. Until you remove the politics you placed between us, we are opponents and I can no longer financially support a business who doesn’t see the common sense in keeping politics from ruining our relationship.

80 posted on 7/13/2015, 2:39:21 PM by ziravan (Choose Sides.)



As for me, their decision to announce this to the world in a patronizing move to the liberals, instead of just quietly posting a 3007 on January 1, will lose my life-long business forever. If they had been quiet and just posted a 3007 on Jan 1, but no 3006, I probably wouldn't have objected much. As for you, you can do whatever you please.

Awesome. Shorter lines for me.