TexasCHLforum.com

chad745 wrote:I'd sure like to see the sign come down ...

But even after the signs come down, how do we assuage the arrogance and ignorance?
Hoot

Abraham wrote:After repeatedly receiving the same email (albeit with different signatures) I'd soon ignore them.

Wouldn't sending in an original email have greater impact?

I would think so.

hoot wrote:

chad745 wrote:I'd sure like to see the sign come down ...

But even after the signs come down, how do we assuage the arrogance and ignorance?
Hoot

If the sign comes down, then you give them your business as a reward for having corrected an error in their ways. If you're not willing to do that, then don't waste your time sending them letters of protest. Otherwise, the protests are meaningless, since you had no intention of going there in the first place. What would they have to lose by not changing? In other words, if you're not willing to give them your business when they take the signs down, then they have nothing to lose by leaving the signs up.

I applaud anyone writing to them.

Personally I would have left out this section:

"It is clear there is not an increased safety risk by allowing concealed handguns, quite the contrary. We are trained to handle our weapons. The perceived risk is unfounded…a false sense of security. We inherently provide a safer environment for all around us."

I find its generally not good to use the term weapon, with non-gun people. And the bit about being trained to handle our weapons, and that we inherently provide a safer environment for all . That brings to mind vigilanties stopping crimes and protecting the public, and gets away from the personal protection aspect of having a CHL. If I was someone that wasn't familiar with guns, or part of the gun culture, that statement would probably bother me.

Have a great weekend everyone!

Just wanted to provide an update. I was at a conference last week at the Gaylord Texan (very near to Great Wolf Lodge, and no 30.06 sign that I was able to see). As we were leaving my wife wanted to take a quick look at the Great Wolf Lodge to see if it looked like a good place to take our kids for a weekend getaway. As of last Friday (10/22), the 30.06 sign was still there.

Looks like hell to me, but looks like a place my kids (4 & 6) would absolutely love.

Andiceman wrote:Just wanted to provide an update. I was at a conference last week at the Gaylord Texan (very near to Great Wolf Lodge, and no 30.06 sign that I was able to see). As we were leaving my wife wanted to take a quick look at the Great Wolf Lodge to see if it looked like a good place to take our kids for a weekend getaway. As of last Friday (10/22), the 30.06 sign was still there.

Looks like heck to me, but looks like a place my kids (4 & 6) would absolutely love.

I wonder if any enterprising criminals review websites listing 30.06 posted establishments for ripe targets or worse set up their own website noting business that would be "safe" for highjacking? Maybe folks who suffer injury during crime in a 30.06 business should sue, especially if they're CHL. Works for the liberals and ACLU.

puma guy wrote:

Andiceman wrote:Just wanted to provide an update. I was at a conference last week at the Gaylord Texan (very near to Great Wolf Lodge, and no 30.06 sign that I was able to see). As we were leaving my wife wanted to take a quick look at the Great Wolf Lodge to see if it looked like a good place to take our kids for a weekend getaway. As of last Friday (10/22), the 30.06 sign was still there.

Looks like heck to me, but looks like a place my kids (4 & 6) would absolutely love.

I wonder if any enterprising criminals review websites listing 30.06 posting establishments for ripe targets or worse set up their own website noting business that would be "safe" for highjacking? Maybe folks who suffer injury during crime in a 30.06 business should sue, especially if they're CHL. Works for the liberals and ACLU.

IANAL, but I do believe that there is a concept of businesses being responsible to provide a basic level of security for their patrons. When a business actively increases the threat potential, this should increase their liability for future injuries that result. In my mind, this is similar to a restaurant promoting an Outlaw Bikers day and offering free beer to anyone wearing the colors of known motorcycle gangs, but then failing to increase security at their establishment.

puma guy wrote:

Andiceman wrote:Just wanted to provide an update. I was at a conference last week at the Gaylord Texan (very near to Great Wolf Lodge, and no 30.06 sign that I was able to see). As we were leaving my wife wanted to take a quick look at the Great Wolf Lodge to see if it looked like a good place to take our kids for a weekend getaway. As of last Friday (10/22), the 30.06 sign was still there.

Looks like heck to me, but looks like a place my kids (4 & 6) would absolutely love.

I wonder if any enterprising criminals review websites listing 30.06 posting establishments for ripe targets or worse set up their own website noting business that would be "safe" for highjacking? Maybe folks who suffer injury during crime in a 30.06 business should sue, especially if they're CHL. Works for the liberals and ACLU.

My Wife and I stayed at the Gaylord Texan the 16th - 18th. They were advertising a new water park that will open on their property next year. IIRC it will encompass ~11 acres and have many of the same features of the Great Wolf.


On a side note: We returned to the Gaylord after attending the fair. While in route we were stopped at an intersection near the fair and my condition went to red (long story). I un-tucked my shirt and put the shirt tail inside the hand grip for easier access. Upon returning to the Gaylord, the valet opened my truck door and calmly stated, "you might want to fix your shirt". I did and we both laughed!

My Wife and I stayed at the Gaylord Texan the 16th - 18th. They were advertising a new water park that will open on their property next year. IIRC it will encompass ~11 acres and have many of the same features of the Great Wolf.

On a side note: We returned to the Gaylord after attending the fair. While in route we were stopped at an intersection near the fair and my condition went to red (long story). I un-tucked my shirt and put the shirt tail inside the hand grip for easier access. Upon returning to the Gaylord, the valet opened my truck door and calmly stated, "you might want to fix your shirt". I did and we both laughed!

I saw that about the Gaylord Texan's upcoming water park area--looks pretty neat. Great Wolf will still have the appeal of being an indoor water park, which sounds great for off-season and for my pale kids who burn despite lots of sunscreen.

That's pretty funny regarding your faux pas. The service there was pretty good--good group of valets. They took good care of my car and I think they left it out front the entire time as we never had to wait. Always tip your valet well, folks (assuming you love your car).

How sad, I think that any place considered to be a hotel should have to grant 2AM rights at least to paying overnight guests. Imagine booking a trip and finding out once you get to the hotel that you will have to leave your gun in the car overnight. We should get some legislation written.

Andiceman wrote:I saw that about the Gaylord Texan's upcoming water park area--looks pretty neat. Great Wolf will still have the appeal of being an indoor water park, which sounds great for off-season and for my pale kids who burn despite lots of sunscreen.

Which off-season?

Is there any cases of lawsuits against "Gun Free" businesses because someone got hurt? That would be a boon to any letter if it could be cited.