TexasCHLforum.com

A couple weeks ago, I noticed that Great Outdoors (a sub shop for those who don't know) in Richardson had a "no guns" type sign on their store window. I went home and found their web site and sent an email to the company president, Jerry Oliverie, asking if "no guns" was company policy or if it was the action of the store manager. He handed off my email to their VP/Director of Operations, Gail Voelcker, with whom I exchanged several emails. His/her (I'm not sure which ... Gail? Who knows?) emails to me were professional and expressed Great Outdoors' support for our freedom to carry firearms. A quote from one of their emails was, "I certainly agree that the right (and in some cases, the need) to carry a gun is very important". Turns out, 2-3 of their stores had old signs in the window leftover from when GO used to sell alcohol ...it was an oversight that they were still there.
I am happy to report that now the signs HAVE been removed!

Their emails also expressed that in the past, they have had customers request that they post "no guns" signs and they did not do so (except for what was required when they served alcohol). They have the tenuous problem of following their personal/corporate beliefs while maintaining their customer base ... they have come down on the side of freedom!

I have written them and thanked them for taking the signs down and have eaten there twice since then. Please join me in supporting the Great Outdoors by eating there on occassion. If you are so inclined, you might drop Jerry or Gail an email thanking them. Their email addresses are:
jerry@greatoutdoorsubs.com
gail@greatoutdoorsubs.com

Bob

That's the kind of corporate policy I love to hear about! Good job Aggiedad.

Why not just walk right by non-compliant signs? Non-compliant signs in no way prohibit chl's from carrying in said establishment...

MoJo wrote:Good job Aggiedad.

On the other hand:

Aggie_engr wrote:Why not just walk right by non-compliant signs? Non-compliant signs in no way prohibit chl's from carrying in said establishment...

Sometimes, it's just best to let sleeping dogs lie.

Wow Aggiedad! Thank you for sharing! It seems we have yet another confirmed example of polite corporate communication resulting in the reversal of posted anti-gun signs.

The CHL community seriously under-estimates the effect that the pressure that their spending $$$ can have. I congratulate you sir.

If Great Outdoors had Houston locations, I would visit them.

Oh man, I love that place! I haven't been in a while, though... Back when I was in college, half the staff at the Richardson location knew what my favorite order was.

Well, now I know what I'm having for lunch tomorrow!

Aggie_engr wrote:Why not just walk right by non-compliant signs? Non-compliant signs in no way prohibit chl's from carrying in said establishment...

I did and you are correct ... and in my email to GO president, I pointed out that it the was not unlawful for me to cc in their restaurant (there was wording on the sign that said it was) but that worst thing I could be guilty of was misdemeanor trespassing if I were asked to leave and refused to do so.

Yes, I could have continued to silently ignore the sign but why patronize a store that doesn't support my rights? Once politely notified, if the signs hadn't come down, I would not have gone back. They did and I will.

No no no. Didn't you realize, that when you email the company, they will fully research the statute and put a new, fully legal 30.06 sign up?

(Seriously, good work!)

Aggiedad wrote:

Aggie_engr wrote:Why not just walk right by non-compliant signs? Non-compliant signs in no way prohibit chl's from carrying in said establishment...

I did and you are correct ... and in my email to GO president, I pointed out that it the was not unlawful for me to cc in their restaurant (there was wording on the sign that said it was) but that worst thing I could be guilty of was misdemeanor trespassing if I were asked to leave and refused to do so.

Yes, I could have continued to silently ignore the sign but why patronize a store that doesn't support my rights? Once politely notified, if the signs hadn't come down, I would not have gone back. They did and I will.

Exactly. There is only one way to find out what their intention is, and that is to ask. If they decide to go ahead and post huge and ugly compliant signs, then no loss, you either don't give them your money or you disarm before entering and I vote for no guns = no money.

OTOH, if they tell you that their policy is no guns, ala Buffalo Wild Wings, but they refuse to put up compliant signs, then they hae been put on notice that they are not in compliance with the law and cannot expect their "corporate policy" to have any effect.

And of course there is always the possibility that they will note that they have signs up which discriminate against, and offend, some of the most law abiding citizens of our great state, and take them down, as has been my experience a couple of times.

I'll have to make sure to try them out.

Well, I wrote them a nice thank you letter. In this case, the company should hear from people who applaud their decision.

jimlongley wrote: If they decide to go ahead and post huge and ugly compliant signs, then no loss...

Except for ruining it for the rest of us.

Aggie_engr wrote:

jimlongley wrote: If they decide to go ahead and post huge and ugly compliant signs, then no loss...

Except for ruining it for the rest of us.

Good point!

Oldgringo wrote:

Aggie_engr wrote:

jimlongley wrote: If they decide to go ahead and post huge and ugly compliant signs, then no loss...

Except for ruining it for the rest of us.

Good point!

How could it ruin anything? Why would you choose to patronize an establishment that doesn't share your view of the constitution?

To the OP,
Good job on correcting the business and letting them know how useless their sign truly was. If we corrected more, rather than ignore, maybe the public perception will change somewhat.

Aggie_engr wrote:

jimlongley wrote: If they decide to go ahead and post huge and ugly compliant signs, then no loss...

Except for ruining it for the rest of us.

Ruining what? Do you actually spend money in support of those place which quite obviously discriminate against you?