Are We Going To Act? Where Do You Stand?

[CountryBoy19]

Just for those that would be interested, on Huhot's website listed under "Coming SOON", they listed Bloomington, IN.

So soon, those of us from this part of the state will be able to patronize them! I plan to do it!

 

[goinggreyfast]

They ARE pro-gun in Missoula, MT.

I have a friend that goes to MT every year and camps in a Nat'l Park. He tells me that pretty much everyone OC's there. HA!

Wow, I had initially agreed to attend an event there, but just read the rest of the thread. Will be happy to make the trip (2 hours) up there when mgt figures out that they are in violation of the Constitution and changes their stance on OC. But I'm quite sure that he's not worried about two people from Morgan Co coming up for one meal. He's more interested in keeping the locals happy.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I just got off the phone with David L. We had a long conversation, but I will let him post first, if he wishes too.

 

[Dave_L]

Based on research that I have uncovered, Wisconsin state law does not allow firearms to be carried into businesses that serve alcohol - Wisconsin statute 941.237.

 

[Dave_L]

The conversation that Tim and I had was informational. As expected, Tim would like for us to allow open carry in our restaurants. As noted above, this is not even a question in our Wisconsin locations.

We will do more research on this topic as it relates to Indiana, but I have nothing further to add at this time.

 

[down3green]

.

That was an impressive letter and great corporate response, but I'm not convinced an "event" is warranted. I'd say we go on about our normal routines there and see if they "walk the walk."


.

 

[Andy219]

The conversation that Tim and I had was informational. As expected, Tim would like for us to allow open carry in our restaurants. As noted above, this is not even a question in our Wisconsin locations.

We will do more research on this topic as it relates to Indiana, but I have nothing further to add at this time.

Glad to see you join and I am impressed with your decision to hit this head on and discuss the issue. Just a little something for you to use if you feel it may help in your discussions and decision making. There are several major corporations that have facilities in multiple states. Culvers, Starbucks, Walmart, Meijer and multiple others with the policy of carrying of firearms in accordance of the state laws governing that particular place.

i.e. In Indiana open and concealed carry is ok(with LTCH of course), in Illinois it's a no go either way, etc... It's a suggestion for your consideration.

 

[4sarge]

I would agree that your method of education would work for many, In regards to Wisconsin -

1st Dave, WE are Not in Wisconsin, this is Indiana. 2nd, This has turned from a Positive Response where many had planned upon attending and dining in your establishment to No One is Planning on Dining in Your Restaurant at this time. As You well know that the Restaurant Failure rate is quite High and you or Corporate has just discouraged a fairly sizable sum of paying customers from dining at your restaurant. I in good conscience would Not spend any monies in your establishment knowing that gun owners are not welcome there. I wish you success but as long as this is the policy, I will discourage anyone that I know from patronage there.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

There are several major corporations that have facilities in multiple states. Culvers, Starbucks, Walmart, Meijer and multiple others with the policy of carrying of firearms in accordance of the state laws governing that particular place.

i.e. In Indiana open and concealed carry is ok(with LTCH of course), in Illinois it's a no go either way, etc... It's a suggestion for your consideration.

I mentioned Starbucks to him during our conversation. And asked him to check into it.

2nd, This has turned from a Positive Response where many had planned upon attending and dining in your establishment to No One is Planning on Dining in Your Restaurant at this time. I wish you success but as long as this is the policy, I will discourage anyone that I know from patronage there.

I mentioned the above to him also.

According to him, I (and I assume you also) am being malicious. I told him that I have only posted about this on this forum. I am waiting to post elsewhere until everything gets decided. He says that me exercising my 1st amendment rights to free speech to let others know about their policies is malicious.

During our talk I mentioned some of the reasons I open carry, which are comfort, deterrence, education, and as a political statement. He did not seem to be able to discuss any of it except the political statement. He asked if I could understand him not wanting his restaurants to be used for political reasons. I told him that yes I could understand that, but that is not the only reason I OC, it is a small part of it. He kept repeating the political part.

I am impressed by him and his employees willingness to discuss this, I am not impressed by his response though.

 

[ATM]

...As expected, Tim would like for us to allow open carry in our restaurants...

Open carry was allowed - at least in your Lafayette restaurant.

We're simply expressing our disappointment that you have now decided to prohibit it even after it seems it was one of your managers that created this whole issue for Tim, one of your customers.

You know this choice will cost you some business from gun rights advocates, but I'm assuming you think this will benefit your business moreso in some other way or you wouldn't do it.

I am impressed by him and his employees willingness to discuss this, I am not impressed by his response though.

Exactly.

 

[superjoe76]

WOW! Never seen that ending coming! That is great! The boss must be pro 2A!

Or he just doesn't want to **** off people with guns!

Seriously though, it was a very unexpected reply. Being from the Fort, I won't be going there any time soon. Still cool though!

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Based on research that I have uncovered, Wisconsin state law does not allow firearms to be carried into businesses that serve alcohol - Wisconsin statute 941.237.

Dave you are able to allow firearms onto your properties. Read the entire statute that you quoted. You can allow open carry for an event in WI. I will guarantee you, that if you do allow it you will get more business. All that is required is that they ask and you grant permission for the event. You have stated on this forum that you wish to educate others. A person open carrying is doing just that, and if you instruct you managers to give permission to do so, it is legal.

All that is required in Wisconsin, is that they either call ahead first or send someone in to ask.

941.237(3)(g)
(g) The possession or use of a handgun on the premises if authorized for a specific event of limited duration by the owner or manager of the premises who is issued the Class "B" or "Class B" license or permit under ch. 125 for the premises.

The specific event would be education of the people, the limited time would be while they would be having dinner. Again totally legal with your and your managers approval.

I hope you see my point of view on this, if you do not I will spread the word. If you do see my point of view I will also spread the word. It is up to you sir.

 

[Dave_L]

All,

I would like to point a few things.

My point regarding Wisconsin statute is that it does not generally allow firearms in places that serve alcohol. You yourself have validated this as it only allows for firearms to be carried during an "event of limited duration." I believe that your point is being overstated if you are implying that this allows us to accept patrons with firearms, as the intent of this is likely to allow bowling alleys or other businesses to have gun shows or other 1 or 2 day events. The point of this discussion is not to argue the technicalities and loopholes in laws.

The statement that "gun owners are not welcome there" is entirely false. We have serviced over 1 million guests amongst the restaurants that we own/operate and I'm certain that many (if not the majority) of them are gun owners.

I also believe that the references to "corporate" and "corporate response" are overstated. We are a small business that opened its first restaurant just over five years ago.

Last night, I validated with all managers involved with the situation that they did not contact the police and each of their stories aligns. I sincerely believe that it was not one of them. This is not to say that some other employee (who did not notify management) did not call the police. Regardless, someone felt unsafe in the presence of another who had a gun. Thus, this proves that there is another set of people who are unafraid of firearms and may not patronize our business if we allow open carry. Many of the points on this board and by Tim reference the fact that we will lose business over this decision. My point, is that we stand to lose business on both sides if we do not reach a compromise.

Regarding us losing business over this decision, I would like for you to consider the following. You may consider the person who is afraid of an inanimate object, particularly to the extent that they would call the police or stop visiting a place of business that allows for open carry, to be irrational. However, by that same argument, what does that make the person who is not willing to patronize a business because they do not allow someone to openly carry an inanimate object openly? To me, right or wrong, the viewpoints are on opposite ends of the spectrum. I understand that you would like to educate other patrons and citizens on the right to carry, however, I think your biggest challenge is not in swaying those who sit on the fence - that is low hanging fruit. Your biggest challenge is swaying those who are on the opposite extreme. If you partake in the same irrational behavior as those people, I can guarantee you that you will only inflame the situation with them.

Tim - I do hang on to the fact that out of the multiple reasons that you stated that you would like to open carry, I chose the "political statement" reason. One reason why is that you have not only stated that you enjoyed our product, but that you also did not have a problem concealing your weapon when asked. Additionally, you have stated that you are going to go out of your way to let others know about our policy. By definition, that is politicking.

We could have chosen many states and cities to locate a restaurant in, but we decided Lafayette, Indiana. Our restaurant will contribute approximately $800k of compensation each year to local employees. This location will also be responsible for direct donations of $30k per year to local non-profit organizations through our Making Community Impacts program (Making Community Impacts). Furthermore, we have won many significant awards based on our community involvement. The chances that this space in Lafayette would be occupied with another organization of this caliber is unlikely. However, some of you are chosing to overlook these facts, not because we do not allow firearms inside, but because we simply ask that you cover them up in some manner. Not only do you not want to patronize our business, you are suggesting that you will indirectly ask others not to patronize our business. I fail to understand how such behaviors better your cause - particularly in such a tumultous economic time where small businesses such as ourselves are reviving the economy.

Sincerely,
David Lindenstruth

 

[SirRealism]

Then ban Wisconsin police. Why disarm law-abiding citizens simply because the police might show up and make asses of themselves?

Very true. Where police decide to ignore their own laws and persecute law-abiding folks, they are the gun-carrying criminals. I wouldn't want them in my place of business.

Tim - I do hang on to the fact that out of the multiple reasons that you stated that you would like to open carry, I chose the "political statement" reason. One reason why is that you have not only stated that you enjoyed our product, but that you also did not have a problem concealing your weapon when asked. Additionally, you have stated that you are going to go out of your way to let others know about our policy. By definition, that is politicking.

By that definition, it would be politicking if I were to tell all my friends that you asked me to leave because my wife isn't the right race. The only difference is that you're not allowed by law to ask me to leave in that instance. But the point is that you have to know that folks who care about a specific right are going to communicate. The right to carry in the manner we see fit is a very important right to a great many of us. As a business owner, you just have to weigh the costs/benefits. I fully support your right to do so and to make your policy based on that. But I just won't eat there.

 

[femurphy77]

All this talk about corporate consistency "we have to do it this way in Indiana because we do it this way in Wisconsin" is kind of lame! A lot of national chains deal with this issue regularly and when questioned their corporate offices generally take a "we abide by the laws of the state our store/restaurant/etc is located in". Seems like a pretty simple solution to the "problem".

I don't generally consider myself political but after reading the positive response that was provided by your organization in the initial e-mails I had already decided to make the trip to Lafayette to patronize your restaurant for taking a positive stance (imho) on this issue. I am not an open carrier nor would I had I made the almost 2 hour trip to your facility but I can tell you know that if and when your Bloomington Indiana location opens that I WILL NOT make the 20 minute drive to check it out!

I realize that I am only one customer and that my lack of patronage will not have much if any effect on your bottom line but I can't support an operation that so willingly steps on our constitutionally gauranteed rights and I'm not just talking about the one specific right that this board so highly values.

 

[4sarge]

All this talk about corporate consistency "we have to do it this way in Indiana because we do it this way in Wisconsin" is kind of lame! A lot of national chains deal with this issue regularly and when questioned their corporate offices generally take a "we abide by the laws of the state our store/restaurant/etc is located in". Seems like a pretty simple solution to the "problem".

I don't generally consider myself political but after reading the positive response that was provided to your organization in the initial e-mails I had already decided to make the trip to Lafayette to patronize your restaurant for taking a positive stance (imho) on this issue. I am not an open carrier nor would I had I made the almost 2 hour trip to your facility but I can tell you know that if and when your Bloomington Indiana location opens that I WILL NOT make the 20 minute drive to check it out!

I realize that I am only one customer and that my lack of patronage will not have much if any effect on your bottom line but I can't support an operation that so willingly steps on our constitutionally gauranteed rights and I'm not just talking about the one specific right that this board so highly values.

Ditto and I was going to make the 2 hour trip to Lafayette to show my support for this restaurant and I too will not be a patron of the Bloomington Location.

Quoth the raven, `Nevermore.'

 

[Mr. Habib]

All this talk about corporate consistency "we have to do it this way in Indiana because we do it this way in Wisconsin" is kind of lame! A lot of national chains deal with this issue regularly and when questioned their corporate offices generally take a "we abide by the laws of the state our store/restaurant/etc is located in". Seems like a pretty simple solution to the "problem".

I don't generally consider myself political but after reading the positive response that was provided to your organization in the initial e-mails I had already decided to make the trip to Lafayette to patronize your restaurant for taking a positive stance (imho) on this issue. I am not an open carrier nor would I had I made the almost 2 hour trip to your facility but I can tell you know that if and when your Bloomington Indiana location opens that I WILL NOT make the 20 minute drive to check it out!

I realize that I am only one customer and that my lack of patronage will not have much if any effect on your bottom line but I can't support an operation that so willingly steps on our constitutionally gauranteed rights and I'm not just talking about the one specific right that this board so highly values.

Ditto and I was going to make the 2 hour trip to Lafayette to show my support for this restaurant and I too will not be a patron of the Bloomington Location.

Quoth the raven, `Nevermore.'

You can add me to the list, too.

 

[ATM]

Bottom line as I see it.

You think that you may lose business if you "allow" open carry.
That is to say that by taking zero action and leaving your restaurant at the default standard of 99% or so of Indiana restaurants, it is conceivable that someone might not choose to eat there for that reason.

On the other hand, if you take an action by prohibiting open carry you would be joining the tiny minority of restaurants that do so and definitely losing the business of several.

Only one of these choices makes any sense to me

...but it's not my restaurant.

 

[Roadie]

So, what I see here is that:

A: A company like Starbucks, that is so huge offending gun owners wouldnt even make a dent in their profits, does the right thing and makes policy based on what state the location is in. Guns allowed in that State? Then guns OK in Starbucks.

B: A small company, that has much more to lose by negative publicity, and the loss of potential revenue, makes a blanket policy for all of their locations, based on one State's policies, which have no legal bearing on another State...

Did I understand that correctly?

 

[4sarge]

So, what I see here is that:

A: A company like Starbucks, that is so huge offending gun owners wouldnt even make a dent in their profits, does the right thing and makes policy based on what state the location is in. Guns allowed in that State? Then guns OK in Starbucks.

B: A small company, that has much more to lose by negative publicity, and the loss of potential revenue, makes a blanket policy for all of their locations, based on one State's policies, which have no legal bearing on another State...

Did I understand that correctly?

Must be Wisconsin Logic