Panera bread email response to my email!

[venenoindy]

I email Panera bread about the decision to take my business elsewhere due to the policy of no guns allowed by law abiding citizens and this is the response I got.


I’m very sorry to hear you disagree with our policy. Within our company, we strive to create Panera Warmth, which means, among other things, creating bakery-cafe environments where customers and associates feel comfortable. Panera Bread respects the rights of gun owners, but we do believe asking that customers*not bring their firearms inside our bakery-cafes is consistent with the bakery-cafe environment we are attempting to create.

*

Thank you for taking the time to write to us and share your comments.

*

Sincerely,

Panera Bread

 

[Bapak2ja]

Their house; their rules. CC and enjoy the Panera Warmth. Try the turkey sandwich—it's pretty good. They have a good vanilla latte, too.

 

[WhitleyStu]

Their house; their rules. CC and enjoy the Panera Warmth. .

Been doing this for decades almost everywhere...

 

[LionWeight]

I know that many are going to disagree but if a company makes it policy that I can't exercise my right to carry in their establishment I exercise my right to spend my money where it is welcome.

 

[spankys56]

Why not a policy that says if you carry please CC. The complaints from other customers who see the guns and like to B#%## about it.

 

[Sawed off]

More and more companies are going this route. We can spend our money in other establishments, but does it really do any good?

 

[SteveM4A1]

I know that many are going to disagree but if a company makes it policy that I can't exercise my right to carry in their establishment I exercise my right to spend my money where it is welcome.

I didn't realize you have a right to carry on another's property.

But it is good that you choose to spend your money elsewhere. If only I could be that strong in some instances.

 

[PRasko]

I email Panera bread about the decision to take my business elsewhere due to the policy of no guns allowed by law abiding citizens and this is the response I got.


I’m very sorry to hear you disagree with our policy. Within our company, we strive to create Panera Warmth, which means, among other things, creating bakery-cafe environments where customers and associates feel comfortable. Panera Bread respects the rights of gun owners, but we do believe asking that customers*not bring their firearms inside our bakery-cafes is consistent with the bakery-cafe environment we are attempting to create.

*

Thank you for taking the time to write to us and share your comments.

*

Sincerely,

Panera Bread

This is a generic response they are sending out, I got the same email, word for word.

 

[sharpetop]

"Panera Warmth" That sounds like politically correct, liberal, touchy feely BS.

 

[jimbob488]

I'll stick with subway

 

[Lefty64]

PC/BS, welcome to corporate america.

 

[gregkl]

More and more companies are going this route. We can spend our money in other establishments, but does it really do any good?

It might make you feel good that you are at least doing something to protest the company policy. But economically, it won't hardly be noticed, if at all, if you refuse to patronize the establishment. Contrary to what we may believe, the few on this forum and other firearm forums for that matter who will take a stand are a very tiny percentage of the consumer population.

There area lot of gun owners in this country, but most do not carry at all and do not take part in the forums. Of those who do carry, the vast majority carry without the masses even realizing they have a gun on them.

Business runs by numbers, not emotion. Business will do what they think is necessary to satisfy the greatest amount of customers.

We need to do what we think is right for ourselves and if that means not supporting something that is against our personal convictions, then we should do it. It is the principle that matters in this case, the financial impact on the business will be negligible.

I for one will not buy anything made by Patagonia. You may and I am okay with that.

 

[WOLFEMAN]

Glad you sent the email "venenoindy" !!! I did exactly the same. What do you know, got the same reply. I know myself and other local
Public Safety Officers in my area arn't to pleased with their policy and have no plans to visit the cafe again.

 

[VERT]

Actually if police officers stop going into businesses somebody will notice. Follow my logic here. People tend to notice officer smiley stopping in for coffee and a scone. Nobody pays attention to all the legally armed normal guys/gals walking around. When the good officer stops showing up it will be noticed.

 

[AngryRooster]

If you choose to take your business elsewhere then make sure to let the company/manager know that's what you are doing and why. If enough people do this then it does get noticed.

 

[Mark 1911]

I know that many are going to disagree but if a company makes it policy that I can't exercise my right to carry in their establishment I exercise my right to spend my money where it is welcome.

I agree wholeheartedly. They are in business to make money. So unless gunowners register their dissatisfaction in terms of impacting a business's bottom line, then they may be enjoying the warmth, but in terms of gun rights they aren't making a difference. It's not just about enjoying the warmth, its about making sure future generations enjoy the right to bear arms.

 

[jb1911]

I got the same email. If I ever go there again I will be ignoring their suggestion.

If they get robbed while I'm there, they're on their own. Unless someone's life
is threatened, of course.

 

[ModernGunner]

Still say the law needs to be changed (and Indiana would be a good place to start), making businesses a 'place of public access'. This would mean that, IF the business advertises and encourages customers to go in and patronize that business, the business then becomes a 'public place', meaning that such limitations would be 'negated' for any such business, and they would have to adhere to the same rules as zoos, parks, etc.

Of course, the business could then choose NOT to advertise for customers to patronize their business premises. MANY businesses do just that (factories, mills, refineries, etc.) They certainly could continue to have and run a business, their choice. But IF they advertised for the public to come on the property to patronize that business, it would then become a 'place of public access', and the same rules would apply as when that citizen is walking down the street, as that is also 'open to the public'.

If the didn't like / agree with that law, they would certainly have that right. They just couldn't advertise, encourage, or allow 'off the street' customers to frequent that business.

Simple.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Still say the law needs to be changed (and Indiana would be a good place to start), making businesses a 'place of public access'. This would mean that, IF the business advertises and encourages customers to go in and patronize that business, the business then becomes a 'public place', meaning that such limitations would be 'negated' for any such business, and they would have to adhere to the same rules as zoos, parks, etc.

Of course, the business could then choose NOT to advertise for customers to patronize their business premises. MANY businesses do just that (factories, mills, refineries, etc.) They certainly could continue to have and run a business, their choice. But IF they advertised for the public to come on the property to patronize that business, it would then become a 'place of public access', and the same rules would apply as when that citizen is walking down the street, as that is also 'open to the public'.

If the didn't like / agree with that law, they would certainly have that right. They just couldn't advertise, encourage, or allow 'off the street' customers to frequent that business.

Simple.

Every fiber of my property-rights-are-paramount being screams no at this. But if I use the sort of rationale others have used for supporting homosexual marriage--that being, as long as it's the law that "public accommodations" cannot discriminate based on certain parameters, then surely it wouldn't be such a stretch to include Constitutional rights that explicitly protected.

 

[stephen87]

Why not a policy that says if you carry please CC. The complaints from other customers who see the guns and like to B#%## about it.

Why not a policy that says if you carry please follow state law. The complaints from other customers who see the guns and should just mtofb.