On Topic Discussion Chipotle has to ask customers to no bring guns into stores.

[Kulindahr]

I agree with this.

A restaurant (even a Chipotle) is supposed to be a congenial, relaxing and pleasant environment. When people do things which are disruptive, they ought to be asked to leave. This is merely being polite. Sometimes, people allow their cell phones to ring in the middle of the dining room. Sometimes, people wear patchouli and the fragrance is invasive. Sometimes, people try to change a baby's diaper next to another party that is eating. Just like bringing in a gun, these actions are disruptive to the other people trying to dine in public. Bad behavior isn't illegal, but it's nothing to be passively tolerated.

You have it backwards: the exercise of a right is not disruptive. It's those who cringe at liberty because of their emotional reaction who are disruptive.

BTW, changing a baby's diaper in a restaurant is legitimately forbidden because it is contrary to the nature of the business: the health hazard is real.

 

[eastofeden]

If I saw someone with a gun when I was in Chipolte...I would leave immediately. Same thing with any place I am eating or shopping.

Sorry...but I am more afraid of people who want to carry a gun into a room full of people dining than I am the gun.

..and agreeing with ibill1...self absorbed insensitive asshole are the words that come to my mind as well

 

[vulgar_newcomer]

Doesn't really matter where you stand on this issue it will be decided by the business owner and or their insurance carrier. The owner can be in favor of the law however is smart enough to realize sooner or later some gun toting pot belly limber dick is going to have a gun problem in their establishment. This could result in law suit for the proprietor . The best protection would be a no guns allowed policy. In fact many insurance companies would likely require it for a policy to be written.

 

[Special K]

Hmm... I predict a rise in Facebook posts that say things like, "OBUMMER'S TAKEIN MAH GUNZZZZZ!!!!" and "AH WONT EET AT CHIPOOPLE AGAIN CUZ DEY BUNCHA GUN GRABIN CUMMUNISTS!"...
Some people think that everyone in the USA should always be carrying a gun because the (outdated) second amendment says so, and it will cut back on crime. They think that if something happens, they could just pull out their gun and save the day, just like on TV. Also, they think they need to be able to take down the government... as if a bunch of rednecks with rifles are capable of bringing down one of the most powerful countries in the world!
Isn't that cute?

Haha! This made me laugh. So true.

 

[zoltanspawn]

You have it backwards: the exercise of a right is not disruptive. It's those who cringe at liberty because of their emotional reaction who are disruptive.

BTW, changing a baby's diaper in a restaurant is legitimately forbidden because it is contrary to the nature of the business: the health hazard is real.

You should open a restaurant with a disclaimer on the menu advising:

"please refrain from cringing at liberty to maintain a congenial dining environment"



I'll be sure to bump this thread with the news as soon as someone complains that the party next to them "cringed at liberty" and would like their food to go.

 

[ibill1]

It's being childish and immature to expect others to set aside their rights just to make others happy. That's how we piddle away our freedom.

In fact, when a right is threatened, responsible citizens will go out of their way to exercise it. I feel sorry for those who cringe at other people exercising their rights, at the sight of inanimate objects. It must be horrible to think your fellow citizens are barbarians who can't be trusted with firearms. The only foundation for such behavior that I can see is an attitude of wanting to be taken care of, to not have to be responsible for yourself but rather have someone else protect you.

The whole point of protecting rights is to be sure that those who "freak out" have to put up with other people exercising those rights. Free speech is protected precisely so you have to tolerate hearing things that make you uneasy -- and the right to keep and bear arms is protected precisely so you are required to tolerate its exercise.

You are missing the entire point. I'm not talking about rights. I'm talking about being a conscious individual who has a concern for their fellow man. A person who carries a rifle to go hunting or to a show and realizes that it would make others uncomfortable to walk into a restaurant brandishing a rifle for all to see. Visions of school shootings and base shootings are going to arise in most patrons minds. This isn't changing a diaper or wearing too much perfume. You are carrying something that kills people. Again, they don't know you or your intentions. To associate walking into a public arena with an exposed rifle and thinking somehow that if you are considerate of others and elect not to that this lessens your rights is ludicrous.

It's arrogant in the extreme to want everyone else to bend to your insecurities.

Again, you missed it. Unlike you, it is not about me, it is being aware of my fellow man. Personally, I wouldn't give a shit if I saw someone enter with a rifle hanging off his shoulder. I certainly would wonder why he thought that was necessary and he is an asshole for doing it, but it wouldn't freighten me.

 

[ibill1]

It's being childish and immature to expect others to set aside their rights just to make others happy. That's how we piddle away our freedom.

In fact, when a right is threatened, responsible citizens will go out of their way to exercise it. I feel sorry for those who cringe at other people exercising their rights, at the sight of inanimate objects. It must be horrible to think your fellow citizens are barbarians who can't be trusted with firearms. The only foundation for such behavior that I can see is an attitude of wanting to be taken care of, to not have to be responsible for yourself but rather have someone else protect you.

The whole point of protecting rights is to be sure that those who "freak out" have to put up with other people exercising those rights. Free speech is protected precisely so you have to tolerate hearing things that make you uneasy -- and the right to keep and bear arms is protected precisely so you are required to tolerate its exercise. QUOTE

You are missing the entire point. I'm not talking about rights. I'm talking about being a conscious individual who has a concern for their fellow man. A person who carries a rifle to go hunting or to a show and realizes that it would make others uncomfortable to walk into a restaurant brandishing a rifle for all to see. Visions of school shootings and base shootings are going to arise in most patrons minds. This isn't changing a diaper or wearing too much perfume. You are carrying something that kills people. Again, they don't know you or your intentions. To associate walking into a public arena with an exposed rifle and thinking somehow that if you are considerate of others and elect not to that this lessens your rights is ludicrous.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Of course you're supposed to "bend to their ways" -- that's what the exercise of a right is all about. It's no different with religion: you have to "bend to [the] ways" of people who wear religious garb or carry religious books or sing religious songs in public. It's no different with freedom of the press: you have to "bend to [the] ways" of all those newspapers and magazines you think are stupid. For that matter, we all have to "bend to [the] ways" of the obese, those with no fashion sense, and those with snotty screaming obnoxious children. And in traffic, we have to "bend to [the] ways" of those who drive like they're in a race or otherwise act like idiots.

What I mean by "bend to their ways" is that a lot of these people are unwilling to listen to the people who don't like this behavior. They will not consider how these acts make other people feel. They are selfish. It is very different than religion by the way, these are weapons, not clothing or books.

That's the whole point of freedom. And as with other freedoms, everyone should celebrate any time someone exercises one of the rights we share, whether we like that exercise or not.

Traveling in groups with these types of weapons doesn't come off as expressing freedom to me. It is expressing intimidation. I am sorry, but anyone in their right mind should feel uneasy when they see a group of people with ak-47's and shotguns, amongst other weapons.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

It's being childish and immature to expect others to set aside their rights just to make others happy. That's how we piddle away our freedom.

In fact, when a right is threatened, responsible citizens will go out of their way to exercise it. I feel sorry for those who cringe at other people exercising their rights, at the sight of inanimate objects. It must be horrible to think your fellow citizens are barbarians who can't be trusted with firearms. The only foundation for such behavior that I can see is an attitude of wanting to be taken care of, to not have to be responsible for yourself but rather have someone else protect you.

Why should I trust random strangers that I don't know? I don't know why you bought and own a gun. I don't know your intentions. I have absolutely 0 reason to trust you just because you have a firearm. Especially when we live in a society with high gun violence. I do not trust Police Officers just because they are in a form of authority, nor do I automatically trust Politicians for the same reason.

The whole point of protecting rights is to be sure that those who "freak out" have to put up with other people exercising those rights. Free speech is protected precisely so you have to tolerate hearing things that make you uneasy -- and the right to keep and bear arms is protected precisely so you are required to tolerate its exercise.

It's arrogant in the extreme to want everyone else to bend to your insecurities.

You are purposely using your vocabulary in a specific way to twist the meaning of what people are saying and to ignore what people have an actual problem with. That is arrogant, you don't actually want to listen you want people to bend to your ways and respect them without respecting how it effects other people.

 

[eastofeden]

Again, you missed it. Unlike you, it is not about me, it is being aware of my fellow man. Personally, I wouldn't give a shit if I saw someone enter with a rifle hanging off his shoulder. I certainly would wonder why he thought that was necessary and he is an asshole for doing it, but it wouldn't freighten me.

I agree. There are a lot of kids (and adults) who are terrified of going to school or work now because of the gun violence...and their fear is very real. If I was a parent I might be tempted to home school because of this myself. The thought of any child being massacred is too much for me to absorb. The fact that this doesn't occur to someone bringing a gun into a restaurant is the height of arrogance.

I had a series of very large wall size WW2 propaganda posters from the United States that had great graphics..and were worth a lot of money...they had captions like "KILL THE JAPS"...everything was red and black on white which made the graphics and captions and text "pop" and immediately capture your attention. They are part of history and it is what it is....and they were cool posters....I only had room to hang up two of them but I had more..

...and then one day I noticed two young Japanese boys hugging their father and looking at the sign very upset and it took me a minute to figure out what was happening but when I did...I was so sorry I had hung them up. It never occurred to me that they would scare a kid and THAT is not acceptable to me...so I took them down immediately. No one had to tell me to do it...

I wanted to apologize to the father but I decided to let him explain...I think he knew I felt bad about it.....

 

[dpnice]

From an Englishman's point of view "free speech" doesn't massacre a whole load of school kids, nor all the other violent crimes we hear about.

Unfortunately the easy access to guns is now proving a problem here in France.

It is difficult to see gun ownership as a constitutional right when I see it, personally, as an infringement to the general public's security

 

[LeicsDom]

It's being childish and immature to expect others to set aside their rights just to make others happy. That's how we piddle away our freedom.

Just because someone claims it is their right doesn't mean it is right

 

[LeicsDom]

It's arrogant in the extreme to want everyone else to bend to your insecurities.

Surely it is just as arrogant to want everyone else to bend to your 'right' to carry an offensive weapon.
After all, you have, presumably, had no formal training on its use, nor have you had a psychological assessment of your suitability to possess it.
I understand that any cow poke, redneck or retard has the right to bear arms in the US.
Over here in the UK we legislate against anyone carrying a knife and yet we still have far too many murders caused by them being drawn in anger. I dread to think how much worse it would be if every Tom, Dick and Harry were leaglly allowed to carry firearms

 

[Kulindahr]

Sorry...but I am more afraid of people who want to carry a gun into a room full of people dining than I am the gun.

So you run from cops. That's probably a good idea.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

I dread to think how much worse it would be if every Tom, Dick and Harry were leaglly allowed to carry firearms

This makes me think about how angry people get in shops like these over orders being wrong, rude employees, or just being angry over something minimal. How much that escalation can change when one person is carrying a gun.

 

[Kulindahr]

Doesn't really matter where you stand on this issue it will be decided by the business owner and or their insurance carrier. The owner can be in favor of the law however is smart enough to realize sooner or later some gun toting pot belly limber dick is going to have a gun problem in their establishment. This could result in law suit for the proprietor . The best protection would be a no guns allowed policy. In fact many insurance companies would likely require it for a policy to be written.

No establishment can keep out firearms under most concealed carry laws. If you want them to, then you should also be willing to allow businesses to keep out gays.

And there are businesses here which have allowed people with guns in for sixty years or more, and there's never been a problem. There are businesses like that all over the country, which understand that they should no more restrict that right than the right to wear a Star of David.

 

[Kulindahr]

Again, you missed it. Unlike you, it is not about me, it is being aware of my fellow man. Personally, I wouldn't give a shit if I saw someone enter with a rifle hanging off his shoulder. I certainly would wonder why he thought that was necessary and he is an asshole for doing it, but it wouldn't freighten me.

No one is an "asshole" for exercising his rights. It's the people who look down on that who are the assholes.

 

[eastofeden]

So you run from cops. That's probably a good idea.

It isn't necessarily a bad idea...but that is not something I would run from and that is another subject...and it is part of their job. The ones who went into schools and post offices and other places and blew away lots of people...carrying a weapon was not part of their job

 

[Kulindahr]

You are missing the entire point. I'm not talking about rights. I'm talking about being a conscious individual who has a concern for their fellow man. A person who carries a rifle to go hunting or to a show and realizes that it would make others uncomfortable to walk into a restaurant brandishing a rifle for all to see. Visions of school shootings and base shootings are going to arise in most patrons minds. This isn't changing a diaper or wearing too much perfume. You are carrying something that kills people. Again, they don't know you or your intentions. To associate walking into a public arena with an exposed rifle and thinking somehow that if you are considerate of others and elect not to that this lessens your rights is ludicrous.

But you are talking about rights -- you want people to be restricted in exercising one that bothers you.

The majority of people who walk into a restaurant are carrying things that can kill people. Do you get upset about belts? pocket knives?

The only reason that visions of school shootings will come into people's minds is that they have been sold a lie. What they should think of is that today, a hundred million gun owners in the country didn't harm a soul -- and that the same was true the day before that, and every day before that.

Unless you're a criminal, you're more likely to be struck by a car than harmed by a firearm.

 

[Kulindahr]

Why should I trust random strangers that I don't know? I don't know why you bought and own a gun. I don't know your intentions. I have absolutely 0 reason to trust you just because you have a firearm. Especially when we live in a society with high gun violence. I do not trust Police Officers just because they are in a form of authority, nor do I automatically trust Politicians for the same reason.

THe "high gun violence" bit is a myth. What we live in is a society with declining gun violence -- indeed, declining violence of all types. Every year there are more guns, many years more gun owners, but the violence continues to drop.

You are purposely using your vocabulary in a specific way to twist the meaning of what people are saying and to ignore what people have an actual problem with. That is arrogant, you don't actually want to listen you want people to bend to your ways and respect them without respecting how it effects other people.

I'm not "ignoring what people actually have a problem with", I'm not giving the irrational fears the dignity of a response.