Without making any other observation or judgment on the subject of open carrying in high-profile, non-gun-related businesses to make a statement, what we've seen from this, and from Starbucks, is that shrill hoplophobes will loudly complain, corporate, which does not want to be dragged into a fight, will react in an unsurprising way, and the antis will receive an outcome over which they will brag and crow and get media attention. [More]
That encouraging result is likely to be repeated in other establishments, along with calls for new legislative restrictions, as were enacted in California.
It's not clear what tactical victory those triggering all of this can claim, as convincingly, and with as widespread coverage and public influence. There are key perception and methodology differences between this and, say, the Greensboro Woolworth's lunch counter in 1960, that I don't see being overcome.
I wonder if the gay mafia is the model to follow. When a business refuses them service, they sue. They've forced a baker and a photographer to render (unwilling) service to them. Maybe its time to make it known that if you refuse us, you're going to be sued (which is a huge expense even if you win.)
ReplyDeleteDavid,
ReplyDeleteIt seems NR has a say: They say no guns. Does this surprise you?
Chipotle Was Right To Ban Firearms
Phelps, don't become evil to fight evil.
ReplyDeleteDragging business owners into court using guns (which is what the force behind government is) over matters of how they choose to run their private property IS WRONG.
A boycott, perhaps, could be in order.
On the other hand, I've been thinking a lot about what Cliven Bundy asked folks to do, those who shows up to support him: firearms welcome, but please don't carry around rifles for now. That thought was with me as I read about the event at Chipolte's.
-PG