Hassled by Buffalo Wild Wings for OC at Dupont, Fort Wayne

[Roadie]

Not that it couldn't happen, but I have a hard time believing that a person would leave a job as a LEO to become the night manager at a Walmart. I would've pressed him a little more about being 'former law enforcement'. Maybe he was in the 'Police Explorers' in high school...

lol!

Retired maybe?

 

[Hooker]

MK2JA When I first read this thread I was disturbed with the way you handled this situation. I have since then read the majority of the posts discussing this issue. You have earnd my respect by the way you have handled youself in this thread. I still would have handled it differently but understand your comittment to your rights.

I wanted to reply to some of your supporter's comments (only a few) but I don't have the patience you do.

I look forward to future posts.

I think he will make a fine addition to our United States Military.

 

[Benny]

lol!

Retired maybe?

Probably got fired for incompetence.

I think he will make a fine addition to our United States Military.

That's an understatement IMO.



BTW, your handle makes me chuckle.

 

[finity]

I got into a discussion about their policy with the nite manager. I told him my wife used to work loss prevention and she was trained that by law, you cant detain anyone without suspicion of theft. He said:

"I am former law enforcement, and I am telling you we have a legal right to stop and detain anyone we want, for any reason we want.."

You should print out the IC that specifically says that & show it to him...

...but as "former law enforcement" he probably knows more about the law than you do, even if it is right in front of him in black & white.

I think he will make a fine addition to our United States Military.

I hope so.

I also hope he realizes that when he enters the military his Constitutional Rights are suspended. He's governed by the UCMJ at that point. It doesn't matter how much he wants to "stand up" for any of his rights "that he won't compromise on". He'll either compromise or face NJP/court martial. It really is that simple.

 

[oneshotonekill]

Yeah good job staying cool....that's why I leave mine covered up, just don't want to deal with the possible hassle.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Agreed.

But what I don't understand is, after probably a dozen different threads detailing BWW as an anti-gun business, why do any INGO members still go to BWW and give them hard earned cash?

Seriously there have been numerous threads about BWW being an anti-gun business (along with other national chains like Chilis, Jared Jewlers) and there have been letters/emails from BWW management posted that detail their dislike of lawful gun carriers. Still despite all the evidence, there are INGO members who continue to frequent BWW.

Good to know. Being new to this forum, I was unaware of their stance on this. I'll have to check the one in Bedford and see if they have a sign posted.

I didn't care much for their Sam's Club chicken-tenders-with-Tabasco-sauce anyway.

 

[sig1473]

Geezus.......all this reading made me hungry for wings

 

[Kutnupe14]

It's rather unsettling that he's a police officer and doesn't know that.

Wat? This is a joke right?

 

[Kutnupe14]

No they don't.

One's rights to be on that private property end there.

I respectfully disagree. If I so choose, I can place restrictions upon your ability to carry a firearm on my property. You can abide by them or not. In not doing so, you may possibly be asked to leave.

So without a doubt, your gun rights... rights provided to you by the Constitution end at the door of private property, if the owner of said property wishes it.

 

[ATM]

I respectfully disagree. If I so choose, I can place restrictions upon your ability to carry a firearm on my property.

Nope. I'd still have the ability to do so.

You can abide by them or not.

Agreed. That's my right.

In not doing so, you may possibly be asked to leave.

Yep. As I stated, that's the property owner's right to ask me to leave.

So without a doubt, your gun rights... rights provided to you by the Constitution end at the door of private property, if the owner of said property wishes it.

Hang on... you just proved my point but now you're saying this again.
When I leave, I still have my gun. I just can't be on the property.

And btw, the Constitution didn't provide my rights.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Nope. I'd still have the ability to do so.

Having the "ability" to do something doest make it right.... might does not make right. An individual's property rights trump a vistors gun rights, every time. I'm not saying that you must turn over you weapon, only that it be removed from the premises if so wished by the property owner. If one fails to abide by said request, they can either leave or be forcibly removed.

And btw, the Constitution didn't provide my rights.

agreed, but as I'm sure you are aware, people constantly cite the Constitution as "proof" of their rights.

 

[ATM]

...An individual's property rights trump a vistors gun rights, every time.

Nothing is trumped. They may make whatever requests they like.
They can make them at the front door or after I've been there a while.
The only request I must honor would be to leave. I can refuse everything else if I like.

I maintain all of my rights, regardless of the nature of any of their other requests

...except for the right to remain on someone else's property - which I never had to begin with.

 

[Gamez235]

Ate there tonight, not an obvious open carry.. M&P 9 in a Raven Phantom, no coat while I enjoyed my mediocre food, just a snug T-Shirt at a table in the middle of the dining room.. I didn't have problem at all. 9pm-ish.

 

[bglaze]

Nothing is trumped. They may make whatever requests they like.
They can make them at the front door or after I've been there a while.
The only request I must honor would be to leave. I can refuse everything else if I like.

I maintain all of my rights, regardless of the nature of any of their other requests

...except for the right to remain on someone else's property - which I never had to begin with.

Agreed.

Property rights do not allow the owner to make patrons do anything they want them to do just because they own the property. They just have the right to ask them to leave if they refuse to comply.

This is so simple to understand, why are some having such a hard time with it?

 

[Hammerhead]

Because some people believe you must obey.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Because some people believe you must obey.

Exactly, you obey a private property owners rules or go... simple. In public you do what you like, you have your rights, on private property you have none.

 

[Rey B]

Sorry, no Kutnupe14. Rights are not surrendered or negated by location. On private property all you can do is request that they leave. You may reinforce that request as you see necessary but rights do not disappear.

 

[jsgolfman]

And until we are living in an Anarchist society, it's not private property.

 

[Hotdoger]

Exactly, you obey a private property owners rules or go... simple. In public you do what you like, you have your rights, on private property you have none.

LOL

Maybe only in Carmel? LOL

 

[ruger1968]

you could have been a police officer in plain clothes did the wanna be manager ask you if you were a police officer and if are a leo I would've not told him that u were you handled that real good just my