Tonight at walmart

[360]

Instead of being pro-active to raise awareness to the situation being discussed, lets all chicken out and sit back and do nothing but gripe at the folks who might want to "protest" the ignorance of Wal-Mart. Isn't that what the OP was trying to clarify in the beginning?
My idea was nothing about stirring trouble, but raising awareness to Wal-Mart about open carry, and to make sure they upgrade their policy by training their employees to all be on the same page when it comes to approaching a shopper who has a sidearm in plain view.

A lot of you guys sit around and yada yada yada this and yada yada yada that, but if an opportunity arises where we could make a positive difference, NOT a negative one, you run away with your tail between your legs and cry "FOUL" on anyone suggestion a pro-active stance.

You can write all the letters you want, but the actual carry-in would do more to raise awareness than letters that will likely be ignored.

I understand that the law may be called, and you could be asked to leave the store, but that is the point we are trying to make here. We want to see if all of the Wal-Marts will do the same thing, or if we get different results from each individual store, manager, employee, or police department (if called upon).

It's not like I am asking to do something illegal that will result in someone being thrown into the clink. It's just a "test" to see what sort of response we would get from Wal-Mart.

We don't have to go in with a neon sign blazing about our heads, flashing our intentions, and that we are carrying a firearm in open view. We don't have to walk in together. We don't have to raise any flags whatsoever. Just make sure your weapon is in plain sight, and don't make an issue of it. Then report back to the forum as to what you experienced. It's not about making us feel 10 feet tall and bulletproof, or like we are some sort of bad-*** posse in effect.

Who's in?

 

[Paco Bedejo]

This is causing trouble and wasting police resources that would be much better served tracking down real criminals, and not dealing with your little protest of this store's policies.

Oh wow! I must have missed where the OP mentioned that they sent detectives to the store...

Since you don't appear to find any value in them; feel free to send back your Constitutionally-recognized basic human rights for a full refund. Your RMA# is 12345. Please be sure to note it on at least 3 sides of the box for faster processing of your claim.

Sorry...I couldn't decide which sarcastic response I wanted to post for you...so you got two for the price of one!

 

[Blue Tile Spook]

LCP, it's a mixed bag, thus the responses.

On one hand, a few around here argue that any attention from the public or LEO by a firearm owner is negative attention. Stay peaceful, stay quiet, don't rock the boat in any way.

On the other hand, a few argue that, like the gay community, "don't rock the boat" kept their issues from being heard and considered. Not until there were gay pride parades, get togethers, public displays, did the movement for acceptance gain any ground.

Sometimes the over-the-top "in your face" instinct is too strong to deny and it gets verbalized.

 

[youngda9]

We want to see if all of the Wal-Marts will do the same thing, or if we get different results from each individual store, manager, employee, or police department (if called upon).

We know the answer to this question already. We know this store calls the cops. We know other stores do not. We know WM's corporate policy on this issue.

 

[youngda9]

Oh wow! I must have missed where the OP mentioned that they sent detectives to the store...

No mention of detectives were mentioned, only police officers...they cost money also, their time is valuable, and taking them off the streets chews up resources. But it's great that your statement hinges on the fact that cops don't track down criminals, only detectives...symantics allows you to use a sarcastic response that is irrelevent. The fact is that it chews up resources($) and officer time. Detective, officer, sargent, or sheriff...not pertinant to this issue.

Since you don't appear to find any value in them; feel free to send back your Constitutionally-recognized basic human rights for a full refund. Your RMA# is 12345. Please be sure to note it on at least 3 sides of the box for faster processing of your claim.

Cute, but property rights trump your 2A rights...deal with it.
FACT:You can carry anywhere you want, but when the property owner asks you to take your gun and leave, you must...your 2A rights have just been trumped. Feel free to contact the property owner(WM) in order to be allowed back on their property with your firearm.

Sorry...I couldn't decide which sarcastic response I wanted to post for you...so you got two for the price of one!

You should have chosen D: None of the above. Thanks for playing.

 

[sjstill]

the first time i carried in our local walmart here in columbus i was followed as well, and the manager asked me why i was carrying. i kinda laughed and told him the 2nd amendment gives me the right. im also an mp and was wearing my MP hoody and had my badge on me and he still insisted i cc I just covered it up and kept shopping. it doesnt take long to move the jacket to get to it if needed but something about OC just makes me feel better sometimes.

Does your MP badge mean anything off base? Just curious.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

No mention of detectives were mentioned, only police officers...they cost money also, their time is valuable, and taking them off the streets chews up resources. But it's great that your statement hinges on the fact that cops don't track down criminals, only detectives...symantics allows you to use a sarcastic response that is irrelevent. The fact is that it chews up resources($) and officer time. Detective, officer, sargent, or sheriff...not pertinant to this issue.

Such misappropriations of resources are certainly not the fault of those who are acting BOTH within the law AND within the limits of corporate store policy.

Cute, but property rights trump your 2A rights...deal with it.
FACT:You can carry anywhere you want, but when the property owner asks you to take your gun and leave, you must...your 2A rights have just been trumped. Feel free to contact the property owner(WM) in order to be allowed back on their property with your firearm.

The property owner's policy is to follow state law. A misinformed/rogue agent for the property owner is making up a contradictory policy & using it to waste police resources.

Don't think of this as only a protest of Wal-Mart policies. It's also a protest of LEO policies. Just because someone at Wal-Mart calls the police, it doesn't mean they need to come down to the store. They *should* simply ask whether store security has approached the person in question & asked them to comply with store policy & whether that person has refused to comply or vacate.

Let me put it this way:
I invite someone over to my home. I see that they're carrying a firearm. I then call the police & ask them to come remove that person from my home because my unposted home-policy is 'no-guns'. Is it OK for me to use LEOs in that way when I haven't even bothered to ask the person to leave?

That's the sort of thing a Wal-Mart OC day would help to highlight.

 

[youngda9]

Such misappropriations of resources are certainly not the fault of those who are acting BOTH within the law AND within the limits of corporate store policy.

They certainly would be at fault would be if they OC'd back at the store prior(which was my original argument that I feel you're missing) to having corporate WM re-train their store employees, and the police get re-trained as well...which is what is needed. Many OC-ers are seen as agitaters and out for attention and to stir the puddin...this attitude needs to stop. Going back before the re-training will only result in the same treatment as the OP got, and therefore would be a blatant waste of everyone's time.

Sounds like this is being cleared up now, that's great to hear.

Just because someone at Wal-Mart calls the police, it doesn't mean they need to come down to the store. They *should* simply ask whether store security has approached the person in question & asked them to comply with store policy & whether that person has refused to comply or vacate.

But they did call the cops, and they did come down to the store, and will continue to do so until re-educated. What they should do doesn't matter if the expected output result is wrong.

That's the sort of thing a Wal-Mart OC day would help to highlight.

If it was done after the re-training I mentioned above then I fully agree. Anything done prior to that would be an obvious waste of time, $, resources, and would cast OC-ers, and gun-owners in general, in a negative light as they are escorted from the store. WM and the police acted incorrectly, and will continue to do so until this is straightened out. It will not get straightened out by people OC-ing in the store as some sort of protest, they will only get the cops called on them...almost never seen by the common person as a good thing.

I believe this is a moot point now, I've tossed in my as well.

 

[IndyMonkey]

I just OC at a walmart in Indy. I usually only OC when I am going shooting and have my tacti-cool pants and holster on. It was a weird experience, I didnt feel right to say the least. I will say that the cop parked in front of the store didnt even notice or care. Neither did any of the people inside.

 

[Tactical Dave]

I do not think open carry is wrong but am not a fan of it. To many people do it for the wrong reason's and for me I don't like to attract attention.

I just don't like to make people feel uncomfortable......


The only place I think I would ever open carry is out in the wood's or something.

I was out one Saturday night with a bunch of guy's in the car scene and one idiot has a 357 mag tucked in behined his belt buckle...... he was asked to cover it up because it was making people un easy and his additude did not help..... everyone knew though that most of the people there were carrying but they were coverd up......... The cop's were called and with them on there way he told some people they were being stupid and he was going to leave before he started busting some cap's in people...... yeah he went to jail and his mom later found us a few miles away...... at the time we did not know open carry was legal but it seem's she did not know you can't really carry it in an atemidating way or threaten people with it.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

I was out one Saturday night with a bunch of guy's in the car scene and one idiot has a 357 mag tucked in behined his belt buckle...... he was asked to cover it up because it was making people un easy and his additude did not help..... everyone knew though that most of the people there were carrying but they were coverd up......... The cop's were called and with them on there way he told some people they were being stupid and he was going to leave before he started busting some cap's in people...... yeah he went to jail and his mom later found us a few miles away...... at the time we did not know open carry was legal but it seem's she did not know you can't really carry it in an atemidating way or threaten people with it.

 

[BUCK HINKLE]

Sounds like a sucky trip to the walmart .

 

[sporter]

Never have trouble at WM or anywhere else I go. I usually CC however.

 

[38special]

Cute, but property rights trump your 2A rights...deal with it.
FACT:You can carry anywhere you want, but when the property owner asks you to take your gun and leave, you must...your 2A rights have just been trumped. Feel free to contact the property owner(WM) in order to be allowed back on their property with your firearm.

FACT: Walmart policy is to *not* trump our 2A rights. This walmart is in violation of that policy.

As the law is written now, a business person can ask you to leave and you must. But I don't believe this should be allowed. Private property rights and 2nd ammendment rights are BOTH constitutionally afforded rights and CAN coexist. A Business owner still owns his private property, regardless of whether I practice my 2nd ammendment right or not.

Is the business owner allowed to violate other rights because you're on his private property? He can't yell racist slander at you or violate your "civil rights" telling you to get off his property based on race. And there's nothing in the constitution about that. The 2nd ammendment IS in the constitution so why should he be allowed to discriminate based on that?

 

[finity]

Anything done prior to that would be an obvious waste of time, $, resources, and would cast OC-ers, and gun-owners in general, in a negative light as they are escorted from the store. WM and the police acted incorrectly, and will continue to do so until this is straightened out. It will not get straightened out by people OC-ing in the store as some sort of protest, they will only get the cops called on them...almost never seen by the common person as a good thing.

I believe this is a moot point now, I've tossed in my as well.

You're right. We should all just get used to sitting in the back of the bus, using the "gun-owners" drinking fountains & restrooms. No reason for us to act all "uppity". It might bring the attention of "the man" down on us.

Ok, seriously. You're acting as though the ONLY possible response by the "public" is that they will see us in a negative light. How many gun-owners are in IN. 10% carry (or at least have the license). That means that out of a possible 100 people there that 10 will have a license & others will have at least guns at home. Who's to say that they won't see the cops escorting a bunch of "normal people" who weren't doing anything wrong out of the store & think "man, that's really screwed up. Wal-mart shouldn't treat those people that way"?

Not all responses to protests in the past have been negative & the ones that were showed how messed up the people who were puttting down the protest were.

 

[lashicoN]

Having 8 guys show up with guns to knowingly get called the cops on them is not about attention, and no big deal will be made about it...rrriiiggghhhttt.

After this is sorted out with the cops and the store then I agree with you. But until it is it will only cause trouble since you already know the outcome.



Probably would. It also probably would allow all of the shoppers of the store get to see 8 argumentitive(proclaiming their rights, and rightly so) OC-ers get escorted out of the store by multiple cops(since the store would ask them to leave since they don't understand their corporate policy). It would also allow all of the employees to understand that these people clearly belive their gun rights trump the store's property rights, which they don't.

I'm not sure if your scenario is all that much of a "win" for your cause.

Diplomacy is your best bet until this gets sorted out. Then after it gets sorted out go back as a group to show them what a swell buncy of guys we are and that they now have our support and our buisness. This is the "win" you're looking for.

Looks like you missed both of my points there. I'll try again. First, Open Carrying isn't about the attention, it's about the right to bear arms. The attention is not created by the person carrying, usually, it's created by uptight ignorant person who makes a huge deal about it and calls the police because he/she doesn't think that's right. I don't like baggy pants or people that mumble. Should I call the cops on them every chance I get? Bright shirts hurt some people's eyes. Should they be escorted out of Wal Mart by a police officer? My first point was that we aren't seeking attention, we want the opposite. We want the sight of firearms to be commonplace in a country that claims you have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms, for the security of the state.

My second point was not to make a big scene in Wal Mart and scream "help, help, I'm being repressed." It was to go in planning to buy a full weeks worth of groceries, electronics, whatever...with a big group of OCers and if no one says anything to you, great, Wal Mart makes sense. If you do get thrown out, multiple things have just happened. 1. Wal Mart (the corporation) just lost a lot of money. 2. They lost the money from people who weren't doing anything wrong. 3. Other customers who know OC is legal just found out what Wal Mart thinks of their law-abiding customers.

As I said before, a phone call to the corporate office letting them know they just lost that much money at that location for no apparent reason probably wouldn't sit well and I'm sure the idiot manager who allowed the cops in to take you out will be getting a lesson in the local laws, because they might as well have thrown people out for wearing bright shirts. If I owned a franchise and and I got a call letting me know that one of my managers blew that much money over something that was legal, it would come out of his/her next few paychecks. Companies like Wal Mart cannot afford to make judgment calls when it comes to things like OC/CC, which is why they revert to the local laws and which is why they always say "Happy Holidays". They take the smart, fiscally maximizing, easy way out, as they should.

Those were my points. I agree with you that the biggest problem here is that the managers and LEOs need some education on OC.

 

[youngda9]

You're right. We should all just get used to sitting in the back of the bus, using the "gun-owners" drinking fountains & restrooms. No reason for us to act all "uppity". It might bring the attention of "the man" down on us.

You act as if going back to be escorted out is productive. Nice analogy, but it's completely irrelivent to the issue.
Common sense has left the building. GW was scratching his head at your post, fitting.

Ok, seriously. You're acting as though the ONLY possible response by the "public" is that they will see us in a negative light. How many gun-owners are in IN. 10% carry (or at least have the license). That means that out of a possible 100 people there that 10 will have a license & others will have at least guns at home. Who's to say that they won't see the cops escorting a bunch of "normal people" who weren't doing anything wrong out of the store & think "man, that's really screwed up. Wal-mart shouldn't treat those people that way"?

Yeah, that most people think when they see people being forced out of a store by the police...yeah. I think beligerent, arrogant, and troublemakers is what most people would think seeing a bunch of armed guys being thrown out or WM due to a "multiple guys with guns" call. Have fun with the swat team, haha. 10%...where do you get your stats from.

Not all responses to protests in the past have been negative & the ones that were showed how messed up the people who were puttting down the protest were.

Diplomacy should be your first, and the most CIVIL, course of action. If it doesn't work, then feel free to go there with all of your buddies a bunch of times to get the cops called on you over and over and over again until someone wises up to the issues.

 

[ihateiraq]

Does your MP badge mean anything off base? Just curious.

no. the army doesnt even issue MP badges to MPs. you buy them at kiosks at the px in ft leonard wood.

 

[Indy317]

..can a worker tell an office i have to cover or leave???

The law says it has to be a property owner, or their agent. I know there has been some case law that defines what exactly an "agent" is. I do believe that it has been ruled that off-duty cops working for a private business are agents. I am not sure if on-duty cops would be considered agents, though I don't see how a court could say they aren't. If a property owner wishes to allow another person rights on their property, I would think they would be allowed to do so.

I bet some of you guys tip toe around your wife when shes mad too. Stand up and claim what is rightfully ours. Be a man.

The way I look at it, if more folks OCed, that would make my house less of a target for burglars. Burglars have already admitted they drive around on trash days looking for boxes sitting out showing a new purchase of a computer, flat screen TV, etc.. If we could get just 5% of the population to OC, burglars would just case out public areas and follow OCers to their home to find their next target. Who cares about getting public access to carry license records when you can just sit outside Walmart and find victims that way!! If 5% of the population OCed, it would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

As the law is written now, a business person can ask you to leave and you must. But I don't believe this should be allowed. Private property rights and 2nd ammendment rights are BOTH constitutionally afforded rights and CAN coexist. A Business owner still owns his private property, regardless of whether I practice my 2nd ammendment right or not.

I need to take over one bedroom in your home. I have a need for a secure place to store my papers until they can be searched via a warrant. My right to have secure papers and your right as a property can co-exist, so this shouldn't be an issue. I will have all of it moved out within a couple of years anyway.

Is the business owner allowed to violate other rights because you're on his private property? He can't yell racist slander at you or violate your "civil rights" telling you to get off his property based on race. And there's nothing in the constitution about that. The 2nd ammendment IS in the constitution so why should he be allowed to discriminate based on that?

So you are OK with various people using your computer so long as they are exercising their first amendment rights? What about using your money to print up political signs, OK as well? Private property should trump everything in a society where individual freedom is cherished. I understand the need for the civil rights act, though I think it has caused some harm to this country. I can support the argument that folks can't help what they are born with: Skin color, sex organ, etc., so protecting their rights should be discussed. In a true individual freedom nation, a business owner should have the right to ban anyone for anything they please. It is their property, the fruits of their labor (or their ancestors) provided the means to procure the property. So long as they are not causing a physical harm (pollution, etc.), they should be able to do as they please. Well, this country has taken steps to try and accommodate as many folks as possible. Right now gun owners aren't a protected class. They likely never will be, as if you don't like a private property owner's decision to not allow guns, go elsewhere. You will never get true, 100% individual freedom, unless you support the selling of RPGs, grenades, and nuclear arms to private individuals who can afford them. In this country, some folks will always lose some of their rights.

 

[IndyMonkey]

Maybe but the rotti and alarm system keeps those people away from my house.