Robert Haack Diamonds responds to their position...

roberthaackdiamonds said:

Hi,

I have opened up our facebook page (robert haack diamonds) to discuss this issue of us being "black listed."

Keep in mind that my wife carries and has been shot at 3 times. My goldsmith will be a concealed weapon carrier, have plenty of family in the military, my brother shoots his gun about 5 times a week - well, he actually owns about 20 guns, etc.

I am ok with the law, and I do support it. However, my concern for my store is this. A bad guy comes in (guys) to our store, and causes an altercation. Our store has security in place to handle certain situations. Now, if you were in the store, with your concealed weapon, you might feel inclined to help out, which is great, except that could escalate the situation to where we can't defuse it. Now, if you didn't have your weapon, the situation never would have been escalated.

I do understand too, that expert gun owners are going to get their permits. But, like my wife says, you never know how you are going to react until the situation arises. I don't want our store to be in that situation.

I am listening and keeping an open mind, and if you want, you can discuss on our facebook page, where you will get more viewers of the public. I might have special hours for concealed weapons, and special hours for non concealed. I think that is a good compromise.

I hope we all can get along.

Bret

Click to expand...

Bret, Welcome to O.C.D.O Please visit and post freely , Glad to have you.

Hack there guy; points to consider: if they CC, then to a criminal's do i go in there since it's button, button? OCer they see they dont go in there. no incident to escalate. realy, merchant to merchant, if they're in there for the diamonds you think they going to let anyone live to ID them? no guns on employees is your bit, guns upon the populace is their bit. you are a merchant.

Require Open Carry

Why don't you require that all weapons be carried in the open? Do you think you would be robbed if a felon walked in and there were several people with guns shopping? I don't think so.

gogodawgs said:

Why don't you require that all weapons be carried in the open? Do you think you would be robbed if a felon walked in and there were several people with guns shopping? I don't think so.

Click to expand...

+10000

Simple facts are that in all those states that allow open or concealed carry (that term does erk me something awful) that the unfounded fears of many merchants have been proven false. The gun fights they envisioned simply don't happen.

The vast majority of people that will carry openly or concealed are going to be responsible law abiding citizens concerned only in their personal safety. Very few will be interested in becoming vigilantes.

Brass Magnet said:

Lastly,
If you aren't already aware, the lawmakers put a carrot in the legislation for business owners who do decide to allow CCW on their property. They will be immune from civil liability as a result of their choice to do so. Businesses that do not allow it would not be immune.

Click to expand...

This is the main reason that you should not put signs up prohibiting firearms! The first person that gets robbed, beat up, stabbed, or shot while leaving your store is gonna sue you. They will argue that had they been allowed to carry a weapon in the store that they would have been able to defend themselves. Your store policy will make targets out of your customers.

"fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." - Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981).

"Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public." Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)


If you believe in the Bible: "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe." — Luke 11:21 (NIV)


Maybe I can explain this for those that don't understand. The Bible says I should protect myself and my property. The courts have affirmed that personal protection is the responsibility of the individual. The highly trained Police have no obligation to protect us. They can and will, sit there outside the building waiting for an armed robber to walk out. But I should not carry a means of protection? And trust some unknown "security force" that may or may not exist? No thank you, I refuse to be a victim and will shop elsewhere.

If a single, armed guard is on the floor and he is the only threat/target, it is just a matter of time in a big city. Eventually your diamond store is going to be robbed.

If no armed guard is on the floor and there are 5, 10 or 20 civilians browsing products, which one is armed? Are all of them armed?

The latter scenario is precisely what the bad guys need to be thinking. A more effective sign for safety in the jewelry business might be "We encourage Legal Concealed Carry at this store".

It'd save you the price of hiring a full-time guard and you'd never be robbed.

Diamonds are a scam anyway. They are far more common than other gemstones, a fake market created and controlled by DeBeers.:cuss:

oak1971 said:

Diamonds are a scam anyway. They are far more common than other gemstones, a fake market created and controlled by DeBeers.:cuss:

Click to expand...

wow, I actually agree with you. I like , Emeralds, Rubies, Sapphires MUCH more than Diamonds.

Robert, I do not live in WI, but from experience here in WA where OC/CC have been legal for many years, (and where there are very few posted stores of any type), I do not think you are giving the honorable citizens of WI (that want to do what is right and abide the laws,) proper deferance. The probabilities of having improper interferance by a licensed carrier is probably about the same as with LE.

Would you forbid a LEO from entering your store because he was armed? If not, why would you consider an armed honorable citizen any differently? Some citizens have a lot more training than many LEO's, and most do not have a "Das Ich" problem (that occures quite frequently in some occupations you know)

If I were to take a moment and place myself in the shoes of a criminal.

A smart(er) criminal would pay closer attention to the patrons instead of the business.
Reason being its the patrons who are carrying the money the business needs to operate on.

Gold and diamonds have an attraction...No argument there.
But also in/on the premises there are security cameras,silent alarms and like Bret mention an armed guard....Which are all fine and good.

But none of those things are there to protect me.Those are in place to protect the business....Which has no obligation to protect me.

Any patron walking into a jewelry store would be good for minimum of $300 in cash, a checkbook and or a credit card....and thats not even saying anything for vehicle keys.

Given that...If I were a criminal....I wouldnt even bother with a jewelry store.
There are too many built in security features...Single entrance/exit (choke point),alarms,cameras,guards as well other things in place that serve only to slow down the criminal and/or assist in getting a more positive id.

Much easier pickings on the patrons....especially if they are alone.
Odds are better....
Most time the victim is too rattled to make a positive id or give the same statement as to what happened the same way twice.

And then theres the Police....

As a business operator....especially a jewelry store....Your gonna get a better police response....In fact I would venture to say its almost an iron clad guarantee they will respond faster to your call of your jewelry store being robbed.

As a private citizen being robbed call....If the police didnt see it (the crime),.....It (the crime) didnt happen.

I am not gonna buy into the hypocrisy, that I need to be unarmed,and under video surveillance and scrutiny of an openly armed guard,employees that are carrying concealed sidearms just so I can to be a customer.

The beauty of it is that we have a free enterprise system.
If a business cant or wont respect my Rights as a law abiding citizen,I am free to go elsewhere.....and only too happy to do so.

LR Yote

I think that Mr. Haack may have overlooked one issue, civil liability. If a robber entered his store and his armed employee escalated the event to the point a concealed carry holder was injured or killed Mr. Haatch might be responsible for that person's welfare and liable for damages. By forbidding a concealed weapon holder the ability to provide for their own lawful right to self protection Haack Diamonds might be found responsible for that person's welfare and the consequences thereof. On the other hand if Mr.Haack allows carry of weapons and a weapon carrier escalates the event to the point that someone is hurt or killed statute 175.60 will give Mr. Haack immunity from liability.

LR Yote makes a good point. Does the armed guard walk the unarmed customer to their car with that shiny new $7000+ diamond ring in hand?

You May Wish To Reconsider

hermannr said:

Robert, I do not live in WI, but from experience here in WA where OC/CC have been legal for many years, (and where there are very few posted stores of any type), I do not think you are giving the honorable citizens of WI (that want to do what is right and abide the laws,) proper deferance. The probabilities of having improper interferance by a licensed carrier is probably about the same as with LE.

Would you forbid a LEO from entering your store because he was armed? If not, why would you consider an armed honorable citizen any differently? Some citizens have a lot more training than many LEO's, and most do not have a "Das Ich" problem (that occures quite frequently in some occupations you know)

Click to expand...

Many of you know that I am an ex-Wisconsin resident.

Like the person who commented above, I now live in a State in which open and concealed carry have been legal for many years. Here in UT, all businesses know that "no guns = no money", but despite that, there have been no jewelry store shoot-outs.

I think Wisconsin's problem is that concealed carry legislation is so new and the citizens of WI just cannot relate to the 47 other States that issue permits (VT has permit-free carry and does not issue a permit). Thus, they dream up "what if" scenarios that are improbable at best.

I strongly recommend that the original poster give even more consideration and thoughtful meditation to this topic. As previously pointed out, the immunity provided by the WI legislation (similar to UT law) is very enticing from a liability standpoint. If you do not allow concealed carry and your "security" cannot prevent somebody from being injured in a robbery in your store, you are liable and may incur a judgement for damages in a WI court.

Grant Guess said:

If a single, armed guard is on the floor and he is the only threat/target, it is just a matter of time in a big city. Eventually your diamond store is going to be robbed.

If no armed guard is on the floor and there are 5, 10 or 20 civilians browsing products, which one is armed? Are all of them armed?

The latter scenario is precisely what the bad guys need to be thinking. A more effective sign for safety in the jewelry business might be "We encourage Legal Concealed Carry at this store".

It'd save you the price of hiring a full-time guard and you'd never be robbed.

Click to expand...

Ya, Ya, Ya...If, If, If...

...IF YOUR AUNT HAD BALLS, SHE'D BE YOUR UNCLE!!!

:banghead:

Bret,

While I disagree with your current decision to ban firearms in your store, I will respect it. I can choose to do business with whoever I want, like my need to purchase a car soon. I won't do business with a few dealerships because I do not like their business practices. It doesn't affect me one bit as someone else is willing to take my business.

http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-20110624-concealed-carry-business-boycott,0,5236383.story

Those who are threatening you, I'd contact the police, but those of us who are saying we won't patronize your store because of your decision is hardly a threat. You also say things may get heated when negotiating a price, has this ever happened in your store? Also, different store hours for no carry and for carry seems weird to me. Sometimes people's schedules do not allow them to go one day or another.

As for my thread, Stores who infringe upon our rights, nothing how nothing there says anything about boycotting anyone. If people are not welcome some place, then we want to know about it and we'll do business elsewhere. It is a huge inconvenience to go somewhere, only to be told you aren't welcome. Then you have to quickly figure out who else has that type of business. A better option, in my humble opinion, is to take no stance on the matter. That is what Starbucks did. You can search the forum on how many meet and greets there are all over the US at Starbucks.

protias said:

Bret,

While I disagree with your current decision to ban firearms in your store, I will respect it. I can choose to do business with whoever I want, like my need to purchase a car soon. I won't do business with a few dealerships because I do not like their business practices. It doesn't affect me one bit as someone else is willing to take my business.

http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-20110624-concealed-carry-business-boycott,0,5236383.story

Those who are threatening you, I'd contact the police, but those of us who are saying we won't patronize your store because of your decision is hardly a threat. If there you also say things may get heated when negotiating a price. Has this ever happened in your store? Also, different store hours for no carry and for carry seems weird to me. Sometimes people's schedules do not allow them to go one day or another.

As for my thread, Stores who infringe upon our rights, nothing how nothing there says anything about boycotting anyone. If people are not welcome some place, then we want to know about it and we'll do business elsewhere. It is a huge inconvenience to go somewhere, only to be told you aren't welcome. Then you have to quickly figure out who else has that type of business. A better option, in my humble opinion, is to take no stance on the matter. That is what Starbucks did. You can search the forum on how many meet and greets there are all over the US at Starbucks.

Click to expand...

Once again, well put.

Arron, you did a fine job of showing how it could in fact increase his business by not taking an anti-gun approach.