Robert Haack Diamonds responds to their position...

[Brass Magnet]

The whole thing is getting funny. If he would have just kept his trap shut and implemented his policy however he felt he needed to, none of this would have happened.

The only GOOD reason (unless just for publicity) to come out in the media and declare your decision one way or the other is if it's on principle, that you strongly believe in it, and that you'll back it up with conviction.

 

[IcrewUH60]

[...]
The only GOOD reason (unless just for publicity) to come out in the media and declare your decision one way or the other is if it's on principle, that you strongly believe in it, and that you'll back it up with conviction.

but instead, he re-writes the definition of epic fail :banghead:

I'd honestly have more respect for the guy if he just simply posted.

 

[roberthaackdiamonds]

Hey, if I didn't care about this issue, I certainly would not be in this forum.

I am "black listed" and the law still isn't even in affect. I still can allow guns in my store. So, obviously, there is some smoke on this subject, and come November, the fire is going to flame. Why not help put it out now?

Unions boycotted businesses that didn't support their cause. Gun people are boycotting because it does not support their cause. Anti gun people will boycott because it does not serve their cause.

Communities will have to decide, will they let their employees carry, like to city hall, the garbage collector, the postal delivery person. What about places of worship? What about places like Applebees and Friday's?

I would say about 5% will boycott with you, 5% will anti boycott you - 90% probably wont care.

This isn't a political debate; but how will this play out in November? I can tell you that some of my employees will conceal. I, personally, am looking at all of my options. What is going to happen to my insurance? Up / down? Etc.

If we can get a solution in place before November, it would benefit Wisconsin as a whole.

 

[IcrewUH60]

Hey, if I didn't care about this issue, I certainly would not be in this forum.

I am "black listed" and the law still isn't even in affect. I still can allow guns in my store. So, obviously, there is some smoke on this subject, and come November, the fire is going to flame. Why not help put it out now?

Unions boycotted businesses that didn't support their cause. Gun people are boycotting because it does not support their cause. Anti gun people will boycott because it does not serve their cause.

Communities will have to decide, will they let their employees carry, like to city hall, the garbage collector, the postal delivery person. What about places of worship? What about places like Applebees and Friday's?

I would say about 5% will boycott with you, 5% will anti boycott you - 90% probably wont care.

This isn't a political debate; but how will this play out in November? I can tell you that some of my employees will conceal. I, personally, am looking at all of my options. What is going to happen to my insurance? Up / down? Etc.

If we can get a solution in place before November, it would benefit Wisconsin as a whole.

and such is life Sir. There is no "solution" to pleasing everyone. I Learned that in the service.. try listening to the Armed Forces Radio Network for 3 + years :lol:

Just make a decision based on your fiduciary responsibilities to the business/emplyees/stock holders etc... and move on. It's your choice brother. Make it.


added on edit: We Law Abiding Citizens can legally open carry right now. What is your policy right now concerning state aw and open carry? If I walked into your store with a loaded side arm holstered on my hip, would you ask me to leave and cite your store policy?

Now just follow through on that policy and post or don't post. Kindof simple, if you ask me.

 

[MKEgal]

Business owners may want to consider this when contemplating firearms in place of business. Info from WI State Bar Assoc

I don't like this line:

This provision seems to insulate a property owner/occupier from all liability for injuries sustained by third parties as a result of a decision to allow weapons on the premises, even if the decision is made negligently, that is, without regard to the foreseeable consequences.

I think the "forseeable consequences" of allowing a law-abiding person who has submitted to a background check & gov't registration would be nothing but good, esp. given the records from other states WRT carriers & (their lack of) trouble w/ the legal system.

I think the "forseeable consequences" of only allowing criminals to have guns would be nothing but bad. But the article only focusses on employees - other than the "disgruntled former employee" he never mentions the possibility of a criminal at all.

...its best that the employer have a written policy that addresses the prohibition on concealed weapons in the workplace. It will reinforce the employer’s serious stance on the prohibition, and inform employees of the discipline they face if they violate the prohibition, decreasing the likelihood that an employee will ignore the prohibition and bring a weapon to work.

:banghead:
For a bunch of supposedly intelligent people, this is really stupid.
A "disgruntled former employee" isn't going to worry about discipline, because he's an ex employee,
and even if it's a current employee, if he's willing to commit murder why would he be stopped by a company policy?

Consider the following hypothetical: An employee has a license to carry a concealed weapon, but a business prohibits the employee from bringing his or her handgun to work. The employee does so anyway. The gun goes off accidentally one day while the employee is working, injuring a non-employee (customer or vendor). The business is not immune from liability.

I'm going to be going through a lot of those banghead icons...
Obviously written by someone who doesn't know a thing about carrying, or carrying concealed.

The author is listed as:
Joe Forward, Legal Writer, State Bar of Wisconsin
Be polite, use reasoning.

 

[Brass Magnet]

[snip]
If we can get a solution in place before November, it would benefit Wisconsin as a whole.

I think what some of us are trying to say is that the solution for someone who is trying to play both sides is to remain silent on the issue just like hundreds of other businesses; but if you truly believe in a principle one way or the other you'll have to go with it and take your hits.

Why not call some places in other states that already have concealed carry and see what they are doing? I'm sure you have connections to a business or two like yours in one of the 48 other states that allow this.

The bottom line is that LACs carrying pistols around isn't a big deal. In many of the states when they first made concealed carry law, signs went up but then went right back down in the first couple years. Probably because pro-rights individuals have a lot more conviction in sticking with their principles. They'd drop of cards saying that the busines just lost money or tell their friends about the stores policy and they wouldn't go there.

On both sides you will have people who are true to their principles and won't visit a store if it violates them. This is one such place where most of us stick to our principles so you won't find sympathy for playing both sides here. No offense meant, it's just how it is.

 

[IcrewUH60]

Hey, if I didn't care about this issue, I certainly would not be in this forum.[...]

and

[...]
Unions boycotted businesses that didn't support their cause. Gun people are boycotting because it does not support their cause.[...]

If I may.

first, there are plenty of folks on this forum who not only care less but are totally against private gun ownership. All eyes are upon us.

Second but more important,
"Gun People" are not boycotting because it does not support their cause. They are being told (with the force of law) by business owners who post, not to patronize certain establishments. This is a huge difference that needs to be well understood if we are to further this discussion.

You're a business owner, and while I have never met you sir, I assume you must have a pretty solid amount of grey matter up there that you consistently put to use while you manage your business. Think about the differences of a "boycott over a cause" and "specific requests to stay away".

A "No Guns Allowed" sign is telling gun owners and CC permit holders to stay out.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

I think what some of us are trying to say is that the solution for someone who is trying to play both sides is to remain silent on the issue just like hundreds of other businesses; but if you truly believe in a principle one way or the other you'll have to go with it and take your hits.

Exactly! Starbucks does that. You would think a left coast company that is fairly liberal would ban guns but their Corporate policy is 'we follow state laws'. That way, there are no signs saying 'guns welcomed' or 'guns prohibited'.

As for insurance, I used to own a small business and carried. My agent said the policy was silent on the issue and that was not a question their underwriters ask. With the new WI law, not posting gives you immunity. That doesn't mean that posting 'no guns' gives you additional liability, just that if you don't post, you have another 'helper' if you were to be sued for some reason.

Not posting doesn't infringe on your right to refuse service to any individual that acts suspiciously or inappropriately as well. If an open carrier (you won't know people are concealed carrying unless you install metal detectors) comes in and keeps playing with his gun and makes you uncomfortable, you can ask that individual to leave or put his gun in his car without painting a broad brush on all open carriers.

Just some additional data points.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

and

If I may.

first, there are plenty of folks on this forum who not only care less but are totally against private gun ownership. All eyes are upon us.

Second but more important,
"Gun People" are not boycotting because it does not support their cause. They are being told (with the force of law) by business owners who post, not to patronize certain establishments. This is a huge difference that needs to be well understood if we are to further this discussion.

You're a business owner, and while I have never met you sir, I assume you must have a pretty solid amount of grey matter up there that you consistently put to use while you manage your business. Think about the differences of a "boycott over a cause" and "specific requests to stay away".

A "No Guns Allowed" sign is telling gun owners and CC permit holders to stay out.

That is another good point. If I go everywhere with my firearm and you won't allow me to carry in your store, since it isn't a fashion accessory but is part of me, I CAN'T enter your store. If I disarmed and went in, that would be against what I stand for.

 

[IcrewUH60]

some local businesses are also taking a proactive approach to the new law:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...air-Hardware-Employees-can-carry&goto=newpost

 

[Teej]

Bret, you're making this sound more sinister and personal than it is.

1: You're on record saying you plan to post that gun carriers are not welcome in your store.
2: Gun carriers have spread the word to others.
3: Gun carriers are probably not going to be willing to stash their firearms in their cars simply for the privilege of shopping your store. If (and it remains to be seen) other stores welcome lawful carry, it's a no brainer.
4: Most here would now feel less safe shopping your store because criminals will know that anyone leaving your store is almost certainly going to be unarmed.

Will it affect your bottom line? Maybe. But that's the result of people respecting your wishes, not an organized plot to boycott your store. As for me, I've never been there. We don't buy much jewelry. When I do shop, I can tell you if your position stands your store won't be on my list - but it's because of reason 4 above, not reason 1, 2 or 3.

 

[wild boar]

Take your "MORAL" stand, and go with it!!!

He posts his store, as many others will. You "MORALLY" object, and shop elsewhere. This redundant BS has gone on long enough in the local, and INTERNET arena. everyone just take your rights, morals, laws, and others concerns and let it go. boar out.

:banghead: just say no.

 

[Brass Magnet]

He posts his store, as many others will. You "MORALLY" object, and shop elsewhere. This redundant BS has gone on long enough in the local, and INTERNET arena. everyone just take your rights, morals, laws, and others concerns and let it go. boar out.

:banghead: just say no.

How about this? If you don't want to discuss it; DON'T, instead of posting useless drivel and trying to strongarm others into not discussing it.

 

[IcrewUH60]

with the Moral Authority vested in me by the state of I_Own_The_Internet, I hereby declare that all public discussion on the matter, in public places, such as the Internet, Starbucks, Lizzy's Cafe, Etc. Etc. be hereby stopped immediately and permanently henceforth banned. Especially on PUBLIC Open Carry forums - it will just not be tolerated anymore.

[smacks hands together to wipe off grime and dust] There, thats settled. :banana:

 

[Brass Magnet]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ROFL :lol:

 

[Big Dipper]

...
Second but more important,
"Gun People" are not boycotting because it does not support their cause. They are being told (with the force of law) by business owners who post, not to patronize certain establishments. This is a huge difference that needs to be well understood if we are to further this discussion.

...

A "No Guns Allowed" sign is telling gun owners and CC permit holders to stay out.

I agree whole heartedly!!

This is akin to a grocery or restaurant that has a sign saying "No shirt, no shoes, no service" posted and then complaining about the people just passing by the store without shoes or shirts that don't come in. That is NOT a boycott. That is obeying the rules laid out (legally) by the proprietor.

btw, I would prefer to do business with a restaurant with such a policy. Just as I preferred restaurants that posted "no smoking" signs before it became state law.

 

[wild boar]

You seem to be the authority on useless drivel,

How about this? If you don't want to discuss it; DON'T, instead of posting useless drivel and trying to strongarm others into not discussing it.

I have as much right to talk as stupid as you do. It's attitudes like yours that really frighten intelligent people. If this is your idea of self defense, leave the pistol home.

:banghead:

 

[Brass Magnet]

Whatever .....

I have as much right to talk as stupid as you do. It's attitudes like yours that really frighten intelligent people. If this is your idea of self defense, leave the pistol home.

:banghead:

Bore out.

 

[MKEgal]

I am "black listed" and the law still isn't even in effect.

:banghead: (FTFY)

"Gun People" are not boycotting because it does not support their cause.
They are being told (with the force of law) by business owners who post, not to patronize certain establishments.
This is a huge difference that needs to be well understood if we are to further this discussion.

AMEN!!!
Where's that "clapping" icon?

You have stated that we're not welcome in your store.
As a private property owner, you already have the power to post a "no (legal) firearms" sign. SB93 only codified how big it has to be & where it has to be posted.

As has been pointed out MANY times, we're respecting your wishes.
We're not boycotting, you're telling us to stay out.
And if there's a sign posted, it's illegal for us to come in.
This may seem rude, but quit whining when you're the one who caused the situation.

Other people who don't carry, but who respect rights, might indeed be boycotting because of the stated policy.
If I saw a sign on a business that prohibited, say, blacks or Muslims or men from entering I wouldn't go there, even though I'm none of those things.

Communities will have to decide, will they let their employees carry, like to city hall, the garbage collector, the postal delivery person. What about places of worship? What about places like Applebees and Friday's?

Any of those places may make rules for employees & may post "no (legal) firearms" signs to prevent both employees & potential customers from entering while armed.

The post person is already prohibited from carrying on postal property (federal law), even if it's in a POV. I can only imagine the portal to Hades that would open up if s/he was caught carrying in a postal truck.

If we can get a solution in place before November, it would benefit Wisconsin as a whole.

You can A: go on as you have been for however long you've been in business & open carry has been allowed (as evidenced by a long-time [now ex-] customer who carried while spending money with you).
OR
You can B: prohibit carry in your store.

I think it's silly to prohibit people, when there haven't been problems with lawful carriers so far (there haven't, otherwise you'd certainly have told us), and the only people the sign or law will stop are the good folks.

 

[IcrewUH60]

[...] everyone just take your rights, morals, laws, and others concerns and let it go. boar out. [...]

I have as much right to talk as stupid as you do. It's attitudes like yours that really frighten intelligent people. If this is your idea of self defense, leave the pistol home.

:banghead:

i'm wondering why, sir, you are banging *your* head?
you are obliged and he is not?