Posted on 09/29/2015 12:19:40 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows
Over the weekend, a soldier with the National Guard was told to leave his gun outside of the Nicholasville Waffle House or he wouldn’t be served. The situation is now getting national attention.
Billy Welch said that he stopped at the Waffle House Sunday morning for breakfast. He was in his Army National Guard uniform and had his gun holstered to his side. After ordering his food, Welch said that a waitress signaled for him to come over.
"I got up and I walked over to them, asked them how they were doing and stuff, and they said I'd have to take my firearm outside,” said Welch.
-snip-
The owner of the Nicholasville Waffle House made this statement, “For many years we have had a “No Firearms” police in place in our restaurants. We continue to believe this is the best policy for the safety of our customers and associates.”
(Excerpt) Read more at lex18.com ...
Active Duty ping.
Having never been drunk enough to dine in a Waffle House at 2am, I certainly see no need to start doing so now.
I agree there is a conflict of rights here. Now:
As to "Right to Carry", I believe that's clearly documented in the Second Amendment (A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.)
As to "right to exclude", where exactly is that clearly documented? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I want to know where it's documented.
“No conflict. His property, his rules.”
Can he make any rules he wants to because it’s his property?
Can he deny me the free speech right to say “No” to a sexual advance? Can he deny me the Liberty right to leave his property once I’m on it?
F Waffle House.
PING!
For a night owl like me, that sounds pretty close to heaven.
This WH is owned by individual franchisee. No need to condemn the whole chain.
Just get the food to go, mental note... “never go back”
**** “2) “For many years we have had a “No Firearms” police in place in our restaurants. We continue to believe this is the best policy for the safety of our customers and associates.” That’s completely retarded. With apologies to actual retards, who can’t help it. Criminal Safety Zones have proven, over and over, to be extremely BAD policy for the safety of customers and associates.” ****
Next question .. ya gonna let someone that stupid cook your food?
**** “No conflict. His property, his rules” ****
I repeat myself but if they are that stupid would you let them cook your food? Or better question... Would you eat what they cooked for you?
Pretty simple for me, it just turned into a “do not return” and I let Capitalism take it’s course.
Some WH’s are owned by franchisees and some by WH corp, which I guess accounts for the variation in policies.
That sounds like a depressingly viable tactic.
Actual retards can’t read your post so no worries
Still...good to be cautious
Not proactive enough. Avoidance too often forgets or loses interest.
It is the Common Law and Statutory law.
It wouldn’t be the first time a hoplophobic business owner excluded armed cops.
Indeed. Gun-free zones are just target-rich environments.
An active shooter barging into the restaurant is not going
to drop his gun and walk out because it’s a gun-free zone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.