A letter to Walmart

[eamelhorn]

My son and I were at the Walmart in Ripley WV today, he was CC and I was not carrying. My son overheard a manager speaking on his radio as he walked by him saying, we have a gentleman who is CC at the bank ATM, that was my son. He showed the handle of his defence weapon as he pulled out his wallet. I have been followed by management while OC'ing in this store, he was followed today. We were talking about sending an e-mail to store management along this line.

We have noticed that while we are shoping in your store and legely carrying our self defence weapons that store management has followed us and reported our activity via your radio cummionications. We are excercing our 2nd ammendment right to keep and bear arms and do so in a law abiding manner. FBI statistics (and give reference to where this info comes from) indicate that most criminals do not use holster's, and do not carry thier self defence weapon in a lawful manner. We understand your responsibility to protect your cunsumers while shoping in your stores. however the people who are CC or OC typiclly are not the ones to be concerned with. We have been custormers since your store has opened in the old location, we are known by name by many of your employees, why since we started exercising our 2nd ammendment right in a lawful undisturbing manner have we became considered a threat while in your store.

Not the exact letter, but would like the thoughts of the ones who have been doing this much longer than myself as to weather you think this is advisable, and if so any thoughts on wording is welcomed.

[eamelhorn]

Saw one of my typo's as I was hintting the post button A letter TO Walmart

[ManInBlack]

Good job on the letter to Walmart. You make good points, and I liked that you cite FBI sources. Just use spell check before you send it out.

[eamelhorn]

Spelling and typing my weak points, im a minister and can speak very well just cant spell what is said,LOL

[wmodavis]

Good sounding letter BUT... since you are a public speaker and obviously not a speller, do not send that letter without lots of corrections! Or give it to them verbally. Those mispellings will subtract way too much from your excellent thoughts. After corrections please send it to thm!

[Venator]

They also may not now what CC and OC mean, first spell out then use acronyms. open carry (OC) concealed carry (CC)...

[skidmark]

While it is frustrating, you need to be reminded that you have no Second Amendment rights when dealing with WalMart or any other private property owner. The Constitution listswhat government cannot do - folks can pretty much do what they want with their own business/property.

If you have not blown a gasket yet, please remember this - WalMart has historically said that they will follow state law. If OC or CC are not illegal in your state WalMart Corporate has stated they will be OK with it, too.

If you can be persuaded to, go back and do a do-over letter to them focusing on that point. As long as your behavior is legal and not overtly threatening (brandishing at the Sporting Goods Counter person because the price of ammo went up again! or shooting it out at the deli over the last of the low-sodium smoked turkey) then they should leave you alone. Maybe the manager of your local WalMart needs to be reminded by corporate?

And please get someone to proofread your letter before it goes out. Some of the words you used are, by themselves, spelled correctly but are misspelled in the context you are using them.

stay safe.

[eamelhorn]

Thanks for the input, and you will not offend me when it come to my grammer and spelling, Im not very educated tho I have been speaking in public for 30 years somtimes in front of a few hundred or so. I have what I call a good enough diploma, thats what we call a GED in our neck of the woods. It has been frustrating the last few months as Ripley is a town of about 2500 people, everyone knows everyone. I grew up with many of the workers there, and some of the managers. I may speak with them in person after putting all my thoughts togather on this. I dont take the "stalking" personally, This just could be a good opening if done right, to help open the door to OC a bit more in our aera. Before I do something like this, I will def.get it proof read, and post it here frist, I would want your all's stamp of approval on it.

[sawah]

Your son failed to properly conceal. You're fencing at the wrong windmill.

Also, anti's do not want logic and statistics. They do not want to face reality. So you're wasting your time sending a blanket letter to someone at Walmart who probably doesn't care and can't affect policy and also - and think about this - can't control their employees who have their own agendas.

[eamelhorn]

To sawah, we covered him not concealing properly on the ride home.

[eamelhorn]

After thinking long and hard about this letter, I decided that was not my best option as I know my limitations when it comes to writing. My son spoke to management and explained his feelings about how thry were following him, IT HAS STOPED, we are no longer being followed in Walmart at Ripley WV. He spoke well made his points and it has been taken care of. Good for him.

[hermannr]

While it is frustrating, you need to be reminded that you have no Second Amendment rights when dealing with WalMart or any other private property owner. The Constitution listswhat government cannot do - folks can pretty much do what they want with their own business/property.

Skidmark:

In your statement above, I agree and disagree. Private property that is open to the general public (like Wal-mart and stores like it, hotels, motels etc) are generally treated differently in law than private property that is NOT open to the general public (like your home)

Private property that is open to the general public can be, and is, regulated by law. look up the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and read it...

Secondly, as I believe everyone knows already, Wal-Mart customer policy is to follow whatever the state law is.

[JeffTL]

Just a side note here but I open carry in the Huntington Walmart on route 60 pretty often and have not had an issue yet. Maybe they are putting the word out not to bother OCers.

[twoskinsonemanns]

Skidmark:

In your statement above, I agree and disagree. Private property that is open to the general public (like Wal-mart and stores like it, hotels, motels etc) are generally treated differently in law than private property that is NOT open to the general public (like your home)

Private property that is open to the general public can be, and is, regulated by law. look up the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and read it...

Secondly, as I believe everyone knows already, Wal-Mart customer policy is to follow whatever the state law is.

I agree. You really can't have it both ways. Very few people would say "wal-mart is private property and they can do whatever they want" if they had policies restricting people for the skin color, or because they had tattoos. If you open your doors to the general public you should have to concede you can't restrict certain people.

my $0.02

[ManInBlack]

I agree. You really can't have it both ways. Very few people would say "wal-mart is private property and they can do whatever they want" if they had policies restricting people for the skin color, or because they had tattoos. If you open your doors to the general public you should have to concede you can't restrict certain people.

my $0.02

Just because that is what is, does not mean that it is correct, and I think that is what Skid was getting at. While there are certain statutes on the books regulating what a property owner may or may not do on his own property, none of those statutes identify firearm carriers as a protected class, and those statutes that do exist are Constitutionally abominable if we look at the original intent or wording of the document.

[hermannr]

I agree. You really can't have it both ways. Very few people would say "wal-mart is private property and they can do whatever they want" if they had policies restricting people for the skin color, or because they had tattoos. If you open your doors to the general public you should have to concede you can't restrict certain people.

my $0.02

The state of Oregon in ORS 166.173(10) defines a public place for reasons of firearms licensing and restrictions as:

10) Public place means a place to which the general public has access and includes, but is not limited to, hallways, lobbies and other parts of apartment houses and hotels not constituting rooms or apartments designed for actual residence, and highways, streets, schools, places of amusement, parks, playgrounds and premises used in connection with public passenger transportation

In Oregon, unlicensed open carry is unrestriced,,,except in a few cities. Those with a CHL are exempt. Local governments can restrict unlicensed OC in "Public places", but not licensed OC or CC.

[twoskinsonemanns]

Just because that is what is, does not mean that it is correct, and I think that is what Skid was getting at. While there are certain statutes on the books regulating what a property owner may or may not do on his own property, none of those statutes identify firearm carriers as a protected class, and those statutes that do exist are Constitutionally abominable if we look at the original intent or wording of the document.

When you say correct are you saying morally or legally?
FWIW I think a property owner should be able to allow/disallow anyone they want on their property. If you want to only sell widgets to green skinned people with one mole of their face and born in November and wearing a "letter jacket" I think that should be your right. But that is not the country we now live in. If your going to FORCE people to sell to anyone, than that should mean ANYONE. That includes people OCing legally.

[ManInBlack]

When you say correct are you saying morally or legally?

Both.

FWIW I think a property owner should be able to allow/disallow anyone they want on their property. If you want to only sell widgets to green skinned people with one mole of their face and born in November and wearing a "letter jacket" I think that should be your right.

I agree.

But that is not the country we now live in. If your going to FORCE people to sell to anyone, than that should mean ANYONE. That includes people OCing legally.

That is the country we live in when it comes to citizens who carry. The unconstitutional statutes, as I mentioned, do not define firearms owners as a protected class, or define the 1st Amendment or 2nd Amendment as extending protections to private property.

This is precisely the problem with laws that designate specially-favored classes of people; everyone else gets screwed.