Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: will they change there mind now .... Emagine Entertainment

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    down river
    Posts
    252

    will they change there mind now .... Emagine Entertainment

    rvd4now, as a fellow CPL holder, I am all about our right to own and carry firearms so truly I understand your concerns and passion concerning this topic. However, Emagine Canton is a Pistol Free Area as defined by the State of Michigan (see below) and that is not up for debate. Emagine Canton has over 3800 seats and is clearly a place where guns are not allowed. In addition, there are no laws that specifically state that we have to post a sign of this fact (some burden is on the gun owner to know this information before entering). Please refer to several excepts I found from the Michigan Coalition For Responsible Gun Owners (MCRGO) web site below (key points highlighted in red). One of the questions answered on MCRGO’s web site even specifically addresses an 18 screen theater and the answer confirms what we already know – guns are not allowed. Lastly, although there are no laws prohibiting “open carry” on the books, most people in our society (even if they are fundamentally wrong in their beliefs) get extremely uneasy at the sight of a gun (even when holstered). So even if we weren’t a Pistol Free Zone, we’d still prohibit them as we are in the business of entertaining folks, not making them scared or nervous.



    We have informed you (politely) that we do not want you to bring your gun into our complex and any future attempts by you to do so will unfortunately result in a call to local law enforcement to have a “No Trespass” notice issued to you (and I’d truly hate to see that happen). We do appreciate your business but you’ll have to visit us without your gun. Thank you.



    Chris Brandt

    Sr. V.P. of Operations

    Emagine Entertainment/Cinema Hollywood

    44425 West 12 Mile Rd.

    Novi, MI 48377

    Ph 248.468.2990, Ext 104

    Fax 248.468.2995

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    down river
    Posts
    252

    i just emailed

    i just emailed him this update

    DEAR CHRIS BRANDT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO UPDATE YOU AND YOUR TEAM ON A STORY I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...courtroom?lite


    THEY WARE A SO CALLED PISTOL FREE ZONE AS WELL, CRIMINALS DONT CARE IF YOUR A PISTOL FREE ZONE.

    WHY PUT YOUR PAYING CUSTOMERS AT RISK. WITHIN ONE AND A HALF MINS TWELVE PEOPLE WERE KILLED AND MANY MORE WERE HURT


    PLEASE DONT SUPPORT PISTOL FREE ZONES.


    rvd4now

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Thank you.

    Quote Originally Posted by rvd4now View Post
    rvd4now, as a fellow CPL holder, I am all about our right to own and carry firearms so truly I understand your concerns and passion concerning this topic. However, Emagine Canton is a Pistol Free Area as defined by the State of Michigan (see below) and that is not up for debate. Emagine Canton has over 3800 seats and is clearly a place where guns are not allowed. In addition, there are no laws that specifically state that we have to post a sign of this fact (some burden is on the gun owner to know this information before entering). Please refer to several excepts I found from the Michigan Coalition For Responsible Gun Owners (MCRGO) web site below (key points highlighted in red). One of the questions answered on MCRGO’s web site even specifically addresses an 18 screen theater and the answer confirms what we already know – guns are not allowed. Lastly, although there are no laws prohibiting “open carry” on the books, most people in our society (even if they are fundamentally wrong in their beliefs) get extremely uneasy at the sight of a gun (even when holstered). So even if we weren’t a Pistol Free Zone, we’d still prohibit them as we are in the business of entertaining folks, not making them scared or nervous.



    We have informed you (politely) that we do not want you to bring your gun into our complex and any future attempts by you to do so will unfortunately result in a call to local law enforcement to have a “No Trespass” notice issued to you (and I’d truly hate to see that happen). We do appreciate your business but you’ll have to visit us without your gun. Thank you.



    Chris Brandt

    Sr. V.P. of Operations

    Emagine Entertainment/Cinema Hollywood

    44425 West 12 Mile Rd.

    Novi, MI 48377

    Ph 248.468.2990, Ext 104

    Fax 248.468.2995
    When did this correspondence occur? Was it recent?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    down river
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    When did this correspondence occur? Was it recent?


    last year some time.. I just thought of him for some strange reason last firday morning

    Idk why

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    lol.

    Im just waiting for there to be a shooting at one of the Waterford Schools, I'll be sure to give Mr. Beaver a call, or maybe I'll just drop in and say hello.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Thumbs up

    Pats on the back to you sir.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Orion's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by rvd4now View Post
    i just emailed him this update

    DEAR CHRIS BRANDT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO UPDATE YOU AND YOUR TEAM ON A STORY I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...courtroom?lite


    THEY WARE A SO CALLED PISTOL FREE ZONE AS WELL, CRIMINALS DONT CARE IF YOUR A PISTOL FREE ZONE.

    WHY PUT YOUR PAYING CUSTOMERS AT RISK. WITHIN ONE AND A HALF MINS TWELVE PEOPLE WERE KILLED AND MANY MORE WERE HURT


    PLEASE DONT SUPPORT PISTOL FREE ZONES.


    rvd4now
    rvd4now, I am sorry but you are mistaken. In Colorado theatres are not gun free zones. If you check their laws you would find there is no restriction on carry in a theatre there by law. Of course, management can always restrict our right to carry, but that is a business decision, not a force of law.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    down river
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    rvd4now, I am sorry but you are mistaken. In Colorado theatres are not gun free zones. If you check their laws you would find there is no restriction on carry in a theatre there by law. Of course, management can always restrict our right to carry, but that is a business decision, not a force of law.
    o thats even better, we are a pfz here in mi . How can we every think we are going to be safe in a ptz.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    rvd4now, I am sorry but you are mistaken. In Colorado theatres are not gun free zones. If you check their laws you would find there is no restriction on carry in a theatre there by law. Of course, management can always restrict our right to carry, but that is a business decision, not a force of law.
    True, but since they did decide to put themselves in this position, (and got the expected result), they would enforce that self inflicted free fire zone under force of law.

    The result is the same, prosecution for the gun owner, death to the patrons and employees.
    Last edited by stainless1911; 07-23-2012 at 11:10 PM.

  10. #10
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by rvd4now View Post
    o thats even better, we are a pfz here in mi . How can we every think we are going to be safe in a ptz.
    By OCing...
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Hyperion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    45
    The Cinemark Theatre in Aurora, Colorado is, and was, a self-defense-free-zone: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...un-ban-notice/

    I support State legislation that would provide that private property owners that have businesses open to the public (business invitees) and restrict the abiility of those invitees to protect themselves, shall have the duty to protect those invitees and be subject to strict liability for injuries arising out of criminal acts by third-parties if those criminal acts could have been avoided or defended against through the use of denied self-defense tools.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Cinemark-gun-ban-notice-courtesy-vdcl_org_.jpg 
Views:	124 
Size:	26.2 KB 
ID:	8926  
    Last edited by Hyperion; 07-24-2012 at 12:32 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    31
    I completely agree with HYPERION. Though it's too early and, no doubt, too painful for the victims and their families to contemplate at this time, I do hope that they eventually give thought to filing suit against the theater for requiring them to be unable to defend themselves while they also then took no responsibility to defend them as their customers.

  13. #13
    Regular Member WilDChilD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Dewitt, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    288
    I dont think they can sue, they went there on their own free will. The theater didnt make them come to the movie. They went there knowing they had no right to self defence.
    Last edited by WilDChilD; 07-25-2012 at 08:27 AM.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyperion View Post
    The Cinemark Theatre in Aurora, Colorado is, and was, a self-defense-free-zone: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...un-ban-notice/

    I support State legislation that would provide that private property owners that have businesses open to the public (business invitees) and restrict the abiility of those invitees to protect themselves, shall have the duty to protect those invitees and be subject to strict liability for injuries arising out of criminal acts by third-parties if those criminal acts could have been avoided or defended against through the use of denied self-defense tools.
    + 1,000,000,000,000

    Let's work together with our law makers to see this happens.:thumbup:

    Giving up civil rights for security is a certain way to lose both!

  15. #15
    Regular Member aa1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Yelm, WA
    Posts
    106
    Homes obviously just didn't see the 'firearms prohibited' sign, they should make it bigger... hard to fathom these freakin anti-gun idiots out there. He obviously didn't want a gunfight because he sat and waited for police to get him. If even one person had returned fire, he would have likely retreated even if he wasn't hit or killed, saving lives. That's just my guess though...

    I do agree that if a business open to the public forbids firearms then they should be held responsible for safety and any death/injuries; that would sure make a lot of places 'gun friendly zones' all of a sudden!

  16. #16
    Regular Member DanM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyperion
    I support State legislation that would provide that private property owners that have businesses open to the public (business invitees) and restrict the abiility of those invitees to protect themselves, shall have the duty to protect those invitees and be subject to strict liability for injuries arising out of criminal acts by third-parties if those criminal acts could have been avoided or defended against through the use of denied self-defense tools.
    Dean, currently don't patrons of businesses often sue, and win or at least settle for a good amount, when businesses create an expectation of safety or other implied or express duty upon themselves but don't follow through?

    How much of a stretch is it to say that a business that established a "no gun" rule created some expectation or some duty that it completely failed at when it didn't screen visitors and a criminal shot up the place? Do you hear much about attorneys taking that approach, on behalf of victim clients, after such incidents?
    "The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi . . ."--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

    “He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.”--M. K. Gandhi

    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." --M. K. Gandhi

  17. #17
    Regular Member Hyperion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    45
    Dan: Property owners are generally NOT responsible for the criminal acts of third parties if they are unforeseeable. If the property owner knew or reasonably knew that there was an increased likelihood of criminal activity and he fails to warn of the threat or take reasonable steps to assure safety, there could be liability.

    I would argue that the creation of a "gun-free zone" is a passive invitation to assaultive crime and that the creation of the zone substantially and materially increases the risk of a mass-attack akin to the shooting in Aurora, CO. The property owner should have warned its business invitees of the increased risk and should have taken reasonable steps to counter the elevated danger caused by the creation of the dangerous zone.

    The gun-free zone liability statute would create a rebuttable presumption that the GFZ created an increased risk, thereby opening the door to personal injury liability for the property owner.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I did consider this legal liability .. but then it would be a double edge sword: if anyone allowed carrying, then would they be liable for any injuries because of this allowance?

    Then 99% of places would not allow carry at all as insurance companies would see it not in any right aspect but purely in $$. And since there really is no facts to support it either way(or one could argue either side of the argument), then they'll likely come down on not giving out insurance if you allow carry into the bldg.

  19. #19
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyperion View Post
    Dan: Property owners are generally NOT responsible for the criminal acts of third parties if they are unforeseeable. If the property owner knew or reasonably knew that there was an increased likelihood of criminal activity and he fails to warn of the threat or take reasonable steps to assure safety, there could be liability.

    I would argue that the creation of a "gun-free zone" is a passive invitation to assaultive crime and that the creation of the zone substantially and materially increases the risk of a mass-attack akin to the shooting in Aurora, CO. The property owner should have warned its business invitees of the increased risk and should have taken reasonable steps to counter the elevated danger caused by the creation of the dangerous zone.

    The gun-free zone liability statute would create a rebuttable presumption that the GFZ created an increased risk, thereby opening the door to personal injury liability for the property owner.
    Amen!!
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer – I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    I heard on the radio today, that there was a shooting in Aurora CO a couple months ago in a church, difference is, that a CPL holder stopped the person after only one victim.

    Wonder why I only heard this on a conservative radio talk show?

  21. #21
    Regular Member fozzy71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Roseville, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    I heard on the radio today, that there was a shooting in Aurora CO a couple months ago in a church, difference is, that a CPL holder stopped the person after only one victim.

    Wonder why I only heard this on a conservative radio talk show?
    http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/04/2...rch/#.T5WjZzkp
    "I like users who quote smellslikemichigan in their signature lines." - fozzy71

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Toledo, OH
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by rvd4now View Post
    i just emailed him this update

    DEAR CHRIS BRANDT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO UPDATE YOU AND YOUR TEAM ON A STORY I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...courtroom?lite


    THEY WARE A SO CALLED PISTOL FREE ZONE AS WELL, CRIMINALS DONT CARE IF YOUR A PISTOL FREE ZONE.

    WHY PUT YOUR PAYING CUSTOMERS AT RISK. WITHIN ONE AND A HALF MINS TWELVE PEOPLE WERE KILLED AND MANY MORE WERE HURT


    PLEASE DONT SUPPORT PISTOL FREE ZONES.


    rvd4now
    Did you really respond exactly like this? Your grammar and spelling is atrocious.

    If I received a serious email written like this, I wouldn't bother reading it.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Sure, cuz only the people who could keep up with you in English class are good enough to hang wit you.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Toledo, OH
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Sure, cuz only the people who could keep up with you in English class are good enough to hang wit you.
    Your sarcasm is monumental, however, in the real world we appreciate people who are able to communicate properly.

    When conveying to a business you feel their practice is bad, then you want to seem like an adult, not a 13-year-old. Proper spelling and grammar will help that.
    Last edited by Noel Avenelle; 07-26-2012 at 02:11 AM.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    In the real world, there are real people, with diverse strengths and weaknesses. If you expect to get along in it, you should accept that.

    It bothers me too, but I tolerate it well, knowing I have many faults. I will take a persons words seriously if the thoughts behind them are seriously made.

    That said, I have read posts here with such poor grammar, that I didn't know what the person was talking about, and that annoys me, but it's mostly because I really wanted to understand what the person was trying to say.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •