Carrabba's Roanoke, VA

imported post

Okey dokey all, perhaps a new topic could be started regarding Mr. Korwin's proposed bill. It seems like a good discussion for the whole of the board, not justVirginia. Someone want to start that up?

Regarding Carrabba's in Virginia, have any of you that had no problems before gone back at least in passing to confirm that there are no signs posted at your local Carrabba's? I know some of you stated that you may be doing some checking, so let us know what you found out.

imported post

asforme wrote:

If a gunman comes in and shoots up Carabba's, any gun carrier who chooses to willingly disarm for the privilege of eating some lasagna is just as responsible for his own death as the restaurant and gunman are.

Click to expand...

+¾

Ok.. I mostly agree with that statement.Would I go in and eat lasagna and take the risk without my firearm? Sure I would. As an activist, I express my opinion.. with my FREE Open carry Cards I hand out.. with the Amazing Mail Post Cards I send out, With my Posts on this and other forums and in Firearms classes I teach (except when I teach I am careful to tell folks what "I DO" and not what "THEY SHOULD DO"). I stand my ground on most issues (you can thank your tax dollars and the USMC for that) but try and stay open minded.

The bottom line is I will probably not ever go into that Carabba's because I live 25 miles from McCain's new house, BUT, I would like my fellow OC'ers to be able to go in there and have some lasagna armed if the so choose to do so.

Ed

imported post

asforme wrote:

If a gunman comes in and shoots up Carabba's, any gun carrier who chooses to willingly disarm for the privilege of eating some lasagna is just as responsible for his own death as the restaurant and gunman are. This isn't about ensuring your safety, you can ensure your safety by only going where you can carry, this is about forcing yourself into a business that doesn't want you.

If you want to look at statistics, there is way more danger of drowning in a public pool than there is of being shot in a gun free zone (or anywhere else). Should we close all public pools, or write a law leaving them specifically liable? No, people go to the pool to enjoy themselves and are willing to take the risk associated with swimming. People who choose to take the risk of dining in a gun free zone take the risk because they are hoplophobes and do not want to be around weapons. That is their risk, in the end it doesn't affect me, because unlike those who want to solve the problem with more unnecessary laws, I can just choose not to go there.

Click to expand...

Let's play devil's advocate here. Assume, for the moment, that every day more and more businesses, restaurants, super stores, etc. post as Gun Free Zones, until there is no place you can legally patronize. What will your response be at that point? Will you illegally carry? Or will you just have so little care for your own safety that you will abide by being stripped of your rights with no possible recourse in the event something happens? Can you survive if you can't shop anywhere due to your choice to not patronize those businesses?

I actually like Grapeshot's letter better than what I composed in my haste. There is the implication that, should the business owner decide to strip you of your means of self defense, that they should be reasonably expected to have taken measures to ensure your safety. If they fail in that, they should be liable.

While I certainly agree that the likelihood of a confrontation in a Gun Free Zone is negligible, I'm sure the folks present during the recent mass shootings felt the exact same way. I hope to never be in that type of situation myself, but I also hope to be allowed the opportunity to protect myself and my loved ones if the situation did occur!

imported post

My point is that we are already a sue-happy culture as it is. If we are going to say that gun-free zones are dangerous and need special liability laws, than why not have special liability for pools, ski resorts, skate parks or any other places that have countless injuries and deaths every year. If you don't feel safe somewhere, you should take the responsibility not to go there.

In response to the what if we're banned from everywhere question: I do not have an ends justifies the means philosophy. I do not believe this legislation is proper in a philosophy of freedom and personal responsibility and despite the fact that I might be better off if it is passed will not sway me to support it. From a practical point of view, there is evidence that there are a great number of businesses who share in our cause, Champs is one I can think of right off hand. And if all business go down hill, start your own. With the number of gun owners in this country, surely some of them are entrepreneurs who would love having such a large exclusive market.

imported post

asforme wrote:

why not have special liability for pools, ski resorts, skate parks

Click to expand...

Because there is not aConstitutional RIGHT to swim, ski and/or skate.

imported post

ed wrote:

asforme wrote:

why not have special liability for pools, ski resorts, skate parks

Click to expand...

Because there is not aConstitutional RIGHT to swim, ski and/or skate.

Click to expand...

I would also add that you go swimming, skating, etc with the understanding that you are participating in a sport or activity with some inherent risks. When you get on that ski resorts slope, a lot of times you have to purchase a ticket and acknowledge you know the risks.

Are you saying we should all have to sign a waiver stating that by eating dinner at Carrabba's, we should all understand it's possible we could be shot to death and that's ok? You sure are taking a bit of a leap in logic, aren't you?

You're comparing apples to oranges. Participating in a sport with known risks is quite different from having your right to self defense removed and then the person taking away that right refusing to protect you or take responsibility for your safety.

Since I don't want to derail this thread any further, I'll leave it at that.

imported post

ed wrote:

asforme wrote:

why not have special liability for pools, ski resorts, skate parks

Click to expand...

Because there is not aConstitutional RIGHT to swim, ski and/or skate.

Click to expand...

Actually, there is liability already for those things. If they show negligence in maintenance, disreguard for safety, they are liable!

imported post

ed wrote:

asforme wrote:

why not have special liability for pools, ski resorts, skate parks

Click to expand...

Because there is not aConstitutional RIGHT to swim, ski and/or skate.

Click to expand...

What aboutone's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Skiing into a pool with skates on while armed to the teeth is my kinda fun.:what:

imported post

ThunderRanch wrote:

Let's play devil's advocate here.

Click to expand...

Ok here's my turn, let's assume a massive, worldwide disaster occurs, governments are in shambles, and bandits roam the countryside.

We can play hypothetical all day. Let's keep the discussion grounded in the real world, please.

imported post

Sounds like a good idea. Maybe the thread could even be about which Carrabba's bar gun owners from carrying while eating. Novel thought, that.

imported post

asforme wrote:

SNIP Should we close all public pools, or write a law leaving them specifically liable? No, people go to the pool to enjoy themselves and are willing to take the risk associated with swimming. People who choose to take the risk of dining in a gun free zone take the risk because they are hoplophobes and do not want to be around weapons. That is their risk, in the end it doesn't affect me, because unlike those who want to solve the problem with more unnecessary laws, I can just choose not to go there.

Click to expand...

Sorry, AsForMe. I just couldn't resist:

Well, maybe if they had some really good linguini in a delicate lobster cream sauce, I might be willing to take that risk.

imported post

AbNo wrote:

ThunderRanch wrote:

Let's play devil's advocate here.

Click to expand...

Ok here's my turn, let's assume a massive, worldwide disaster occurs, governments are in shambles, and bandits roam the countryside.

We can play hypothetical all day. Let's keep the discussion grounded in the real world, please.

Click to expand...

I defer to someone who is obviously willing to forfeit his rights.

imported post

THEY GOT THE MESSAGE!!!

I was just at the mall and walked past Carrabba's - the offensive sign is not in evidence.

Now I finally have a chance to use this... :celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate

imported post

That's great news! :celebrate

imported post

Very good news indeed.

Now we just have to see what happens as one of us carries in there....

:celebrate:monkey

Edited to add monkey and banana.

imported post

CPerdue did you go in and have a meal while armed too?

imported post

No, not this time. I know one of the servers though so maybe next weekend.

Did anybody get a response from messages to corporate? Perhaps follow up 'thanks for doing the right thing' notes are in order? I think so.

C.

imported post

CPerdue wrote:

Did anybody get a response from messages to corporate?

Click to expand...

Not me. But if I do and they really took down their sign I will thank them.

imported post

CPerdue or anyone in the area can you snap a couple pictures of the now removed sign when it's convenient?

Thanks for the reminder of calling and thanking Carrabba's. I'll certainly make time to do that in the upcoming days!

imported post

I wrote to corporate a week ago and never got any kind of reply.