Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: Haggen letter

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    Here is the letter that I have drafted to corporate. Any feedback is welcome.





    Blaine, WA 98230

    October 18, 2008

    Richard and Donald Haggen
    2211 Rimland Drive
    Bellingham, WA 98227-9704

    Dear Mr Haggen,

    I am writing to ask you about an alleged store policy that your Ferndale Haggen manager is enforcing and about the treatment that a friend received at that store. For the record, I have been shopping at Ferndale Haggen for the past eleven years, ever since I moved back into the area after an extended absence due to military service. I have always enjoyed my shopping experience at your stores.

    Richard, a friend of mine, was approached by the manager at Ferndale Haggen several months ago as he was shopping. The manager was apparently concerned that Richard was openly carrying a pistol in a belt holster. The manager asked Richard if he was law enforcement, to which Richard informed him that he was not law enforcement but that Washington state law permits the open carry of a firearm (RCW 9.41.270). Richard is an older gentleman who maintains his grooming and typically dresses in slacks and a t-shirt or sports shirt so there is nothing about his appearance that would cause alarm. The manager claimed that he had received ten complaints from “regular” customers who were threatening to stop shopping at Haggen if people were allowed to carry firearms. Richard was skeptical that this was the actual reason, having noticed nothing out of the ordinary in the public reaction to him as he shopped but he agreed with the manager that the store had the right to ask him not to carry.

    Fast forward several weeks later. Richard had at this point shopped at the store on a weekly or more frequent basis, each time locking his pistol in the car prior to entering the store in acquiescence to the manager’s wishes. This time, however, he entered the store and was doing his shopping when he was approached by two Ferndale police officers and the manager. The officers told him that the manager had called them because he had asked Richard not to carry his firearm in the store. Richard pointed out that he was not carrying his firearm. The officers questioned him for a few minutes and then left. Richard contacted me because he feels absolutely humiliated. He was accosted by police in front of his community members and neighbors for no reason at all other than the store manager’s apparent unreasoning fear of firearms. He had complied 100% with the manager’s request regarding open carry even though he had never received a copy of the corporate policy that the manager promised him.

    I have been openly carrying my firearm in Ferndale Haggen for over a year, long before I met Richard. I have never had any problems in the store, I have never noticed any other customers exhibiting negative reactions to my firearm, and I have never been approached by an employee of the store. I am wondering what is going on with your store. I understand that this manager is new and I wonder if he is setting store policy based on his personal feelings rather than any direction from above.

    I have two questions for you as members of the Board of Directors and as the sons of the founders of Haggen grocery.

    First, is there an official policy that customers are not allowed to legally carry firearms in your stores. If so, could you please send me a copy of that policy?

    Second, if there is an official policy or if you are allowing the manager’s of the stores to set policy in this area, could you please explain why you feel that law abiding citizens can not be trusted with the means of their own defense. If you look at the history of the past fifty years, each and every mass shooting in this country and others has been carried out in a place where law abiding citizens were prohibited from possessing a firearm. What Virginia Tech, Columbine, Pearl, Mississippi, and Long Island, NY, along with each other mass shooting in recent history, have in common is that there were no law abiding citizens who could stop the mentally unstable shooter from committing his crimes.

    The Washington State Constitution is clear on the right of the citizen of self defense and the possession of firearms. The United States Constitution is clear on the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms and has been recently upheld by the Supreme Court. Although I recognize your right as a property owner to set rules for your customers, I would hope that you would not choose to limit the ability of your customers to defend themselves, especially while causing no trouble for your other customers or your business.

    I look forward to your quick response on this matter.

    Sincerely,









    I will also have a copy at the breakfast this am for people to look over.











  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    +1

    Only thing I would add is reference to the Tacoma Mall shooting, which I brought up in the discussion with the LEO's. If you recall in that incident there was a mall patron who was CC'ing when the shooting started. He tried to pull his weapon but the shooter was a bit quicker and wounded the guy, very seriously. He is now in a wheelchair, but appeared as a prime witness for the prosecution when the shooter went to trial.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Richard6218 wrote:
    +1

    Only thing I would add is reference to the Tacoma Mall shooting, which I brought up in the discussion with the LEO's. If you recall in that incident there was a mall patron who was CC'ing when the shooting started. He tried to pull his weapon but the shooter was a bit quicker and wounded the guy, very seriously. He is now in a wheelchair, but appeared as a prime witness for the prosecution when the shooter went to trial.
    The problem with the Tacoma Mall guy was he didn't shoot scum boy in the back.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Well written letter!
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  5. #5
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    +1

    Only thing I would add is reference to the Tacoma Mall shooting, which I brought up in the discussion with the LEO's. If you recall in that incident there was a mall patron who was CC'ing when the shooting started. He tried to pull his weapon but the shooter was a bit quicker and wounded the guy, very seriously. He is now in a wheelchair, but appeared as a prime witness for the prosecution when the shooter went to trial.
    The problem with the Tacoma Mall guy was he didn't shoot scum boy in the back.
    If I remember correctly, he tried to talk the kid down and the kid shot him for his troubles......

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    compmanio365 wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    +1

    Only thing I would add is reference to the Tacoma Mall shooting, which I brought up in the discussion with the LEO's. If you recall in that incident there was a mall patron who was CC'ing when the shooting started. He tried to pull his weapon but the shooter was a bit quicker and wounded the guy, very seriously. He is now in a wheelchair, but appeared as a prime witness for the prosecution when the shooter went to trial.
    The problem with the Tacoma Mall guy was he didn't shoot scum boy in the back.
    If I remember correctly, he tried to talk the kid down and the kid shot him for his troubles......
    Like I said, he should have just shot the scum bag. Talking to them is just PC crap for doing the wrong thing. Violent asocial be behavior needs to have one consequence, you are eliminated from the gene pool.




  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    apparent unreasoning fear
    should be unreasonable fear

    First, is there an official policy that customers are not allowed to legally carry firearms in your stores.
    should have question mark at end, not period.

    Second, if there is an official policy or if you are allowing the manager’s of the stores to set policy in this area, could you please explain why you feel that law abiding citizens can not be trusted with the means of their own defense.
    should be managers - no apostrophe - not possessive in this sentence. Also, as the sentence is a question, it should have a question mark at the end, not a period.

    along with each other mass shooting
    should be along with every other mass shooting.


    Why is Richard not writing this letter?



  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    apparent unreasoning fear
    should be unreasonable fear

    First, is there an official policy that customers are not allowed to legally carry firearms in your stores.
    should have question mark at end, not period.

    Second, if there is an official policy or if you are allowing the manager’s of the stores to set policy in this area, could you please explain why you feel that law abiding citizens can not be trusted with the means of their own defense.
    should be managers - no apostrophe - not possessive in this sentence. Also, as the sentence is a question, it should have a question mark at the end, not a period.

    along with each other mass shooting


    Why is Richard not writing this letter?

    One major reason, as I see it. If it comes from me it will appear to them that I'm a solo guy with a gun who wants to upset their applecart. If it comes from someone else they may get the message that they are dealing with a group and not just a whiner.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gene Beasley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    426

    Post imported post

    Richard6218 wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?


    One major reason, as I see it. If it comes from me it will appear to them that I'm a solo guy with a gun who wants to upset their applecart. If it comes from someone else they may get the message that they are dealing with a group and not just a whiner.
    I can see the reasoning behind this. I don't know what the OC population of western Whatcom County is, but having the Haggens see that there's more than one helps. I remember seeing some sort of retail formula where letter, fax, phone call, email supposedly represents x-number of additional people with the same point of view.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    compmanio365 wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    +1

    Only thing I would add is reference to the Tacoma Mall shooting, which I brought up in the discussion with the LEO's. If you recall in that incident there was a mall patron who was CC'ing when the shooting started. He tried to pull his weapon but the shooter was a bit quicker and wounded the guy, very seriously. He is now in a wheelchair, but appeared as a prime witness for the prosecution when the shooter went to trial.
    The problem with the Tacoma Mall guy was he didn't shoot scum boy in the back.
    If I remember correctly, he tried to talk the kid down and the kid shot him for his troubles......
    Like I said, he should have just shot the scum bag. Talking to them is just PC crap for doing the wrong thing. Violent asocial be behavior needs to have one consequence, you are eliminated from the gene pool.


    Interesting you mention this. It came up this AM at our breakfast and the discussion revolved around the issue of legal authorization to use lethal force. The victim in that case got his authorization the instant the shooter fired his first round, therefore he was not required to order the scumbag to drop his weapon. He paid dearly for his error.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the suggestions. I will make the changes and send it off this week.

  12. #12
    Regular Member j2l3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    871

    Post imported post

    Richard6218 wrote:
    +1

    Only thing I would add is reference to the Tacoma Mall shooting, which I brought up in the discussion with the LEO's. If you recall in that incident there was a mall patron who was CC'ing when the shooting started. He tried to pull his weapon but the shooter was a bit quicker and wounded the guy, very seriously. He is now in a wheelchair, but appeared as a prime witness for the prosecution when the shooter went to trial.
    He wasNOT a patron, he worked there, in the Excalibur Knife Shop. He was returning from a break or coming to work. Not sure which.

    He DID pull his weapon, and then put it away rather than use it because he was worried the police would mistake him for the BG. He paid for that and will for life. A lesson we should all learn from.
    CZ 75B 9mm, Ruger P94 .40 S&W, Bersa Thunder .380, AR-15 Homebuild

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    Gene Beasley wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?


    One major reason, as I see it. If it comes from me it will appear to them that I'm a solo guy with a gun who wants to upset their applecart. If it comes from someone else they may get the message that they are dealing with a group and not just a whiner.
    I can see the reasoning behind this. I don't know what the OC population of western Whatcom County is, but having the Haggens see that there's more than one helps. I remember seeing some sort of retail formula where letter, fax, phone call, email supposedly represents x-number of additional people with the same point of view.
    There is an actuarial formula that is used to project statistical data to a segment of population. The Haggen guy actually used it as rebuttal against me in my debate with him about my rights under RCW. "There are more people who don't have guns than those who do." I made reference to this in my post in the DNP thread about that encounter, I believe page 15.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Richard6218 wrote:
    Gene Beasley wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?


    One major reason, as I see it. If it comes from me it will appear to them that I'm a solo guy with a gun who wants to upset their applecart. If it comes from someone else they may get the message that they are dealing with a group and not just a whiner.
    I can see the reasoning behind this. I don't know what the OC population of western Whatcom County is, but having the Haggens see that there's more than one helps. I remember seeing some sort of retail formula where letter, fax, phone call, email supposedly represents x-number of additional people with the same point of view.
    There is an actuarial formula that is used to project statistical data to a segment of population. The Haggen guy actually used it as rebuttal against me in my debate with him about my rights under RCW. "There are more people who don't have guns than those who do." I made reference to this in my post in the DNP thread about that encounter, I believe page 15.
    Then there appears to be a lot of bad citizens in this country, as the Founding Fathers expected everyone to bring their own gun to the defense of this country. By the Haggen guy's reasoning it is OK to discriminate against minorities, which of course is illegal in this country. So he advocates breaking the law to keep you from having your rights. Not a very good argument if you ask me.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Gene Beasley wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?


    One major reason, as I see it. If it comes from me it will appear to them that I'm a solo guy with a gun who wants to upset their applecart. If it comes from someone else they may get the message that they are dealing with a group and not just a whiner.
    I can see the reasoning behind this. I don't know what the OC population of western Whatcom County is, but having the Haggens see that there's more than one helps. I remember seeing some sort of retail formula where letter, fax, phone call, email supposedly represents x-number of additional people with the same point of view.
    There is an actuarial formula that is used to project statistical data to a segment of population. The Haggen guy actually used it as rebuttal against me in my debate with him about my rights under RCW. "There are more people who don't have guns than those who do." I made reference to this in my post in the DNP thread about that encounter, I believe page 15.
    Then there appears to be a lot of bad citizens in this country, as the Founding Fathers expected everyone to bring their own gun to the defense of this country. By the Haggen guy's reasoning it is OK to discriminate against minorities, which of course is illegal in this country. So he advocates breaking the law to keep you from having your rights. Not a very good argument if you ask me.
    I wasn't defending his argument: quite the contrary. All he was thinking of was how many customers he has to offend in order to keep the rest happy. $$$$$$$$$$$

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Richard6218 wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Gene Beasley wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?


    One major reason, as I see it. If it comes from me it will appear to them that I'm a solo guy with a gun who wants to upset their applecart. If it comes from someone else they may get the message that they are dealing with a group and not just a whiner.
    I can see the reasoning behind this. I don't know what the OC population of western Whatcom County is, but having the Haggens see that there's more than one helps. I remember seeing some sort of retail formula where letter, fax, phone call, email supposedly represents x-number of additional people with the same point of view.
    There is an actuarial formula that is used to project statistical data to a segment of population. The Haggen guy actually used it as rebuttal against me in my debate with him about my rights under RCW. "There are more people who don't have guns than those who do." I made reference to this in my post in the DNP thread about that encounter, I believe page 15.
    Then there appears to be a lot of bad citizens in this country, as the Founding Fathers expected everyone to bring their own gun to the defense of this country. By the Haggen guy's reasoning it is OK to discriminate against minorities, which of course is illegal in this country. So he advocates breaking the law to keep you from having your rights. Not a very good argument if you ask me.
    I wasn't defending his argument: quite the contrary. All he was thinking of was how many customers he has to offend in order to keep the rest happy. $$$$$$$$$$$
    So once again money is more important than the law. It's a sad place our country has gone too. Of course that same greed has led the world into this failed economy we are riding down a slippery slope to doom.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Gene Beasley wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?


    One major reason, as I see it. If it comes from me it will appear to them that I'm a solo guy with a gun who wants to upset their applecart. If it comes from someone else they may get the message that they are dealing with a group and not just a whiner.
    I can see the reasoning behind this. I don't know what the OC population of western Whatcom County is, but having the Haggens see that there's more than one helps. I remember seeing some sort of retail formula where letter, fax, phone call, email supposedly represents x-number of additional people with the same point of view.
    There is an actuarial formula that is used to project statistical data to a segment of population. The Haggen guy actually used it as rebuttal against me in my debate with him about my rights under RCW. "There are more people who don't have guns than those who do." I made reference to this in my post in the DNP thread about that encounter, I believe page 15.
    Then there appears to be a lot of bad citizens in this country, as the Founding Fathers expected everyone to bring their own gun to the defense of this country. By the Haggen guy's reasoning it is OK to discriminate against minorities, which of course is illegal in this country. So he advocates breaking the law to keep you from having your rights. Not a very good argument if you ask me.
    I wasn't defending his argument: quite the contrary. All he was thinking of was how many customers he has to offend in order to keep the rest happy. $$$$$$$$$$$
    So once again money is more important than the law. It's a sad place our country has gone too. Of course that same greed has led the world into this failed economy we are riding down a slippery slope to doom.
    I've just read the new American Rifleman that came Friday and I've been watching all the Sunday talk shows. You're right: we are on the road to doom. Obama is going to put the last nail in our democracy (or more accurately, our Republic).

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, , USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Wow... to say that the minority that is exercising their right must yield to the majority who do choose to exercise the right makes no sense at all. That's not a valid justification as towhether someone should be able to exercise theirgod given right.

    What ifwe find another religion that is practiced by a small group in my community particularly offensive. Is Haggen going to ban those individuals because it makes us feel uncomfortable? I would say quite the contrary, they are going to ensure that those individuals do not feel discriminated against lest a lawsuit ensue.

    That was a very poor argument that Haggen assistant manager gave. Had he just said it was their policy that would be one thing as he was just enforcing a corporate policy (albiet a poor policy). To try to justify to Richard that Richard did not have a good reason to OC because the majority of the population showed his lack of understanding of what a "right" really is.

    Good luck with the correspondence to Haggen, I'll be looking forward to their response as I do shop at Haggen from time to time as it is near my work.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    joz00 wrote:
    Wow... to say that the minority that is exercising their right must yield to the majority who do choose to exercise the right makes no sense at all. That's not a valid justification as towhether someone should be able to exercise theirgod given right.

    What ifwe find another religion that is practiced by a small group in my community particularly offensive. Is Haggen going to ban those individuals because it makes us feel uncomfortable? I would say quite the contrary, they are going to ensure that those individuals do not feel discriminated against lest a lawsuit ensue.

    That was a very poor argument that Haggen assistant manager gave. Had he just said it was their policy that would be one thing as he was just enforcing a corporate policy (albiet a poor policy). To try to justify to Richard that Richard did not have a good reason to OC because the majority of the population showed his lack of understanding of what a "right" really is.

    Good luck with the correspondence to Haggen, I'll be looking forward to their response as I do shop at Haggen from time to time as it is near my work.
    You miss the whole point of that discussion. In the State of Washington and probably almost every other state a property owner or manager has the right to exclude anyone he/she chooses, for almost any reason. It matters not whether his reasoning about numbers of gun owners vs. non-owners makes sense. If he wants to exclude gun carriers he has that right, regardless of his reasoning. That's the law.

    The intent of heresolong's letter is to attempt to learn what, if any, corporate policy Haggen Stores has with regard to firearms, and if that policy is negative toward them, to attempt to change that policy. Further, if the manager was not following corporate policy, senior management needs to know about it.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, , USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    I did get the gist of the letter as I did read it before I posted. I was referring to this comment.

    "There is an actuarial formula that is used to project statistical data to a segment of population. The Haggen guy actually used it as rebuttal against me in my debate with him about my rights under RCW. "There are more people who don't have guns than those who do." I made reference to this in my post in the DNP thread about that encounter, I believe page 15."

    I understand that they can ask you not to patronize their establishment if they wish. I was stating that the assistant manager's rationalization was absurd regarding the stastitics he used to prop up his position. I had stated that telling you flat out that it was against their policy was one thing but to try to convince you that it was "right" for them to ban guns by using a theory which in my mind holds no weight what so ever was foolish.

    I don't think I stated anywhere that I thought you could carry in Haggen no matter their policy in my previous post. Hence my parting comment about how I would be looking forward to seeing how this worked out as I would not want to patronize a company who banned good people from being able to protect themselves. I try to be very careful about what I state, particularly in writing. If you still think I missed the point please let me know.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    joz00 wrote:
    I did get the gist of the letter as I did read it before I posted. I was referring to this comment.

    "There is an actuarial formula that is used to project statistical data to a segment of population. The Haggen guy actually used it as rebuttal against me in my debate with him about my rights under RCW. "There are more people who don't have guns than those who do." I made reference to this in my post in the DNP thread about that encounter, I believe page 15."

    I understand that they can ask you not to patronize their establishment if they wish. I was stating that the assistant manager's rationalization was absurd regarding the stastitics he used to prop up his position. I had stated that telling you flat out that it was against their policy was one thing but to try to convince you that it was "right" for them to ban guns by using a theory which in my mind holds no weight what so ever was foolish.

    I don't think I stated anywhere that I thought you could carry in Haggen no matter their policy in my previous post. Hence my parting comment about how I would be looking forward to seeing how this worked out as I would not want to patronize a company who banned good people from being able to protect themselves. I try to be very careful about what I state, particularly in writing. If you still think I missed the point please let me know.
    My point was that the manager's statement about numbers of people was irrelevant to his authority to trespass me. If he wants to trespass me he doesn't need a reason.He can say I looked cross-eyed at him if he wants, and that's reason enough under the law. Once he has notified me of trespass he can have me arrested next time I enter his premises.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bellingham, , USA
    Posts
    13

    Post imported post

    Richard6218 wrote:
    My point was that the manager's statement about numbers of people was irrelevant to his authority to trespass me. If he wants to trespass me he doesn't need a reason.He can say I looked cross-eyed at him if he wants, and that's reason enough under the law. Once he has notified me of trespass he can have me arrested next time I enter his premises.
    Fair enough, I understand that was your intention when posting the anectdote about the manager. I would say that link was tenuously insinuated at best, and I did not pick up on it as the previous statement you were commenting on was responding to the theory that phoning, faxing etc might help bring the issue to better light.

    To clarify my post, I was sympathizing with what happened to you and was also questioning why someone would try to justify the supression of your rights with a statistical theory. I didn't use the "quote" feature which may have thrown you off on what I was commenting on.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    deanf wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?
    One reason is that Richard has managed to get himself kicked out of half the stores in Ferndale. I have been openly carrying for far longer than Richard in the same area and haven't been approached once. I thought that, given his history, maybe I should attack this one.

    No offense intended Richard, just an analysis of the probability of success based on past performance.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    deanf wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?
    One reason is that Richard has managed to get himself kicked out of half the stores in Ferndale. I have been openly carrying for far longer than Richard in the same area and haven't been approached once. I thought that, given his history, maybe I should attack this one.

    No offense intended Richard, just an analysis of the probability of success based on past performance.
    Be my guest. I stand by my original answer that they need to hear it from more than one of us so I guess that puts you on the pulpit.

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    deanf wrote:
    Why is Richard not writing this letter?
    One reason is that Richard has managed to get himself kicked out of half the stores in Ferndale. I have been openly carrying for far longer than Richard in the same area and haven't been approached once. I thought that, given his history, maybe I should attack this one.

    No offense intended Richard, just an analysis of the probability of success based on past performance.
    Out of curiosity, is there any analysis as to why Richard has been kicked out of "half the stores in Ferndale" but others have not? What is different about Richard's look, approach, attitude, interaction, or whatever that is likely the cause of this discrepancy?
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

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
  •