Richard6218
Regular Member
imported post
joz00 wrote:
joz00 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.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.