• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Lynchburg Waterstone/Shoemakers/Craddock Terry NO FIREARMS"

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

The girlfriend and I decided to head down to Waterstone Pizza (pizza and micro-brewery) here in Lynchburg for a later than usual dinner tonight. We have been fairly regular diners (a couple times a month generally) at the Waterstone ever since it opened some time in the first half of 2008. Except for the few times I've had a beer I've open carried there with no problems at all and continued on as a customer despite what seemed a shaky startup. Well this evening we pull into the parking lot, I turned on my voice recorder and ensured my firearm (Ruger P95 carried in a nice leather retentionholster) is openly carriedand we headed for the door. I don't know why the sign caught my eye, but in the lower portion of the glassto the right ofthe door was a circled firearm outline with a "No Firearms" sign below it. This was new, or at least new since we last dined there a few weeks ago.

Seeing the sign I pointed it out to my girlfriend and we both turned around and headed to the car. As I began to start up the car I remembered that I had my little VCDL "No Guns / No Money" card in my wallet, so I left the gun in the car and headed back in to see whoever the manager was on duty to let him know he had lost a customer. As I walked back to the entrance one of the managers who I've interacted with and knows me as a customer met me outside. I pointed out to him that although I'd been a customer previously, because of the restaurant's position on firearms I would no longer be giving them my business. The manager then told me that the owner had decided to ban firearm carry for all, because some people had both carried and drank and now all firearm carriers would be banned. Although I tried to handhim my previously mentioned VCDL card, he only took it and then handed it back stating that the owner's decision had been made. After this brief cordial conversation I returned to my car, visited a neighboring restaurant and spent in excess of $50 for two meals and tip at The Depot Grill, which provided both decent service and a tasty meal with no denial of civil rights. :)

Although as a rule I don't drink and carry at the same time, I understand it to be legal, provided that one is not under the influence of alcohol. Further it is my opinion that it is no more dangerous to have a bit of alcohol with dinner and carrying a firearm than it is to have a bit of alcohol and then drive home. Given this, I find it disingenuous that this restaurant will happily serve multiple rounds to diners who openly drive a vehicle and then leave shortly afterward,but bans firearm carry for all diners and guests, whether they wish to drink alcohol or not. The wait staff should have a much easier time of identifying firearm open-carriers than trying to identify the drivers of each vehicle, so the wait-staff could surely know when they are serving a firearm carrier. Although I am not mad aboutall of this, I am highly disappointed to cross off the list one of myfavorite places to dine and amdisgusted to see such abigoted attempt to ban one type of diner, while freely serving another the same mealwith no restrictions.

Some time in the upcoming days I will draft a letter to theowners of the Waterstone, Shoemaker's and the Craddock Terry Hotel (all threeshare same ownership and are posted the same) to share mydismay and share that I will no longerbe a customer and will rescind my recommendations for the restaurants to my friends and family. Once I have drafted the letter I will post its contents and will make you aware of all further discussion. Take note that I have audio to follow once I downloadfrom my voice recorder and I will likely have pictures this upcoming weekend.
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

Thanks for the reminder, I'll likely get it in the morning.

Here is the audio I recorded. I have a better quality source if necessary, but the file type and size limited me as to quality. Note that I generally make note of date, time, location and why I'm recording when I start up the player.
 

Notso

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
432
Location
Laveen, Arizona, USA
imported post

If it's possible, I'd have a parade of carriers 'innocently' going in over the period of a few weeks to be turned away and let them realize just how much money they're losing out on. Maybe even let them reject a few groups of carriers. If I were a restaurant owner in these economic times, I'd certainly think about the decision again if I knew I was losing hundreds/thousands of dollars a month in sales revenue.
 

Riana

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2008
Messages
943
Location
Fairfax County, VA
imported post

Notso wrote:
If it's possible, I'd have a parade of carriers 'innocently' going in over the period of a few weeks to be turned away and let them realize just how much money they're losing out on. Maybe even let them reject a few groups of carriers. If I were a restaurant owner in these economic times, I'd certainly think about the decision again if I knew I was losing hundreds/thousands of dollars a month in sales revenue.

Given that there is apparently a sign on the door stating that no firearms are allowed, that might not work - wouldn't there be a risk of a tresspassing charge, if some manager really got their knickers in a knot about the OCers?

I do think a well-written letter to the owners is in order. You might want to mention that a more reasonable option would be to prohibit their servers from serving liquour to someone OCing. Still bothersome, but certainly better than banning everyone.
 

alnitak

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
78
Location
Potomac Falls, Virginia, USA
imported post

jmelvin wrote:
Given this, I find it disingenuous that this restaurant will happily serve multiple rounds to diners who openly drive a vehicle and then leave shortly afterward,but bans firearm carry for all diners and guests, whether they wish to drink alcohol or not.

Thanks for sharing this experience. Not to hijack the thread, but it's all about money and politics. Certainly, on any given night, especially Friday and Saturday, police could sit outside any local restaurant/bar and pick up dozens of people that have been inside drinking all night. And if they really wanted to eliminate drunk driving, they would do just that. Yet why don't they? I suspect it's because of the restaurant lobbying force and the ABC revenues they would lose. If MADD really wanted to be effective, they would push for this kind of "sting." (Of course, I would also rail against such actions as an infringement on my rights, but that's for another discussion.)

We (gun owners) need to figure out have to have the same kind of powerful message around revenues thatthe restaurant owners do. Until then, it'll be an uphill battle.
 

Wolf_shadow

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
1,215
Location
Accomac, Virginia, USA
imported post

I Like how they don't ban drivers that drink. As a firefighter/EMT I see too many vehicle accidents involving alcohol. Yet theserestaurant owners think it's OK to serve drivers.

:cuss::banghead:
 

Argus Eyed

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
62
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
imported post

jmelvin wrote:
Thanks for the reminder, I'll likely get it in the morning.

Here is the audio I recorded. I have a better quality source if necessary, but the file type and size limited me as to quality. Note that I generally make note of date, time, location and why I'm recording when I start up the player.
Thanks for posting the recording, very interesting to listen to. (I'm new and like absorbing all the info and experiences to help myself in the future).
 

ODA 226

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,603
Location
Etzenricht, Germany
imported post

Thinking like an Anti...

We need to pass a law that will make ANYONE who serves a drink to a person who is drivingor MAY drive a vehicle criminally responsible for the missactions of said driver.

That will stop the slaughter on our highways...if it saves just one child, it will be worth it.
 

ProShooter

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,663
Location
www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
imported post

jmelvin wrote:
Although as a rule I don't drink and carry at the same time, I understand it to be legal, provided that one is not under the influence of alcohol.
If I'm reading your sentence correctly (and please correct me if I misread it), you are stating that you cannot open carry and drink to the point of being under the influence.

Actually, any time that you drink an alcoholic beverage, you are under its' influence. Even one beer has some level of impairment attached to it, i.e. slowed reflexes, judgement, etc - however minor that degree of impairment may be. The statute simply says that you cannot carry concealed while under the influence. There is no BAC level indicated to judge the level of impairment. I liken it to local drunk in public ordinances, which simply rely on an officer's perception and training that someone is under the influence in public. The determing factor is not what level of intoxication you may at, but that someone may be carrying concealed while drinking.

In years past, I have seen people that are unsteady on their feet, have an odor of an alcoholic beverage about their person, have glazed/glassy eyes and slurred speech. They may blow a .02 or .03, clearly not as high as you would see for a DUI charge, but due to their size/weight/age, whatever, they are "under the influence".
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

ProShooter it is my estimation that each persons ability to operate with alcohol in their system varies by person, thus some folk may be under the influence of alcohol after a few drinks while someone else may do fine until a couple had been poured down their throat in short order. I believe your summary of my statement to be correct. I do not intend to suggest that anyone other than the protected government funded classes of Virginia society could legally consume alcohol and carry a concealed weapon in the places defined by the code.

I certainly am no fan of universal BAC limits defining the level of impairment for folk consuming alcohol. Only a thorough, proscribed testing, performed by an uninterested party should be used for impairment testing, which I believe could result in various BACs being reported for the same levels of impairment.

I am, however, not (here) supporting the carriage of a firearm or the driving of a vehicle of after the consumption of a beer or so with a meal, however, my issue is that the same ownership that bars firearm carry for everyone (regardless of alcohol consumption on the possibility that one would carry and consume) then ignores its own reasoning and will then serve copious quantities of alcohol to anyone who has the right age and the ability to pay without regard to the fact that the person may then walk right out and operate a vehicle.
 

kenny

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
635
Location
Richmond Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

Here is what I would do. Approach the restaurant to hold monthly/weekly lunch or dinner meetings, i.e. OCDO. have a reservation say for 20 people. Have 20 people show up OCing and see if they are refused service. If so state your objections and have a reporter close by. Thank the manager and then go to your second choice establishment.

Each month or so have a different person make the arrangements and each month show up with some new faces in your group. It would be great to throw in a couple of former probation/parole officers and a former non retired officer. Don;t forget a victim of domestic violence who carries.

Letters to the management would not hurt either, written not emailed.
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

Well that would be funny and poignant Kenny, but this is Lynchburg, not Richmond. I am a survivor/victim of a DUI accident as a youngster, so I intend to build this tidbit into my commentary regarding their policy of banning all firearm carriers regardless of alcohol consumption and continued serving of alchohol to those who leave the establishment operating a vehicle. Pure unadulterated bigotry is what this is.
 

ProShooter

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,663
Location
www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
imported post

jmelvin wrote:
ProShooter it is my estimation that each persons ability to operate with alcohol in their system varies by person, thus some folk may be under the influence of alcohol after a few drinks while someone else may do fine until a couple had been poured down their throat in short order. I believe your summary of my statement to be correct. I do not intend to suggest that anyone other than the protected government funded classes of Virginia society could legally consume alcohol and carry a concealed weapon in the places defined by the code.

I certainly am no fan of universal BAC limits defining the level of impairment for folk consuming alcohol. Only a thorough, proscribed testing, performed by an uninterested party should be used for impairment testing, which I believe could result in various BACs being reported for the same levels of impairment.

I am, however, not (here) supporting the carriage of a firearm or the driving of a vehicle of after the consumption of a beer or so with a meal, however, my issue is that the same ownership that bars firearm carry for everyone (regardless of alcohol consumption on the possibility that one would carry and consume) then ignores its own reasoning and will then serve copious quantities of alcohol to anyone who has the right age and the ability to pay without regard to the fact that the person may then walk right out and operate a vehicle.
Well said, and I love the phrase "protected government funded classes of Virginia society".
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

I just spoke with the general manager of the Craddock-Terry Hotel and briefly explained why I called and asked to whom I could draft a letter and make my case for the carriage of firearams on premises. The gentleman was quite cordial and asked me to address the letter to him and he would forward the information on to the owners of the hotel and restaurant. I hope to get my draft tonight and I may ask for suggestions shortly thereafter.

I'll keep you all informed. I do hope for a reversal of policy even if the restaurants choose to not serve alcohol to those carrying. I'd hate to permanently scratch the Waterstone off of my list of favorite places to dine.
 

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

Formerly No Problem Restaurants & Hotel Now Denies Civil Right.

Which civil right would that be? If your answer is the civil right to OC on private property, you'd be wrong.

There is no right to posses a gun on private property if you are not the property owner.. You may have license to do so from the owner of the property. That license may be revoked at any time without regard to circumstance as the owner sees fit. Not saying don't protest, just don't frame it as a civil rights violation.
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

Here is my intended letter. Let me know your thoughts and suggestions.

Mr. Jonathon Miller

Beck Company Hotels

c/o Craddock-Terry Hotel

1312 Commerce Street

Lynchburg, VA 24504



May 5, 2009



Dear Mr. Miller,



On Thursday April 30, 2009 my girlfriend and I arrived at the Waterstone restaurant associated with the Craddock Terry Hotel, looking forward to enjoying tasty pizza and friendly service, much as we had received many times before. However, as we approached the entrance I noticed a new sign to the right of the door with the figure of a firearm circled and a note to the effect of “No Firearms or other Weapons Permitted.” Seeing this sign, my girlfriend and I turned and walked back to my car to find another place to dine.



Prior to leaving the premises on this night, however, I left my sidearm in the car and returned to speak with manager on duty to let him know that the new signage had cost the restaurant a customer. As I returned to the entrance the general manager met me on the porch and greeted me as he had many other times that I had dined there. During our cordial conversation I regretfully informed him that the new signage had cost the restaurant my business, since I do not wish to give up my means of self defense just to dine out. The manager then informed me that servers had been found serving alcohol to customers carrying a sidearm and that he disapproved of this action. As such, rather than simply ask the servers to not serve alcoholic beverages to diners carrying a sidearm, all diners are required to give up their sidearms even to dine without having a beer or wine with dinner. The general manager further informed me that the Shoemaker’s restaurant and the Craddock Terry Hotel make the same request of all diners and guests, unless they are law enforcement officers (whom the U.S. Federal Courts find to have no responsibility for the protection of any particular person).



I have dined many times at this same restaurant wearing my sidearm openly in accordance with Virginia law and further have spoken with the management on many occasions while dining, often to note my pleasure with the operation of the restaurant and its improvements since opening. At no time was I made to feel unwelcome whether I was dining soberly with my sidearm at my side or having a beer or two with my sidearm left at home. (Note here that although I have chosen and will continue to chose to dine unarmed while having a beer, Virginia law only requires that guests openly carrying a sidearm not be under the influence of alcohol while armed, much the same as those who would operate a vehicle after consuming alcohol.) I have dined at the Waterstone since its opening, have returned as a customer despite the restaurant’s start-up troubles and have recommended this restaurant to many friends with whom I’ve also dined there. Needless to say that despite being a loyal customer, I feel betrayed that I have now been asked to either choose to dine un-armed without a means to protect myself or dine somewhere else. When given this option I will continually choose to dine somewhere that honors its customers’ desire to keep themselves safe by carrying a means to self-defense (my sidearm in this case) over a place that asks that everyone disarm in the all too often misplaced hope that nothing will go wrong while dining disarmed and further hopes that those who would commit violent crimes will be deterred by a sign that might result in a mere trespassing charge.



Mr. Miller as a result of Waterstone’s, Shoemaker’s and the Craddock Terry Hotel’s request that no firearms or other weapons be brought upon their premises, I will no longer spend my money at any of these businesses nor give my recommendations for these businesses because I believe that asking someone to give up their means of self protection for a meal or paid lodging is an unethical and immoral request. I do not ask that the restaurants and hotel serve alcohol to guests who are either carrying a sidearm or operating a vehicle if it so desires. I do, however, request that the restaurants and hotel allow guests to arm themselves for self defense as provide for by Commonwealth law when dining without the consumption of alcohol. I have alerted my friends and various fellow-minded people throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia of the new policies at Waterstone, Shoemaker’s and the Craddock Terry Hotel so that they may take their business to the many other restaurants and hotels that would not ask us to disarm for meal or lodging. It is my hope that you will forward my concerns on to the property owners and it is my hope that the owners will reverse their decision to bar service to those of us who simply do not wish to give up our sidearms and other legal means of self defense.



Please do not hesitate to call me or write to me if you have any questions regarding anything that I have written. I look forward to your, or the property owner’s reply and hope to again be a welcome guest while carrying my sidearm at Waterstone, Shoemaker’s and the Craddock Terry Hotel.



Thank you,



jmelvin
 

tag

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
164
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, USA
imported post

jmelvin wrote:
I do, however, request that the restaurants and hotel allow guests to arm themselves for self defense as provided for by Commonwealth law when dining without the consumption of alcohol.
The only mistake (spelling-wise) I found. I didn't notice anything wrong grammatically. The letter is a little long, so you might consider making it a bit more brief.
 
Top