Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Nashville restaurant owner sues to stop concealed carry

  1. #1
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    Surprised nobody posted this yet... unless I missed it!

    Guns and booze don't mix, lawsuit argues

    Thu Jul 2, 2009 12:10pm EDT

    By Pat Harris

    NASHVILLE, Tennessee (Reuters) - A well-known restaurateur is fighting back against Tennessee's newly enacted law that allows gun owners to bring their weapons into bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

    Randy Rayburn, owner of three top-rated restaurants in Nashville, filed a lawsuit on Wednesday challenging the state law's constitutionality, arguing it creates a public nuisance by threatening the safety of the public.

    "If it's called a 'nuisance bar,' with shootings, it normally gets shut down. But in Tennessee, we apparently are going to have 225,000 vigilantes shooting in bars," said David Smith, Rayburn's attorney.

    At least 200,000 Tennesseans have permits allowing them to carry their guns concealed while in public. The new law that takes effect on July 14 also specifies that persons who bring their guns into an establishment cannot drink alcohol.

    Rayburn's lawsuit, filed in Davidson County Chancery Court, claims the law violates the constitutional rights of the owners, customers and employees of restaurants and bars.

    The new law was pushed by the Tennessee Firearms Association. Its executive director, John Harris, said critics had every opportunity to defeat the legislation -- which state lawmakers passed with little opposition -- and should not turn to court action at this point.

    There are 37 U.S. states that give most people who apply the right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon. A few U.S. towns have tried to require residents to own guns.

    A spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a gun control advocacy group, said Tennessee's law posed obvious risks.

    "Any time you introduce guns into a situation where there's alcohol, where they can be fights, it's dangerous," spokesman Chad Ramsey said. "We've all been to bars. They get crowded and there's pushing and shoving sometimes. A situation that is ugly can become deadly."

    Rayburn's lawsuit will receive a hearing on July 13, a day before the law is due to go into force.

    (Additional reporting by Andrew Stern; Editing by John O'Callaghan)



    Nashville restaurateur to fight state gun law

    Suit will challenge measure's constitutionality

    By Brad Schrade
    THE TENNESSEAN

    A well-known Nashville restaurant and bar owner plans to sue today to stop the state's new guns-in-bars law from taking effect later this month.

    The case will center on claims that the law would create a public nuisance that threatens the safety of the public, and violates the constitutional rights of restaurant/bar owners, patrons and employees.

    Randy Rayburn, owner of the Sunset Grill, Midtown Cafe and Cabana, said advocates pushing the law falsely claimed that nearly 40 other states had similar laws. He said the law creates increased liability for him and other owners and is a matter of public safety.

    "They've told more fairy tales than the Brothers Grimm," Rayburn said. "Tennessee is the only state that has a law that specifically authorizes gun permit carriers to carry their weapons into establishments that serve 50 percent or more alcohol."

    John Harris, the executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association, which pushed for the law, said those pursuing the lawsuit are misguided and are trying to derail a legislative initiative that has been contemplated and discussed for more than a decade.

    Harris said the idea that the legislature was not fully informed when it enacted the law last month after years of debate "borders on insanity." He said those pushing the suit had ample opportunity through the legislative process to make their arguments and to turn to the courts is an effort to derail the General Assembly's action.

    "The problem is they don't get the opportunity to argue, particularly in a circumstance like this, that the legislature was somehow misled in making a policy decision," Harris said. "If no other state had this rule, Tennessee could adopt it and be the first. … The only real remedy they have is to go back to the legislature next year and persuade them they've made a bad policy decision and to change it."

    New set of burdens

    The lawsuit, to be filed in chancery court in Davidson County, will be the latest turn in one of the most controversial pieces of legislation from the most recent session. The law allows more than 200,000 handgun carry permit owners to bring their weapons into bars and restaurants. One provision of the new law is that any patron carrying a handgun can't consume alcohol.

    Technically, in Tennessee, places that serve liquor are classified as restaurants because they also must serve food under the law. Owners of the establishments can place signs barring gun permit holders from bringing their weapons inside, but Rayburn's attorney said the law creates a new set of burdens for owners.

    His attorney, David Randolph Smith, said the lack of legal distinction in Tennessee between restaurants and bars means that it is the first state to affirmatively say it is OK to bring guns in bars.

    The law is set to take effect July 14, and the suit seeks a temporary restraining order until the case can go to trial to determine the law's constitutionality.

    Smith said in this case the state would be aiding and abetting a public nuisance by allowing guns in bars.

    "Courts have historically shut down bars with guns in them or where shootings occurred," Smith said. "It's called a nuisance bar. If a bar has shootings in it, it normally gets shut down. But in Tennessee we apparently are going to have 225,000 vigilantes shooting in bars."


  2. #2
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,964

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    .......

    The law allows more than 200,000 handgun carry permit owners to bring their weapons into bars and restaurants. One provision of the new law is that any patron carrying a handgun can't consume alcohol......
    So if I want to open carry and have a beer, I have to open carry a long gun, right?
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    I thought the law took effect on June 14.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    Surprised nobody posted this yet... unless I missed it!
    I was coming here to do just that but checked first to make sure no one else had already done so.

    I love this statement from the restaurant owner's attorney -

    "But in Tennessee, we apparently are going to have 225,000 vigilantes shooting in bars," said David Smith, Rayburn's attorney."

    Perfect example of the stupidity of anti-gun people.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    Looks like Arizona is looking to do the same thing. Also check the last paragrapgh about not requiring permits to carry concealed.

    Arizona moves to allow concealed guns in barsBy AMANDA LEE MYERS, Associated Press Writer Amanda Lee Myers, Associated Press Writer – SunJun28, 12:26pmET PHOENIX – There was a time in the Wild West that cowboys had to check their guns before they could pull up a bar stool for a drink — rules that protected against the saloon gunfights that came to define the frontier era in places like Arizona.
    But a bill moving through the Arizona Legislature has some bar owners fearful that the state is turning back the clock to the Old West. Lawmakers are considering a bill that would allow anyone with a concealed-weapons permit to bring a handgun into bars and restaurants serving alcohol.

    The bill gives bars discretion to keep gun-toting patrons out, and anyone with a weapon would not be allowed to drink. But the bill has angered bar owners who believe booze and guns are a recipe for disaster.

    "This might be one of the stupidest things that I have heard of," said Mike Nelson, who owns Pomeroy's bar in Phoenix and plans to post a sign on his front door outlawing guns in his bar as soon as possible. "Can you think of a single reason guns and alcohol should be intertwined?"

    The bill is part of a nationwide push by the National Rifle Association. Georgia passed a similar law in 2008, as did Tennessee earlier this year in becoming the 40th state to allow bar or restaurant patrons to carry guns.

    "These laws are common sense," said NRA spokeswoman Rachel Parsons. "Restaurants are not immune to criminal activity. Law-abiding people — regardless of whether they're in restaurants, cars or homes — they should be able to protect themselves against criminal attack."

    One of the bill's sponsors, Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, said it's about time Arizona passes such a law, and that the most important thing is that people carrying guns into bars aren't allowed to drink.

    "You don't want intoxicated people with weapons, and this bill continues the prohibition against drinking and carrying," said Kavanagh, a retired police officer in New York and New Jersey. "What is the problem with having a gun in a delicatessen where someone is having a beer with their pastrami two tables away?"

    The law would only apply to people with concealed-weapons permits because lawmakers say that type of gun owner has to pass a background check and take an eight-hour course to get their permits, and are therefore safer. More than 127,000 Arizonans have concealed-weapons permits, according to the Arizona Department of Public Safety.

    Arizonans are also allowed to openly carry guns — on a belt or holster, for example. But those people would still not be allowed in bars or restaurants serving alcohol if they're armed.

    The bill has been approved by the Senate and is now before the House; Republican Gov. Jan Brewer would still have to OK it.

    Marc Peagler, owner of the Silver Spur Saloon Restaurant in Cave Creek outside Phoenix, said he's in favor of the legislation and sees some marketing potential in it.
    "I look at it this way — let's just say for a moment you're a crook or a thief," Peagler said. "Are you going to break into a place where you know that there might be 10 to 15 people who are armed? I wouldn't do that."

    Peagler, a gun owner himself, said people with concealed-weapons permits aren't people to be concerned about.

    "People who carry concealed weapons for the most part are your general law-abiding citizens, and the people who are going to break the law are going to do it no matter what laws we have out there," he said. "If somebody has been drinking and they have a weapon in the car, they're just going to go out and get it."
    Frank Murray, owner of Seamus McCaffrey's Irish Pub & Restaurant in downtown Phoenix, said he opposes the law and will prohibit his customers from coming in armed.

    "It's kind of like the Wild West days," he said. "We've got enough nuts out on the street walking around with guns. We don't need them in places with alcohol and families."

    The Arizona Licensed Beverage Association threw its support behind the bill after some compromises were made this week. The Arizona Restaurant Association has taken a neutral stance, but in previous years came out against most bills that would have allowed guns in bars and restaurants with alcohol.
    This year's bill is one of several measures loosening gun laws moving through the Arizona Legislature.

    In May, the House overwhelmingly approved a bill that would permit gun owners to keep a weapon out of sight in a locked vehicle in a parking lot or garage. That would override employers that ban weapons on their property.

    Last week, a Senate committee approved a bill that would allow Arizonans to carry concealed weapons without state permits, despite objections from law enforcement.


  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201

    Post imported post

    The Arizona Senate did approve the bill to allow for concealed carry without a permit (open carry without a permit is perfectly legal there), but it never made it past the House.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    I thought the law took effect on June 14.
    That was the original effective date in the bill, but then Governor Bredesen vetoed it (despite a campaign pledge to sign exactly this legislation). The legislature overrode his veto, but it was then after 14 June. Under the Tennessee Constitution, the law goes into effect forty days after the override.
    If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.--Samuel Adams as Candidus, Boston Gazette 20 Jan. 1772

    Veteran--USA FA
    NRA Benefactor Life
    Tennessee Firearms Association Life

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    , Arizona, USA
    Posts
    111

    Post imported post

    His attorney, David Randolph Smith, said the lack of legal distinction in Tennessee between restaurants and bars means that it is the first state to affirmatively say it is OK to bring guns in bars.


    Not true !! Even New York allows concelled carry in bars.



  9. #9
    Regular Member Huck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Evanston, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    647

    Post imported post

    Rayburn's lawsuit, filed in Davidson County Chancery Court, claims the law violates the constitutional rights of the owners, customers and employees of restaurants and bars.
    And which "Constitutional rights" are those? I notice there was no mention as to which rights would be supposedly violated. FYI Randy; Ficticious "rights" do not over-ride real rights, like those guarenteed bythe second ammendment no matter what the little voices in your head tell you.



    "You can teach 'em, but you cant learn 'em."

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    77

    Post imported post

    Snip...:
    Owners of the establishments can place signs barring gun permit holders from bringing their weapons inside
    I don't understand why there is even a lawsuit. Just put up your sign so the criminals know where there won't be anyone to stop them.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Huck wrote:
    Rayburn's lawsuit, filed in Davidson County Chancery Court, claims the law violates the constitutional rights of the owners, customers and employees of restaurants and bars.
    And which "Constitutional rights" are those? I notice there was no mention as to which rights would be supposedly violated. FYI Randy; Ficticious "rights" do not over-ride real rights, like those guarenteed bythe second ammendment no matter what the little voices in your head tell you.


    That's just it, his Constitutional rights aren't being violated. He still has the legal right, as a property/business owner, to bar firearms from his premises. Nothing is being shoved down his throat.

    What he is trying to do is deny other business owners their right to decide for themselves if they want to allow HCP holders to enter their businesses armed.

    Some one posted early in the comment section that this guys businesses aren't doing so well right now. I'm starting to think that maybe he knows the risk he takes in posting "NO FIREARMS" signs on his doors. I'm thinking he also realizes that his customer base may understand the risks they will be taking in being in a "GFZ", and might stop doing business with him.

    Before he didn't have to take responsibilty to bar firearms, the state did that for him. Now, the responsibility (and possibly blame for injuries/death incurred) falls on him. He doesn't want to put up signs, marking an easy target for the criminals, while maybe the establishment next door hs no such postings.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Turtle Creek (outside of Pittsburgh), Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    84

    Post imported post

    I like this one better.

    Rayburn said. "Tennessee is the only state that has a law that specifically authorizes gun permit carriers to carry their weapons into establishments that serve 50 percent or more alcohol."
    In Pennsylvania, we can carry firearms CC or OC in ANY bar or restaurant regardless of percentage of alcohol sales. Also, while I don't drink while carrying, it is not against the law in PA to consume alcohol while carrying.

    Maybe Mr Rayburn should do some research before bloviating as he has.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    Yes, let's leave the "bloviating" to Bill O'Reilly...

    -- John D.
    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  14. #14
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    It appears to me that Tennessee, especially Memphis and Nashville, need some "special help" in understanding that people vote against stupid stuff like this with their dollars.

    I'm too far away, but I sure hope there are some folks in the area who can call out the 2A supporters and make a clear difference.

    TFred


  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Eagle River, Alaska, USA
    Posts
    584

    Post imported post

    Why does everyone assume that if you carry a gun your a vigilante, I've concealed carried in places that don't allow firearms as far as I'm concerned the whole point of conceal carry is that no one knows your carrying.

  16. #16
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    I put it over here. Perhaps the wrong place to post it.

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum50/27172-1.html

  17. #17
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    TFred wrote:
    Surprised nobody posted this yet... unless I missed it!

    Guns and booze don't mix, lawsuit argues

    Thu Jul 2, 2009 12:10pm EDT

    By Pat Harris

    NASHVILLE, Tennessee (Reuters) - A well-known restaurateur is fighting back against Tennessee's newly enacted law that allows gun owners to bring their weapons into bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

    Randy Rayburn, owner of three top-rated restaurants in Nashville, filed a lawsuit on Wednesday challenging the state law's constitutionality, arguing it creates a public nuisance by threatening the safety of the public.

    "If it's called a 'nuisance bar,' with shootings, it normally gets shut down. But in Tennessee, we apparently are going to have 225,000 vigilantes shooting in bars," said David Smith, Rayburn's attorney.

    At least 200,000 Tennesseans have permits allowing them to carry their guns concealed while in public. The new law that takes effect on July 14 also specifies that persons who bring their guns into an establishment cannot drink alcohol.

    Rayburn's lawsuit, filed in Davidson County Chancery Court, claims the law violates the constitutional rights of the owners, customers and employees of restaurants and bars.

    The new law was pushed by the Tennessee Firearms Association. Its executive director, John Harris, said critics had every opportunity to defeat the legislation -- which state lawmakers passed with little opposition -- and should not turn to court action at this point.

    There are 37 U.S. states that give most people who apply the right to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon. A few U.S. towns have tried to require residents to own guns.

    A spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a gun control advocacy group, said Tennessee's law posed obvious risks.

    "Any time you introduce guns into a situation where there's alcohol, where they can be fights, it's dangerous," spokesman Chad Ramsey said. "We've all been to bars. They get crowded and there's pushing and shoving sometimes. A situation that is ugly can become deadly."

    Rayburn's lawsuit will receive a hearing on July 13, a day before the law is due to go into force.

    (Additional reporting by Andrew Stern; Editing by John O'Callaghan)



    Nashville restaurateur to fight state gun law

    Suit will challenge measure's constitutionality

    By Brad Schrade
    THE TENNESSEAN

    A well-known Nashville restaurant and bar owner plans to sue today to stop the state's new guns-in-bars law from taking effect later this month.

    The case will center on claims that the law would create a public nuisance that threatens the safety of the public, and violates the constitutional rights of restaurant/bar owners, patrons and employees.

    Randy Rayburn, owner of the Sunset Grill, Midtown Cafe and Cabana, said advocates pushing the law falsely claimed that nearly 40 other states had similar laws. He said the law creates increased liability for him and other owners and is a matter of public safety.

    "They've told more fairy tales than the Brothers Grimm," Rayburn said. "Tennessee is the only state that has a law that specifically authorizes gun permit carriers to carry their weapons into establishments that serve 50 percent or more alcohol."


    John Harris, the executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association, which pushed for the law, said those pursuing the lawsuit are misguided and are trying to derail a legislative initiative that has been contemplated and discussed for more than a decade.

    Harris said the idea that the legislature was not fully informed when it enacted the law last month after years of debate "borders on insanity." He said those pushing the suit had ample opportunity through the legislative process to make their arguments and to turn to the courts is an effort to derail the General Assembly's action.

    "The problem is they don't get the opportunity to argue, particularly in a circumstance like this, that the legislature was somehow misled in making a policy decision," Harris said. "If no other state had this rule, Tennessee could adopt it and be the first. … The only real remedy they have is to go back to the legislature next year and persuade them they've made a bad policy decision and to change it."

    New set of burdens

    The lawsuit, to be filed in chancery court in Davidson County, will be the latest turn in one of the most controversial pieces of legislation from the most recent session. The law allows more than 200,000 handgun carry permit owners to bring their weapons into bars and restaurants. One provision of the new law is that any patron carrying a handgun can't consume alcohol.

    Technically, in Tennessee, places that serve liquor are classified as restaurants because they also must serve food under the law. Owners of the establishments can place signs barring gun permit holders from bringing their weapons inside, but Rayburn's attorney said the law creates a new set of burdens for owners.

    His attorney, David Randolph Smith, said the lack of legal distinction in Tennessee between restaurants and bars means that it is the first state to affirmatively say it is OK to bring guns in bars.

    The law is set to take effect July 14, and the suit seeks a temporary restraining order until the case can go to trial to determine the law's constitutionality.

    Smith said in this case the state would be aiding and abetting a public nuisance by allowing guns in bars.

    "Courts have historically shut down bars with guns in them or where shootings occurred," Smith said. "It's called a nuisance bar. If a bar has shootings in it, it normally gets shut down. But in Tennessee we apparently are going to have 225,000 vigilantes shooting in bars."
    I refer to the enlarged red text above...

    Just because a State does not have a law specifically allowing an individual with a Concealed Carry permit to be in a Bar does not mean that such action is illegal. Utah, for example has NO restrictions on a Concealed Carry permit holder from being in a bar or EVEN CONSUMING ALCOHOL. Just a law that makes it a crime to be intoxicated while armed. The limit is the same as for driving.

    Seems to me that some States just try to make it TOO complicated and / or difficult!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Man, I've just been having myself a grand old time picking apart some of the asinine comments left in the comment section of the Tennessean story.

    I suspect that the Brady Bunch or some other anti-gun group is financing this lawsuit and using Rayburn as a usefull idiot. Some one posted that he was having some financial difficulties with his restaraunts. Maybe he's seeking favor from the Obama Admin in the form of a bailout, by protesting this progun legislation.

  19. #19
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    Man, I've just been having myself a grand old time picking apart some of the asinine comments left in the comment section of the Tennessean story.

    I suspect that the Brady Bunch or some other anti-gun group is financing this lawsuit and using Rayburn as a usefull idiot. Some one posted that he was having some financial difficulties with his restaraunts. Maybe he's seeking favor from the Obama Admin in the form of a bailout, by protesting this progun legislation.
    Wow, you have been busy. It begins to get old after a while though. At least it does for me. Trying to fix peoples thinking, that don't want to be fixed, is like taking a crack addict to a methadone clinic, when they don't want to be cured.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    buster81 wrote:
    Task Force 16 wrote:
    Man, I've just been having myself a grand old time picking apart some of the asinine comments left in the comment section of the Tennessean story.

    I suspect that the Brady Bunch or some other anti-gun group is financing this lawsuit and using Rayburn as a usefull idiot. Some one posted that he was having some financial difficulties with his restaraunts. Maybe he's seeking favor from the Obama Admin in the form of a bailout, by protesting this progun legislation.
    Wow, you have been busy. It begins to get old after a while though. At least it does for me. Trying to fix peoples thinking, that don't want to be fixed, is like taking a crack addict to a methadone clinic, when they don't want to be cured.
    I know what you mean, Buster. It can be frustrating sometimes. But I see it as a challenge to go head to head with these folks in a fashion that relies on facts rather than name calling, insults, and belittlement that many of them use. Even though I may not convert them, there's always the chance that I may reach readers of the comments that start to see through the lame rhetoric of the anti's.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Here's a link to Mr Rayburns legalpetition. His attorney, John Randolph Smith,practiceswrongful injury and civil law.

    http://www.drslawfirm.com/gunsinbarscomplaint.pdf

    I'm still reading it, but so far, I've gotten some really good laughs from it.

    It basically says, about the sign postage, that Mr Rayburn fears he'll loose business if he post "NO FIREARMS" signs on his doors. Funny, the opponants of this law claim that the majority of citizens don't want to dine with our guns in the room. So, I would think that the only business he would loose would be that of HCP holders that refuse to enter his establishments unarmed. Since we are in a very small minority, I don't see that as a great loss to him.

    On the other hand,

    Could it be that many of Mr Rayburns regualr patrons have expressed there concern for their safety dining in a GFZ, knowing that these equal "Killing Fields"?

    Could it be that these patrons have expressed dissaproval of beingpotential unarmed victems both inside the restaurant and outside in the parking lots?

    Could it be that Mr Rayburn knows that when he post signs barring firearms, he's inviting criminal activity to his establishments?

    He could be caught between a rock and hard place here, too.

    He may be under pressure to post signage by metro and county officials. They may be threatening him with more scrutiny in regards to health and fire codes (or other means)if he allows guns to be carried in by HCP holders.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    The argument is just plain silly.

    Of the 8 states bordering Tennessee, only one (North Carolina) prohibits guns in restaurants where alcohol is served. At least one (Arkansas) voted to allow restaurant carry after several years of banning guns anywhere alcohol was served.


  23. #23
    Regular Member buster81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,461

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    The argument is just plain silly.

    Of the 8 states bordering Tennessee, only one (North Carolina) prohibits guns in restaurants where alcohol is served. At least one (Arkansas) voted to allow restaurant carry after several years of banning guns anywhere alcohol was served.
    Yes, but facts areconfusingfor these people. They feel, they don't think.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    It just dawned on me that this Randy Rayburn is a great example of some one not wanting toexcept responsibility.

    He was perfectly fine while the State was forbiding firearms in his establishments. It wasn't causing any harm to his business and life was wonderful for him.

    But now that the responsibility is going to fall on him to forbit firearms, by posting signage, suddenly his business is being placed in grave danger. He's going to be hit with undue liabilities thatcould destroy him.

    um hmm.... What happened to the "No Guns-No Crime" crede these anti-gunners always spout off about? They not buyiong their own BS any more?

    I have a feeling this Randy Rayburn has been allowing firearms to be carryied into his establishments (unlawfully) by some of his best customers (big money people) all this time. Some of them probably didn't even have a HCP, maybe even felons. All the while letting the State laws prohibit other HCP holders from entering. Now he's worried that if he has to post NO FIREARMS signs, those customers will stop patronizing his businesses, because that signage will have to apply to everyone.

    If you read his petition, the whole thing screams, "I DON"T WANNA BE RESPONSIBLE!"

    Life was so much easier for him when the "Nanny State" took care of him.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama, ,
    Posts
    1,338

    Post imported post

    More likely he is worried about an inlaw with a long criminal history being
    stopped from making a living. If the only safe place to rob people is his
    bars then he must face his customers with those facts.
    Better to have lots of other places to rob.



Posting Permissions

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