Toys 'R' Us: Boycott.

Confirmed. My local store is posted. However, in Missouri their particular posting format is not legal by Statute.

I was asked to leave the other day from their store and was escorted out by three large male employees like I was some kind of shop lifter. The niles store here in OH had no sign to tell customers that it is a gun free zone, I sent off an email to corporate and have yet to hear anything from them.

Don't you mean Victim Zone?

MKEgal said:

Bear in mind, though, that you're breaking Federal law by denying customers based on their exercise of civil rights. (See http://www.justice.gov/crt/crim/241fin.php "If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State... in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ... They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.")

Click to expand...

Um, no, and everybody on this board should know better.

The Second Amendment does not apply to private actors - they can eject you from their property for carrying guns, or any other reason they wish, unless a valid federal or state law bars them from doing so.

paramedic70002 said:

I wrote to them last week and have not received a response. Perhaps the repeated inquiries have caused them to step up their game. Time for a second, more direct letter. This is it:

Click to expand...

Can you post up the Supreme Court decision regarding LEO having "no duty to protect citizens" please? I'd like to reference the specific decision when I write my letter and how it impacts my family as a combat veteran.

Whooo boy my friend.

There isn't any ONE supreme court decision saying the police have no duty to protect, rather there are many.

Try this link here.

http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html

Also this one.

http://www.endtimesreport.com/NO_AFFIRMATIVE_DUTY.htm

There's been quite a few cases referencing this.

thx997303 said:

Perhaps also, when this is posted on other forums, provide a link here.

The boycott will carry more weight the more easily it is seen how large in scope it may become.

Click to expand...

http://forums.buckeyefirearms.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=9577

heresyourdipstickjimmy said:

Can you post up the Supreme Court decision regarding LEO having "no duty to protect citizens" please? I'd like to reference the specific decision when I write my letter and how it impacts my family as a combat veteran.

Click to expand...

Warren v. District of Columbia
DC's highest court ruled that the police do not have a legal responsibility to provide personal protection to individuals, and absolved the police and the city of any liability. By a 4-3 decision the court decided that Warren was not entitled to remedy at the bar despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police. The court held that official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for a failure to provide adequate police protection.

http://gunrightsalert.com/documents/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia_444_A_2d_1.pdf

http://hematite.com/dragon/policeprot.html

eye95 said:

As hard as I would fight for the RKBA, I would also fight for Toys R Us's property rights, which include determining what activities they will allow on their property.

Click to expand...

I have to agree.

In order for us to be passionate about our right to carry we have to be equally passionate about the rights of private property owners. We don't have to agree, and we don't have to like it... we also don't have to patronize them if we choose not to.

To vilify a company for exercising their legal rights flies in the face of our fight to legitimize 2A rights in the mainstream.

I don't know Utah law, but here in WA they would be completely within their rights to restrict guns on property.

It is perfectly within their rights to ban firearms from their stores.

It is also perfectly within our rights to tell everyone we know about the policy, and refuse to shop at their stores.

I don't see where anybody has villified TRU. If their own actions "villify" them than so be it. They have every right.

So.... They think that a NO GUNS sign is gonna keep the BG out of there store? They might as well put a sign up that says NO ROBBERIES ALLOWED, signs like that are a step in a backwards direction. Becuase if a citizens rights were not so infringed in california the BG shooting up the store might have been stopped by a law abiding citizen with a legaly carried gun.

Stores like this are just making themselves more vulnerable to violent BG's. Well when their stores get shot up again and wonder why nobody stopped them it's becuase the BG ignored their sign, and the law abiding citizen followed the rules, and the police didn't show up untill ten minutes later. Then we can all send them an e-mail asking them "Who's retarded now?"

For what its worth, I will pass this on Downunder.

thx997303 said:

Here is my response to Mr. Latner.

"Mr. Latner,

There are several flaws in the reasoning behind this policy.

Perhaps you recall hearing about the Trolley Square shooting in Salt Lake City Utah.

Trolley Square was, and still is a posted "gun free zone" This failed to stop the shooter.

Perhaps you recall the Columbine shooting.

Per federal law, schools are gun free zones, this once again failed to stop the shooters.

What your corporation is creating is a "victim disarmament zone"

I refuse to shop anywhere that so ignorantly creates such a zone.

I have and will continue posting this information in various locations, and am calling for a nationwide boycott of Toys 'R' Us and Babies 'R' Us stores.

Here are links to the discussions I have posted on various gun related forums. As you will soon see, there is support for this boycott.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=92947

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?80532-Toys-R-Us-Boycott.

http://www.utahconcealedcarry.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=9505

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=543355

http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/rkba-news-information/158598-toys-r-us-boycott.html

You can rest assured that more forums will be notified of your policy and the boycott. These are merely the posts I have had time to post since the incident yesterday evening.

In this economy, it appears to be a horrible idea to alienate ANY customers at all.

Blockbuster is a fine example of the backlash such signs create.

I sincerely hope this matter can be resolved.

Sincerely,

Thx."

Click to expand...

Hi Mate.

You can pass this on to them as well. There are many friends in Australia who's right to defend one's self has been stripped away by our own government, and to whom I will be passing this on to. I can assure Toys 'R' Us and Babies 'R' Us stores we will also no longer be shopping at Toys 'R' Us and Babies 'R' Australian stores. Although firearms are generally banned here as is armed self defence of any kind, we the sporting shooters of Australia are dissapointed that in a country like the USA where it is legal to CC and OC for self defence, multinational stores like Toys 'R' Us and Babies 'R' Us, feel they can take away such fundamental rights at their own whim. Plus, I have a large family which has many children and grandchildren. They will also no longer shop there. Haz.

There ya go Haz, a new twist on 'Global Economy'. One change affects more than is realized...

-R

Alright Haz!

Fun when boycotts go international.

thx997303 said:

Whooo boy my friend.

There isn't any ONE supreme court decision saying the police have no duty to protect, rather there are many.

Try this link here.

http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html

Also this one.

http://www.endtimesreport.com/NO_AFFIRMATIVE_DUTY.htm

There's been quite a few cases referencing this.

Click to expand...

TM.

Not meaning to go off topic but most large stores such as Toys 'R' Us and Babies 'R' Us, Woolworths, Bunnings, and the like have signs posted at their doors and at checkouts stating, "We reserve the right to inspect all bags brought into the store larger than A 4 size." Every woman I have witnessed being asked to open their bags always comply although reluctantly. The many times when asked, "May I check your bag sir?" on going through the checkout or the main door I always reply, "No." I then politely state, "Do you suspect that I may have stolen something?" They usually reply, "No not realy but its store policy, I must ask you and or call security." I then politely respond with, It is my policy never to steal and never to open my private bags to anyone on demand except when asked by police. I am not a criminal, no one has reported seeing me shoplift anything here but, If you think I have stolen something please feel free to call security and while your at it also call the police and I will only then open my bag for the police to inspect."

So far they have never called security or the police and they usually respond with, "Thank you have a nice day." And I leave. It seems its all too much trouble for them to carry through with their "I will have to call security" threat.

Well, I got my canned response. I get the feeling they pretty much don't care.

Maybe they should post a different sign. I like the "No robberies" idea. Maybe "No burglaries" would be good too. Or how about "No bad people." I am shocked that a toy store, filled with kids, would allow BAD PEOPLE in.

paramedic70002 said:

I get the feeling they pretty much don't care.

Click to expand...

Then I don't care to frequent any store who can't respect my civil rights.

Here's my note to Ms. Albano:

Ms. Albano,

I am in receipt of the canned response to my inquiry regarding Toys R Us' new policy banning firearms from all stores. It is copied below, as is another email that I sent, which has had no reply. I hope you read through all my points.

Just so we're clear I will quote the canned response here.

"At Toys “R” Us, Inc., the safety and security of our customers and our employees is, and always has been, our highest priority. As a retailer that welcomes millions of kids and families into our stores across the country each year, we take our responsibility to create only the safest shopping environment very seriously. While we respect citizens’ rights to carry firearms in public areas according to certain state laws, our company policy prohibits customers from doing so in any of our stores out of an abundance of caution for the safety and protection of the children and families shopping with us."

It is painfully obvious that the safety and security of your customers and employees is actually of the lowest priority, you have a very unsafe shopping environment, and there is an abundance of callous disregard for safety and protection of children and families. Apparently your company prefers that any 'active shooter' who chooses a Toys R Us "Victim Disarmament Zone/Free Fire Area" as his target will have an opportunity to go about his business unobstructed by any customers who might have otherwise been able to put an end to the rampage. There may be some who are willing to die while cowering on the floor but there are many others who choose to defend themselves, and will not cross the threshold of any store which takes that ability away.

Since Toys R Us puts such faith in a sign and a policy, perhaps you should just post "NO KILLING / NO ROBBERY / NO STEALING / NO BAD PEOPLE" signs. That should take care of all your problems.

Toys R Us quickie fake sniper rifle





http://www.toysrus.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4365587&siteID=TnL5HPStwNw-8zFqjAxCw4VEZLVMFux5IQ

http://www.amazon.com/Krylon-Black-Spray-Decorator-Aerosol/dp/B0029PML10