Lansing Mall -- Asked to leave

I posted this in the OC Experience thread, but figured I'd make it's own thread -- so please excuse the duplicate.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I attended the seminar that didn't happen at the Lansing Gander Mountain today. Only the presenters, freak, myself, and my fiancee` (5 of us total) showed up. We've all seen the spiel before.

So we went to Fire Mountain to eat; the place was packed so we went across the road to the mall.

We walked in through Barnes and Noble at the Lansing Mall, through the mall and ended up at the food court. We passed two mall security right before we reached the food court. Warchild noticed the security double backing towards us in a pair. The encounter went as follows:

Security Guy: You guys aren't going to like this, but I'm going to have to ask you to leave. There's no weapons of any kind allowed in the mall.
Me: Since when? He and a friend (Venator) have been here while carrying several times and never asked to leave.
SG: Since the mall opened. There are signed posted on each of the end doors that says "no weapons of any kind."

Others in the group had commentary mixed in as well.

We all (5) said -- okay, thanks -- and left. I double checked the door we came in at Barnes and Noble -- no sign on THAT door.

At this point Jerry went home for a home cooked meal.

The remaining 4 proceeded across the street again and went into the Fazollis. We noted a Lansing Township PD car in the lot after we had parked. We went in, ordered, got a seat. LEOs said nothing to us. I don't even think they noticed. All of us got a funny look from one family of 5 (kids and parents). While we were eating another guy approached us and said:

Guy: Excuse me, but are you open carrying?
All Around: Yes
Guy: So you're not cops or anything?
All around: Nope
Guy: I think that's great (shaking hands with those at the end of the booth -- then lifting up his shirt to reveal his Springfield XD in a SERPA style holster that was concealed.
freak handed the guy a MOC tri-fold.

He asked if we get hassled much. We told him that it generally isn't a problem, but we just got kicked out of the mall. He asked if the cops bother us, he noticed the two LEOs that were there. We said it generally isn't a problem.


After eating and talking, we all wrapped up and went our separate ways.

About the Mall -- I guess they don't like people with pocket utility knives either? How about people who had just purchased baseball bats in the mall? I've never seen them pat anyone down or have metal detectors to see if anyone is concealing.

Here is the contact page for those who wish to start a mail bombing campaign.

Here is my letter:

Dear Sir or Ma'am,

I am a resident of the city of Lansing. I was recently at the Lansing Mall with 4 of my fellows, all of us were LEGALLY* openly carrying handguns, in holsters, on our hips. We stopped in to get some food at the food court.

Two of your security guards approached us and informed us the mall has a policy that doesn't allow any weapons. He also informed us this fact is posted on each of the "end" doors. We came in and left through the Barnes and Noble. We saw no such sign.

Michigan has over 250,000 concealed carry permit holders. I'd think, with a population like that, you'd hate to eliminate these potential customers -- especially in an economy like this AND where your own mall is struggling. I'm sure you know as well as I do, many of the store slots are vacant.

Also, I was curious, do you screen every customer for concealed weapons? How exactly do you enforce such a policy as, "No weapons allowed"? Do you prohibit customers who purchase baseball bats in the mall from carrying them unescorted out to their vehicles? Do you check people for pocket utility knives?

I often came to your mall as a place to have lunch during work. Now that I know your policy about "weapons", I will not be visiting anymore. I would think your mall would need every customer it could get to prevent deteriorating further into a ghost village. I will be spreading the news about your store amongst my friends and fellows. We'll be sure to stay clear of your mall and the stores in it. I'll write a few of your tenants also. I'm sure they'll be happy to know they are losing several valued customers.

I'd like to close by sharing a few example of businesses nation wide and locally that are friendly to customers open carrying in their stores:

* Walmart
* Starbucks
* IHOP
* McDonald's

I look forward to hearing back from you.

* See http://www.michiganopencarry.org for more information.

Click to expand...

It seems the webpage for submitting your letter is currently broken. NO wonder the mall is struggling...

ETA: It seems the contact us page is working now.

Mens' Warehouse

I often go to Mens' Warehouse in this mall, so I figured I'd let them know I wouldn't be back.

Dear Sir or Ma'am,

I am writing you to notify you about a concern I have about one of your leasing locations, the Lansing Mall in Lansing Michigan.

I will start by saying I visit your store at said mall several times a year. When I am in, I often buy several hundred dollars of apparel. I am a gun owner and I legally open carry my handgun in a holster almost everywhere I go. I do so for the defense protection of myself and those that I love. I have a CPL (Concealed Pistol License) with the State of Michigan and in addition, I practice regularly with my handgun.

All that being said, to say, I sadly will not be visiting the store at this location any more. I visited the Lansing Mall today to get food with 4 of my fellows, who were also carrying. We were approached by two Mall Security guards and told we would have to leave for openly carrying. We, of course, promptly left.

I had often visited the mall for the purpose of eating and shopping. I have written the mall management to explain I will not be back. I am writing you since you are a tenant of this mall to let you know I will no longer be visiting the store there, since the mall policy seems unfriendly towards me.

I'm also curious how do they stop those who choose to legally carry concealed in their mall? Do they feel the mall is more safer because they kick 5 people out who openly display their safely and legally possessed sidearms?

I've always been treated well at your store and I am saddened to inform you of my decision.

I wish you the best of luck in business.

Click to expand...

ETA: I sent a similar message to Sbarro's & Chipotle -- both places I frequent.

I wonder if security has kicked people out for wearing turbans and hijabs as well.

Or maybe for being a certain race. Cause, you know, since we're going to generalize and stereotype, we might as well go there.

I'd call the UCLA to be honest and see if they'll do something about this. This kind of sh!t has to stop. Gun owners are law abiding citizens. Those that have CPL's can sneeze wrong and lose their license. We're some of the most upstanding lawful citizens this state has and don't deserve to be treated this way. Legally, again, I don't even think they can do this, so I'd contact the security company directly or whoever owns the mall and go from there. If you can't ban certain races, ethnic dress, etc. you shouldn't be able to ban guns. Supreme Court Judge Napolitano from New Jersey also seems to think so too. Again, pay close attention at the 01:00 mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP1Wgkh5MeE

malignity said:

I'd call the UCLA to be honest and see if they'll do something about this.

Click to expand...

You mean the ACLU?

Damn. I know we are a small number of people, for now, but I never understood why someone would turn away money, from a person who is doing nothing wrong, illegal, or disruptive.

That Gander Mountain has a problem at the Gun Counter. They are NOT in any way promoting the seminars. That is the 2nd poorly attended one in that location.

TheQ said:

You mean the ACLU?

Click to expand...

ROFL.

UCLA, ACLU, whatever. Note to self: don't post five minutes after waking up from a nap. You may not QUITE be awake yet.

autosurgeon said:

That is the 2nd poorly attended one in that location.

Click to expand...

If it makes you feel any better, our second seminar on 11/6 at the GM over here only had two people.

as far as a law suit because your rights were violated, i don't think that will fly.

religion, sex, race, etc are protected by law from discrimination. wearing yellow shirts, carrying firearms, having blue hair, pierced ears etc are not protected by law from discrimination.

lapeer20m said:

as far as a law suit because your rights were violated, i don't think that will fly.

religion, sex, race, etc are protected by law from discrimination. wearing yellow shirts, carrying firearms, having blue hair, pierced ears etc are not protected by law from discrimination.

Click to expand...

You sure about that? The Supreme Court Justice in the video seems to think otherwise. I've never seen anyone ban turbans, hijabs, or any other style dress anywhere. I don't mean to argue, but I don't think they legally can is what I'm saying. If they could, we would heve seen it after 9/11.

malignity said:

If it makes you feel any better, our second seminar on 11/6 at the GM over here only had two people.

Click to expand...

Could be the wow factor is wearing off...

The 15-20 people at the morning seminar on 11/6 was a good turnout. 4 MOC were memberships were paid for too. Looks like the 1 seminar was all that was needed that day. The problem seems to be more with Lansing than anything else.

Yep. I was VERY impressed with the 11am seminar, like you said, 15-20 people.

The 1pm one had I think 2-3. (lol)

We did a brief overview, did questions and went to get some chow immediately after. Anyone have any ideas on what the problems are at the Lansing store?

it's probably like the smoking ban (which i am all for by the way). they feel discriminated against even tho it is a choice and they want to be lumped in with people with diseases. the mall is shutting up the very few super-minority complainers that claim they are the majority. like we say - they are alienating our group and the complainers feel the need to exaggerate their numbers to sway the mall's decision. for every complainer there are hundreds there that don't mind and are not threatened.
someone mentioned the over 250,000 CPL holders. i was writing an open letter to a local paper here but the figure i had was over 600,000. don't know where i got that number. probably should put in a little fact homework.

kryptonian said:

it's probably like the smoking ban (which i am all for by the way). they feel discriminated against even tho it is a choice and they want to be lumped in with people with diseases. the mall is shutting up the very few super-minority complainers that claim they are the majority. like we say - they are alienating our group and the complainers feel the need to exaggerate their numbers to sway the mall's decision. for every complainer there are hundreds there that don't mind and are not threatened.
someone mentioned the over 250,000 CPL holders. i was writing an open letter to a local paper here but the figure i had was over 600,000. don't know where i got that number. probably should put in a little fact homework.

Click to expand...

That's not exactly the point. As with many laws, the general public doesn't understand / know what the law entails. If the general populous would "read" these laws; they may take more offense to what they really represent, false sense of our government "caring" about our health.

The smoking ban is not against the people who smoke. I do smoke and this bill doesn't directly effect me. It is directed towards the business community as a whole.
I have read the law and here are the condensed portions that you may/may not take offense to as the reality of what they did sets in.

The ban prohibits "public" access businesses to allow smoking.
The ban is enforced by the health department...NOT law enforcement.
If I am caught smoking in a business, the only thing that can happen is refusing
to leave when asked; and then it's only a trespass charge...similar to OC.

The business on the other hand can have their licenses revoked by the health dept. for allowing it to happen and their only recourse is the authority to sue me in civil court for damages.

What this law has done, as with many others; the government regulation of what a private business owner can do with his business and property. This law effectively put many businesses "out of business" with this ban. Granted many of the whole were "bars, gentleman's clubs and the like. But it doesn't matter what kind of business it WAS... These people are having their rights removed by a supposed "concern" by our government to "care" about the health of the populace.

If it were their true concern, do you not think they would concentrate more on putting the tobacco industry out of business?

It's my personal choice to smoke. It should be the business owner's choice to allow me to smoke; not the damn government intrusions into our freedoms.

rant off.... JMO

WARCHILD said:

The smoking ban is not against the people who smoke. I do smoke and this bill doesn't directly effect me. It is directed towards the business community as a whole.
I have read the law and here are the condensed portions that you may/may not take offense to as the reality of what they did sets in.

Click to expand...

As a non-smoking Libertarian, I too am against the ban. Do I like clean air when I go out to eat? You bet yeah! As much as the next guy! Do I think we should use the force of government to make this happen? HELL NO!

I can choose to eat somewhere that doesn't allow smoking already (like IHOP) or a place where the filtration system they have eliminates the problem for me. It's about personal choice -- for the individual AND the business.

If a business has a horribly smokey environment and if, like me, many others won't eat there because of it then that business will go out of business. This is the way of the free market. I wish more people would understand. :banghead::banghead:

I will post this before I am asked to cite to authority.
Make sure you "read" the law and not "read" or assume what is not there.

Penalties/ Enforcement. The no-smoking provisions of Part 126 and 129 would be enforced by the Department of Community Health, and DCH could authorize local health departments to carry out the enforcement. Violations would be subject to a civil fine of up to $100 for a first violation and up to $500 for a second or subsequent violation (This is current law). A person making a false statement on an affidavit would be guilty of perjury. The health code also allows individuals and entities alleging violations to bring civil actions for appropriate injunctive relief.
Also, as now, violations of no-smoking provisions could result in an order to cease food service operations, and compliance and non-compliance could be used a criteria by the Department of Agriculture in denying, suspending, limiting, or revoking a license issued under the Food Law. (DCH and local health departments would have to notify the Department of Agriculture of noncompliance with smoking laws.)

kryptonian said:

it's probably like the smoking ban (which i am all for by the way). they feel discriminated against even tho it is a choice and they want to be lumped in with people with diseases. the mall is shutting up the very few super-minority complainers that claim they are the majority. like we say - they are alienating our group and the complainers feel the need to exaggerate their numbers to sway the mall's decision. for every complainer there are hundreds there that don't mind and are not threatened.
someone mentioned the over 250,000 CPL holders. i was writing an open letter to a local paper here but the figure i had was over 600,000. don't know where i got that number. probably should put in a little fact homework.

Click to expand...

I don't think we should be a protected class. I don't think any of the following should be a protected class either.

• Smokers
• Race/Color/National Origin (Black, red, yellow, green, purple, orange, whatever)
• Sexual Choice (Gay, Lesbian, Bi, BDSM -- Heck, I fall into that too)
• Gender/Sex
• Age
• Familial Status
• Disability
• Veteran
• Genetic Information

Damn! I guess that means all of the protected classes!. They all involve telling a private business what they can and cannot do with their business! This is wrong!

Come on folks, seriously, what are we going to claim? Gun toting is in our genes? Please!

I know this isn't a popular opinion, especially if you are a protected class member. Heck, the opinion may offend some people. I'm sorry, deal with it.

* For the record, I'm not a racist, bi/gay hater, misogynist/misandrist, anti-old/young person, anti-handicap/special need, anti-veteran, nor anti-anything! I think we should just all be the same and we definately shouldn't have the government trying to force us to be the same!

TheQ said:

As a non-smoking Libertarian, I too am against the ban. Do I like clean air when I go out to eat? You bet yeah! As much as the next guy! Do I think we should use the force of government to make this happen? HELL NO!

I can choose to eat somewhere that doesn't allow smoking already (like IHOP) or a place where the filtration system they have eliminates the problem for me. It's about personal choice -- for the individual AND the business.

If a business has a horribly smokey environment and if, like me, many others won't eat there because of it then that business will go out of business. This is the way of the free market. I wish more people would understand. :banghead::banghead:

Click to expand...

As a non-smoking libertarian myself, I agree with you 100%!

Thanks guys, it's refreshing to see people that recognize some laws for what they truly are...control and suppression of our rights and liberties. This law was never about smoking or health risks to the "public".

BTW: I didn't start this as a pro smoker...anti smoker discussion. It's about suppression of liberty and freedom of choice.

JMO