Robert Haack Diamonds responds to their position...

rcav8r · Jun 23, 2011

Meh

Retail diamond stores have some of the biggest markups besides furniture. If you wanna shop for diamonds, find a diamond broker or a high end pawn shop. Diamonds are NOT an "investment" BTW.

wild boar · Jun 23, 2011

Who is this guy anyway?

I don't see where anything he had said has done either good, or bad for open carry. W.A.V.E. must have been busy if they had to go find this guy

:banghead:

rcawdor57 · Jun 23, 2011

Immunity Is Only For "Concealed" Weapons.....Not Open Carry...

Snip: (b) A person that does not prohibit an individual from
carrying a concealed weapon on property that the person
owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising
from its decision.
(c) An employer that does not prohibit one or more
employees from carrying a concealed weapon under sub.
(15m) is immune from any liability arising from its decision.

rimmer · Jun 23, 2011

So, If you post that no guns are allowed in a business, can you as the owner {Poster} still have a gun on the premises? Then if you use it for SD your not covered by the liability in the new law?
oscar

MKEgal · Jun 23, 2011

Interceptor_Knight said:
If he does not allow firearms in the store, there is no reason to have immunity from something which could occur if he were to allow firearms in the store.

Mark this day on the calendar: IK & I agree on somthing. :shocker:
You've hit the nail on the head, though - since his signs will keep out guns, why would he need immunity from anything that a gun might do in his store?

turbojohn41 said:
That clown just went on TV and invited himself to be robbed.

+1000

Haack on FB said:
just make sure you shop around before you buy your diamond! I know we can save you money on an "apple to apple" basis when you shop around.

:banghead:
This is a very common mistake.
People think they can post "no (legal) guns" signs, & carriers will just leave them in the car but spend money there anyway.
I might leave it in the car long enough to go in & have a chat w/ the manager & hand her a "no guns = no money" card, but I'm certainly not spending any money there.

oak1971 · Jun 23, 2011

Robert Hack can eat my sack.:cuss:

vermonter · Jun 23, 2011

Who goes into his store anyway?? Young ghetto males looking to buy bling, thats who... I am sure they will pay attention to his signs! He is just worried that a law abiding citizen may bust-a-cap if one of homies tek 9's falls out of his sagging pants. LOL

davegran · Jun 24, 2011

Concealed Carry Right versus Economics 101

Hey, we need to honor his rights, also. Let's remain respectful as we take our business elsewhere....

bigdaddy1 · Jun 24, 2011

On his facebook page he keeps comparing us to the union protesters boycotting businesses that supported Walker.

roberthaackdiamonds · Jun 24, 2011

Hi,

I have opened up our facebook page (robert haack diamonds) to discuss this issue of us being "black listed."

Keep in mind that my wife carries and has been shot at 3 times. My goldsmith will be a concealed weapon carrier, have plenty of family in the military, my brother shoots his gun about 5 times a week - well, he actually owns about 20 guns, etc.

I am ok with the law, and I do support it. However, my concern for my store is this. A bad guy comes in (guys) to our store, and causes an altercation. Our store has security in place to handle certain situations. Now, if you were in the store, with your concealed weapon, you might feel inclined to help out, which is great, except that could escalate the situation to where we can't defuse it. Now, if you didn't have your weapon, the situation never would have been escalated.

I do understand too, that expert gun owners are going to get their permits. But, like my wife says, you never know how you are going to react until the situation arises. I don't want our store to be in that situation.

I am listening and keeping an open mind, and if you want, you can discuss on our facebook page, where you will get more viewers of the public. I might have special hours for concealed weapons, and special hours for non concealed. I think that is a good compromise.

I hope we all can get along.

Bret

apjonas · Jun 24, 2011

Gee

what a rational, reasonable and calmly stated position. I therefore predict that Mr. Bret will be ruthlessly savaged by some of the more "purist" readers who think all truths can fit on a bumpersticker. Please prove me wrong.

Flipper · Jun 24, 2011

Why don't you instead post a sign informing that the store has armed security and ask the customer to inform the store's security if they are are armed.

Thank you for your willingness to come into the lions' den. (Actually there very good people here that strongly believe in their right to defend their families and themselves.)

MKEgal · Jun 24, 2011

Jonas, most of the discussion on FB has been fairly civil. I see no reason that won't continue here, esp. since Mr. Eulberg is trying to find a workable solution.
People who are rude will influence him to post his store.
People who can present calm, reasoned arguments about why what he's proposing is a bad idea (or at least, why it's not going to be good) have a better chance of persuading him to our pont of view.

Bret said:
to discuss this issue of us being "black listed."

On the FB page, there was reference to union / anti-union boycotts...
This isn't politically motivated. We're not boycotting you.
You announced a policy that says we shouldn't come in your store.
That's completely within your private property rights.
We spread the word about your policy.

I think you would be happy about having less potential conflict with someone who hadn't heard of the policy, yet tried to come to you to shop.
(Even if I didn't carry, or wasn't carrying at the time, I wouldn't go in a store that discriminates, but that's just my choice of where to spend my money.)

My goldsmith will be a concealed weapon carrier

Employees could carry concealed at work now, w/ your permission.
Could carry openly at work now unless you prohibit it.

that could escalate the situation to where we can't defuse it.
Now, if you didn't have your weapon, the situation never would have been escalated.

If your armed guards are handling the situation, my life probably isn't in danger from an armed robber & neither is anyone else, so why would I draw?
I might try to head for the back room, though...

I might have special hours for concealed weapons, and special hours for non concealed.

I appreciate that you're trying to find a compromise, but this feels like having separate water fountains & lunch counters.
(No, I'm not black, nor am I old enough to have lived through the black civil rights movement.)

Flipper said:
Why don't you instead post a sign informing that the store has armed security and ask the customer to inform the store's security if they are are armed.

To what purpose? So they know who to tell "don't shoot!" if something happens?
I don't understand why this would benefit anyone. Try to enlighten me, please.

Brass Magnet · Jun 24, 2011

apjonas said:
what a rational, reasonable and calmly stated position. I therefore predict that Mr. Bret will be ruthlessly savaged by some of the more "purist" readers who think all truths can fit on a bumpersticker. Please prove me wrong.

Left my tourches and pitchforks at home again darn it.....

Bret,
It's certainly your prerogative to set whatever policy you'd like on your private property. It's also the prerogative of those who disagree with you to adopt their own stance which may involve "black-listing" your business based on the policy decisions you may make.

I believe the hypothetical situation you bring up has an extremely low probability of happening. If a carrier has too little training the more likely situation would be for them to freeze up and do nothing. If a carrier is well-trained they should know not to pull their weapon unless there is imminent danger of great bodily harm or death, in which case your policy goes out the window anyway; after all, if the bad guy starts shooting, the situtation is already escalated. If I'm carrying, saving my butt is what's important to me, not protecting your jewels. I'm personally going to find cover or get my behind out of the store.

The other problem with your stance is that most people aren't even worried about ever having to use their weapon in your store. They are worried about going to and from your store. If you disarm them by policy they are unprotected on their way to your store and; more importantly, unprotected after buying something from you that a lot of criminals would love to have. You aren't only disarming them in your store but on the way back to their car, or the bus, or even all the way home if they walked.

Lastly,
If you aren't already aware, the lawmakers put a carrot in the legislation for business owners who do decide to allow CCW on their property. They will be immune from civil liability as a result of their choice to do so. Businesses that do not allow it would not be immune.

Once again, it's your right to disallow carry. Just as allowing it has consequences, so does not allowing it. I firmly believe that allowing it has fewer consequences.

RR_Broccoli · Jun 24, 2011

My personal first response to an altercation I am not involved in is to back way off if not outright leave, maybe record audio or video if I can find a safe place to do that.

I think the uninvolved bystander making things worse is unlikely.

I just want to point out here, that not posting a sign provides immunity from liability for the decision. (page 8 on the summary document linked in my sig)

Basically, say something DOES happen and a 3rd party customer shoots a robber, the robber or his/her family cannot turn around and sue the store (the deep pockets in the situation) for wrongful death.

Posting a sign, and having someone enter the store with a concealed weapon, and having the same scenario occur may have more liability attached to it than not posting a sign.

The sign also sort of implies you were intending to adequately police if people came in armed or not, we know this is ridiculous, but crazier stuff along the "you should have done X" comes up all the time in civil suits.

Obviously, check with your lawyer on the interpretation.

Basically it seems like "something might happen" is just a way of expressing unease with the public having guns and in the store doing business. The thing is, being uneasy about something doesn't change the probabilities, and I am going to guess that over time the types and frequencies of crimes will change due to concealed weapons in WI. Where "break in at night when nobody is there" becomes a better choice than "smash and grab cuz the lady behind the counter cant do anything" for those who will be trying to victimize others.

Flipper · Jun 24, 2011

MKEgal said:
RE: Informing store security if armed

To what purpose? So they know who to tell "don't shoot!" if something happens?
I don't understand why this would benefit anyone. Try to enlighten me, please.

Situation:

Armed staff, likely no place to hide or run.

Why inform them if armed?

So they don't shoot me in case of an issue occurring where I had to expose my firearm to protect myself or my family. I don't care about the store staff or other customers. Sorry if this sounds self-centered, but I carry for SELF-defense.

oliverclotheshoff · Jun 24, 2011

no guns= no money i will find a diamond elsewhere

Badger Johnson · Jun 24, 2011

Brass Magnet said:
Left my tourches and pitchforks at home again darn it.....

Bret,
It's certainly your prerogative to set whatever policy you'd like on your private property. It's also the prerogative of those who disagree with you to adopt their own stance which may involve "black-listing" your business based on the policy decisions you may make.

I believe the hypothetical situation you bring up has an extremely low probability of happening. If a carrier has too little training the more likely situation would be for them to freeze up and do nothing. If a carrier is well-trained they should know not to pull their weapon unless there is imminent danger of great bodily harm or death, in which case your policy goes out the window anyway; after all, if the bad guy starts shooting, the situtation is already escalated. If I'm carrying, saving my butt is what's important to me, not protecting your jewels. I'm personally going to find cover or get my behind out of the store.

The other problem with your stance is that most people aren't even worried about ever having to use their weapon in your store. They are worried about going to and from your store. If you disarm them by policy they are unprotected on their way to your store and; more importantly, unprotected after buying something from you that a lot of criminals would love to have. You aren't only disarming them in your store but on the way back to their car, or the bus, or even all the way home if they walked.

Lastly,
If you aren't already aware, the lawmakers put a carrot in the legislation for business owners who do decide to allow CCW on their property. They will be immune from civil liability as a result of their choice to do so. Businesses that do not allow it would not be immune.

Once again, it's your right to disallow carry. Just as allowing it has consequences, so does not allowing it. I firmly believe that allowing it has fewer consequences.

+100

That's just it. He's envisioning three OC-ers or CC-ers in the store and a lethal cross-fire taking place. Considering that it's -very rare- that an armed person might be in the store when a BG comes in, and BGs typically wait until there are no customers to get in the way, his 'scenario' is just a fantasy which isn't going to happen.

I don't like the idea of having to ID to store security. It's none of their business. Otherwise, great response.

Brass Magnet · Jun 24, 2011

Badger Johnson said:
I don't like the idea of having to ID to store security. It's none of their business. Otherwise, great response.

Just to clarify, that was flipper; not me.

MKEgal · Jun 24, 2011

Brass Magnet said:
If I'm carrying, saving my butt is what's important to me, not protecting your jewels.
I'm personally going to find cover or get my behind out of the store.

Can't... hold... back...
You protect your jewels, he can protect his?

(In the interest of public safety, please do not leave straight lines and double entendres lying around where people might trip over them.)

But seriously, folks...
I think we all agree the store is allowed to post, and we would be breaking the law if we entered the store.
And even in the interview on Ch. 12, he admitted that a sign won't stop criminals.
Sounds pretty rational, & from his other comments he's not against guns, or armed citizens, or self-defense. (Though there was that quote about "normal people".

)

Arguments Bret made for posting:
An armed citizen might escalate a situation that might have turned out OK if the armed store security guards had been allowed to handle it themselves.
He doesn't want customers having guns during price negotiations. (See this news story*.)

Arguments we've made against posting:
Loss of customers, income, reputation.
Lawfully armed citizens are good people.
Unlikely there will be a carrier there when a robber commits his crime.
Possible customers will be attacked in parking lot or to/from store.
Store is immune from liability if it does NOT post.
Posting a sign tells criminals where they're less likely to meet resistance.
OC deters crime. (Kennesaw Waffle House)
If the armed security guards are handling the situation, a citizen won't need to draw.

(*Which also says "he’s considering allowing open carry during half of his business hours".)

Robert Haack Diamonds responds to their position...

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member