Asked to cover up by a customer, outside of a Hooters.

What about you being armed in the regular portion of the restaurant and want to consume a beer with dinner?

Perfectly fine...

You could OC in the regular part of a restruant, drink yourself to an oblivion and be totally legal (assuming you are not driving home).

Personally, when I OC and go out to dinner I refrain from drinking. However, if I am CC I will have a glass of wine with dinner.

J_Douglass said:

What about you being armed in the regular portion of the restaurant and want to consume a beer with dinner?

Click to expand...

J_Douglass said:

What about you being armed in the regular portion of the restaurant and want to consume a beer with dinner?

Click to expand...

Washington State follows British legal tradition, which states that anything that is not proscribed as unlawful is lawful. IMHO, alcohol and guns don't mix but there is no law against it.

I'm looking up the RCW that covers a CPL and being above the legal limit while carrying. While it takes a judge to do you can lose your CPL.

Rcw 9.41.098

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.098

Do you mean this one:

(1) The superior courts and the courts of limited jurisdiction of the state may order forfeiture of a firearm which is proven to be:


(e) In the possession of a person who is in any place in which a concealed pistol license is required, and who is under the influence of any drug or under the influence of intoxicating liquor, as defined in chapter 46.61 RCW;

Click to expand...

Since my CPL is not required, I doubt that they could confiscate my firearm.

M1Gunr said:

Washington State follows British legal tradition, which states that anything that is not proscribed as unlawful is lawful. IMHO, alcohol and guns don't mix but there is no law against it.

I'm looking up the RCW that covers a CPL and being above the legal limit while carrying. While it takes a judge to do you can lose your CPL.

Click to expand...

CW 9.41.098(1)(d) which reads as follows:
"(1) The superior courts and the courts of limited jurisdiction of the state may order forfeiture of a firearm which is proven to be:
"(d) Found concealed on a person who is in any place in which a concealed pistol license is required, and who is under the influence of any drug or under the influence of intoxicating liquor, having 0.10 percent or more by weight of alcohol in his blood, as shown by chemical analysis of his breath, blood, or other bodily substance;

Personally I see that RCW 9.41.270 could also come into play especially if that person were Open Carrying. See section (1)
(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.



Ken Eikenberry, The Attorney General wrote on November 16, 1984, AGO 1984 No. 27 in regard to a letter by Al Williams, State Senator, 32nd District. The Senator asked several questions relating to local gun control. You can read the letter and response here: http://www.atg.wa.gov/AGOOpinions/opinion.aspx?section=archive&id=7660

The AG's answers:
(1) The validity of a local ordinance making it either a criminal or civil offense to be in possession of a firearm while under the influence of alcohol or other drugs will not turn on RCW 9.41.290, in the sense that such a local ordinance is, or is not, thereby statutorily preempted; instead, it will depend upon the effect which a particular ordinance has on constitutionally-protected rights.

(2) A local ordinance providing for the mandatory forfeiture of a firearm in the possession of one who is intoxicated would be within the purview of RCW 9.41.290 and, therefore, would be required to be consistent with its state statutory counterpart (RCW 9.41.098) in order to be legally effective.

Boy, you guys aren't much fun

Not one crack about this being the first time someone has ever been asked to cover up at a Hooters? (My apologies if there was one and I missed it.)

My $.02 - - if it's not this woman's place of employment and not her property then it's none of her business. Politely ignoring her would be my response.

M1Gunr said:

Hooters Corp Policy is anti CC & OC.
This thread: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?64707-Asked-to-leave-Hooters-in-Newport-News/page3

<snip>
In areas where concealed weapons are allowed, we do post a sign that says firearms and other weapons are not permitted on the premises. Thankfully, it is a choice we have the freedom to make. We respect those customers who decide not to patronize our business because of this decision.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. If it wasn't clear from my original post, I wasn't even inside the building. I stayed in the parking lot talking to friends the whole time.

Mainsail said:

Was it a horizontal or vertical style shoulder holster? Some people get nervous when they can see down the barrel as is often the case with a horizontal holster.

Nevertheless, I think you should have stayed.

Click to expand...

It is a horizontal style shoulder holster. I don't think it was the barrel pointing at anyone that made them nervous. I believe that all the nervous people were actually inside the building while I was outside. I think it was that one dumb girl who got everyone else to support her (IF there is an "everyone else" to speak of). I had a couple people say "nice carry" and a few others asked about my gun.

I didn't make too much of a fuss about leaving because I was about to leave anyways. It still bugs me though. I ride with that group often, but it seems I should not finish the ride at Hooter's with them. I could press the issue, continue to OC at the Hooter's parking lot, and eventually have management kick me out in front of everyone.

NavyLT said:

State law does not protect our rights to carry on private property. If corporate office has a policy to follow state law, and a store manager asks you to leave because you are carrying a firearm, and threatens you with trespassing if you don't leave... then state law has been followed.

Click to expand...

I understand that. When I said "follow state law", I used that as shorthand to mean, "they allow all forms of carrying that are within the law of the state".

If the policy is to allow all forms of carrying that are within the law of the state, and the manager asks me to leave, I would inform him that he is going against the corporate policy and if he insists that I leave, I would leave. After that, I would follow up with corporate.

I always liked the simple and pointed answer to this question. "No"

So, how 'bout this?

Looking at the Federal Way OC training bulletin, it references FW City Code 6-138...
The language there seems a bit more obtuse...to include anywhere that alcohol is served, and makes no reference to signage as described.

jt

gogodawgs said:

Only the part of an establishment that is 21 and over. You will see this sign as the WSLCB says it is required.

Click to expand...

I like a nice approach myself, but some people don't give up. Maybe you should just act as appalled and offended as her that she is not OCing. That makes about as much sense as her getting all worked up at you OCing. Your position should have as much weight as hers.

Son_of_Perdition said:

I like a nice approach myself, but some people don't give up. Maybe you should just act as appalled and offended as her that she is not OCing. That makes about as much sense as her getting all worked up at you OCing. Your position should have as much weight as hers.

Click to expand...

Might wanna re-evaluate the your riding group. Looks like they may be singling you out. If the gal that was complaining is there on all the rides, then that will force you to have to make some choices.

i rode this weekend too, mostly Casual carry, but OC with my group in the campground,
nobody said anything, until one by one over the weekend each of my mates finally asked what kind?, what caliber?.

the thing that bothered about the OPs story is that this didnt happen At hooters!
it happened in the parking lot, and had nothing to do with the business.
the complainer wasnt really One of your group, but along with them?
it struck me that Bikers, as freedom loving, rights demanding, individualists
would bother to try to deny anybody elses rights.

It's because of 40 years of serial misinformation by the media, NRA and others that 'concealed is concealed'... I call hogwash!
They are all brainwashed!

1245A Defender said:

i rode this weekend too, mostly Casual carry, but OC with my group in the campground,
nobody said anything, until one by one over the weekend each of my mates finally asked what kind?, what caliber?.

the thing that bothered about the OPs story is that this didnt happen At hooters!
it happened in the parking lot, and had nothing to do with the business.
the complainer wasnt really One of your group, but along with them?
it struck me that Bikers, as freedom loving, rights demanding, individualists
would bother to try to deny anybody elses rights.

Click to expand...

Next time just pull out a water gun, give it to the chick, and then say,"At least my gun is in a holster."

gogodawgs said:

Only the part of an establishment that is 21 and over. You will see this sign as the WSLCB says it is required.

Click to expand...

I can bring my kids into the WA State liquor store. So that angle is out. However, they make a majority of their money on alcohol. So that angle works.

amzbrady said:

Might wanna re-evaluate the your riding group. Looks like they may be singling you out...

Click to expand...

There were many groups that ended up at Hooter's. I was with another group. It's not as if I ride with the same group that was complaining about me.

1245A Defender said:

...it struck me that Bikers, as freedom loving, rights demanding, individualists
would bother to try to deny anybody elses rights.

Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts too.

The girl who complained (at least the one that I know of) is not a rider herself. She just came to the Hooter's later, probably in a car. She has to weigh at least 200 pounds. I'm sure she does not have a biker mentality (i.e. supporting individual rights and responsibilities).

What is the concensus here? Should I continue to OC, ending up at the Hooter's parking lot, and proceed as normal until the management asks me to leave?

ShooterMcGavin said:

What is the concensus here? Should I continue to OC, ending up at the Hooter's parking lot, and proceed as normal until the management asks me to leave?

Click to expand...

You got it! The worst that could happen is management asks you to leave.

Leatherneck said:

I can bring my kids into the WA State liquor store. So that angle is out. However, they make a majority of their money on alcohol. So that angle works.

Click to expand...

The law does not mention "places that sell alcohol" or places that "make their money from alcohol" it says:
"That portion of an establishment classified by the state liquor control board as off-limits to persons under twenty-one years of age"
RCW 9.41.300 (1) (d)
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300

I dont know the laws about taking minors into a liquor store, but if its legal to bring your kid then its legal to bring your gun. At least as far as 9.41.300 is concerned.

There's a good chance that you wont need to worry about it soon, as there will be a voters initiative on the ballot this year to shutdown the state controlled liquor store monopoly.