Ejected from Cabela's for open-carrying

[Bubbajms]

You might be a bit drowsy. Society, in general, EXPECTS an LEO to be armed. Do you not realize this? Really? It has nothing to do with what you think is right or wrong, or what is written down in some statute. People expect an LEO to have a gun, much the same as you would expect to see a stethoscope around a doctor's neck. It's not that the LEO has more of a right to carry....it's that his/her position in society requires that he/she carry.

Besides, I know quite a few LEO's, and none of them would even think of open carrying off-duty, so this whole argument is moot anyway. The few rookies who might want to strap their badge and gun on and go strutting around town would be quickly smacked with a healthy dose of common sense about "staying under the radar" by the veteran officers.

Right, I got that part.. I know that most off-the-clock LEO's carry concealed. Some are more deliberate than others, but most (who carry off the clock, and I know a few that don't carry off-the-clock at all) try to cover up, at least a little bit. Maybe just a jacket over their OWB holster, which is still pretty easy to see. What I don't understand is why it would be okay for a LEO to carry IWB or OWB in the store, but why law-abiding-non-LEO Scutter can't..

"Hey, are you a doctor??"

"No, but I've been trained to use this stethoscope to take blood pressure.."

"Well, I'm sorry.. you're going to have to leave.. we don't let non-doctors carry stethoscopes.."

THAT'S where I'm confused. On-the-clock LEOs, in uniform, are easy to spot. Off-the-clock, they look like everybody else. If someone complained to the manager about someone with a firearm, why should it be any different to say to the complainer "Oh, don't worry, he's an off-duty LEO" rather than "Oh, don't worry, he's a legal firearm owner with a permit issued by the state"..

If we're at the airport, an on-the-clock LEO can probably get through the metal detectors with their duty belt in place. An off-the-clock LEO can't do the same. If the rule is no firearms, then why should an off-duty-LEO get a pass while citizen Joe doesn't??

 

[NWI40cal]

Well, I guess the question is, have other's open carried there without incident? Did they just not like the cut of Scudder's jib and singled him out? Or are others regularly asked to leave? If it is a blanket policy of ejecting OC'ers, then yeah, they need to change their sign if it indeed says "we love to see your gun displayed, please open carry in our store".

Yes, I have had both experiences. Ive been asked to check it in and such and hassled, and I have been told to have a good time shopping. I OC.

Just as a side-note, I tried to google the Cabela's gun policy, and found this thread on a different site:

Cabela's store policy - Indiana - Stories From The States - OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum

Seems Hammond Cabelas has long been a place where OC'ers wanna test the limits of what they can get away with, and dance around with staff. To be honest, they are probably getting pretty sick of it, and ready to jump on anyone they see with a displayed firearm. Just because you are polite and kind doesn't mean the last ten guys they threw out of the store were. You are all gonna get lumped in the same Kook Bucket together.

We don't test the limits, we don't like to dance with the staff. Well, me personally. I go there to shop, not to OC. Sorry, but your "to be honest..." statement is a little off, at least to me. They are getting sick and tired of people going in there and knowing the policies and laws better than they do, and showing it when challenged by the sheeple employees.

How hard is it to tell your employees, We SELL guns, its legal to CARRY guns. HOWEVER they want. Really, it seems kind of easy. Or, hey, they could put out a MEMO if they don't want to call all of thier employees to one spot in the store, thus making ASSet protection go bonkers.

 

[Agent 007]

Right, I got that part.. I know that most off-the-clock LEO's carry concealed. Some are more deliberate than others, but most (who carry off the clock, and I know a few that don't carry off-the-clock at all) try to cover up, at least a little bit. Maybe just a jacket over their OWB holster, which is still pretty easy to see. What I don't understand is why it would be okay for a LEO to carry IWB or OWB in the store, but why law-abiding-non-LEO Scutter can't..

"Hey, are you a doctor??"

"No, but I've been trained to use this stethoscope to take blood pressure.."

"Well, I'm sorry.. you're going to have to leave.. we don't let non-doctors carry stethoscopes.."

THAT'S where I'm confused. On-the-clock LEOs, in uniform, are easy to spot. Off-the-clock, they look like everybody else. If someone complained to the manager about someone with a firearm, why should it be any different to say to the complainer "Oh, don't worry, he's an off-duty LEO" rather than "Oh, don't worry, he's a legal firearm owner with a permit issued by the state"..

If we're at the airport, an on-the-clock LEO can probably get through the metal detectors with their duty belt in place. An off-the-clock LEO can't do the same. If the rule is no firearms, then why should an off-duty-LEO get a pass while citizen Joe doesn't??

I'm not saying that it's right, but the LEO gets a pass because he/she is a recognized government authority figure, expected to be armed. Most of these manager types are actually GLAD to have a police officer in the store. It has nothing to do with the firearm itself.....it is the whole idea of having a police officer present. The manager automatically trusts the LEO (deserved or not, that's an argument for another thread). The armed LEO is generally somewhat of a known quantity in society. I know, I know....cops are people too, and they have done stupid things with firearms. But IN GENERAL, in order for an orderly society to work, there will be at least a modicum of initial trust from the public towards LEOs carrying weapons as part of their duty.

When Joe Citizen walks in carrying his weapon, that trust is not automatically there. (Again, I'm not saying that it SHOULDN'T be there. I'm talking about the way things are, not the way they should be in a perfect world.) You must remember that open carry is pretty rare, almost non-existent in certain places, even though it's legal. That's why the first question is, "Are you an LEO?" Who is this guy? Why does he have a gun? People are bombarded with stories on the news about gun toting loonies taking out people at malls, restaurants, etc. Interpersonal violence is the universal human phobia. (Thank you, Col. Grossman! )

Until a person determines for themselves that another armed person is not a threat, there is going to be some uneasiness about the presence of a weapon in a setting that usually doesn't call for it. A pistol carried openly has only one purpose, and that is to kill. The killing may be entirely justifiable and necessary, in defense of innocent life. It is the taking of a human life, nonetheless. Not something to be considered lightly. An openly carried pistol brings that issue to the forefront....the suggestion that there may be violence. Many people are not comfortable thinking about that; thus the drama over openly carried pistols. People want to feel safe when they are out and about. Open carry by those other than recognized authority rattles the sheep.

I'm not saying that an LEO has more of a right to carry a firearm than a non-LEO. I AM trying to convey why people who are not familiar with firearms and responsibility for personal security might be apprehensive about the unknown quantity of the armed citizen. Urban areas are worse about this. Even in Cabela's, where you would think that they would be familiar with local firearms laws, you're going to have employees and customers who are not accustomed to seeing people going about armed.

 

[esrice]

I have personally never met Scutter but he appears to be a intelligent and reasonable guy so I don't "assume" it is about a "bruised ego" as you put it.

I have. Your assumptions (and non-assumption) are correct.

 

[JR50]

I called Cabelas (219) 845-9040 and left a voice mail for 'Ken', apparently the manager of several departments. I asked for a clarification of the OC policy in Hammond and how it relates to corporate policy, since I'm confused as to why a fellow was ejected yesterday. In my very polite message, I left my name and phone number for a return call. I ask that everyone here do the same.

I'll post the result of any returned message.

 

[cox7215]

cant wait to see a responce? i bet they dont call...

 

[joslar15]

OC Ejection and OC Event, another perspective.

Actually, based on what I have read, since this particular store has a track record of asking people who OC to leave, I think it may be a back-handed ploy to increase store traffic volume by an observant general manager. The first time, it was followed by an "OC event," resulting in a spike in traffic and sales. So, the GM puts the hypothesis to a test and another OC customer is identified and asked to leave, yeilding the same results. Continuing to use this strategy yeilds similar results, more often than not. So, the GM might actually be counting on an "OC event" from Scutters ejection.

Now, on another note. The first and only time I had an OC incident was back in 81. I was at Castleton mall, carrying a Colt Trooper MkIII, in a leather shoulder rig. I started getting hot and so I took off my jacket. Later, without even asking to see my license, an IPD officer politely and matter-of-factly, simply asked me to put my jacket back on because it scared the sheep. Looking back, if it had been a snubby, in an IWB, probably wouldn't have gotten a second glance.

 

[JR50]

"So, the GM might actually be counting on an "OC event" from Scutters ejection."


joslar 15 --
Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be explanied by stupidity.

 

[Crystalship1]

Actually, based on what I have read, since this particular store has a track record of asking people who OC to leave, I think it may be a back-handed ploy to increase store traffic volume by an observant general manager. The first time, it was followed by an "OC event," resulting in a spike in traffic and sales. So, the GM puts the hypothesis to a test and another OC customer is identified and asked to leave, yeilding the same results. Continuing to use this strategy yeilds similar results, more often than not. So, the GM might actually be counting on an "OC event" from Scutters ejection.

Ummm..... I gotta say that IMHO that's quite a stretch.

 

[bradp]

I just wrote Cabela's off of my places to go.

 

[joslar15]

Ummm..... I gotta say that IMHO that's quite a stretch.

Yes, it is a stretch, but this store apparently has some sort of track record with regard to OC. Scutter himself pointed out that OC events generally result in sales. Granted, as far as policy goes, it is very short-sighted, but managers at big box stores are very numbers driven. I've been in on more than a few of the brainstorming strategy meetings where the goal is to increase traffic/sales. So, aside from general stupidity, what other rational explanation would there be for a GM to allow actions contrary to corporate policy?

 

[GhostofWinter]

Wow so in your eyes I must be a real piece of **** since I have tattoos, ride a Harley, and while I am not a Hell's Angel I pass for one.

Guess it's a good thing I prefer CC otherwise I would make you and your family uncomfortable and you would have dessert.

You are not only not "pro-gun" you are also not very intelligent.

hmmm let me see if I understand you:

Just guessing at your view points.

Biker=Bad
Black=bad
Yellow=bad
brown=bad
OC=bad
Anybody who doesn't think and act just like you=bad

You really need to open your eyes to the rest of the world, While I am the vision of everything you dislike apparently I would give you the shirt off my back if you needed it.

Dunno about being a POS mike, but you ARE an asshat does THAT count? LOL

Greg

PS mike would ya kindly keep your shirt on though? don't wanna see all 300# of WHITE flesh hanging out there :P

 

[Roadie]

We arent even sure at this point if the GM was even AWARE of what went on. We have an AP telling a flunkie to go do their dirty work, and insulting he customer in the process.

With the phone calls, the GM is aware NOW though, I hope.

 

[finity]

FYI

I just called the Cabelas store & spoke the firearms/optics manager named John Demblowski (SP?).

I told him about the incident & all the play it has received here.

He first said that no one had ever ejected anyone for just OC'ing. He said that people have been asked to leave if they had unholstered or done some other unsafe act. I said to the best of my knowledge that the story as relayed was truthful & said I didn't think that Scutter had any reason to lie about it.

He said he has not heard of anyone being asked to leave for any reason & had not heard from anyone else (customer-wise) about this either. I told him that he probably would be hearing more about it. I told him that he needed to make sure that all his employes needed to understand & follow coroprate policy.

He restated that corporate policy was as has been stated on here. OC is OK as long as its not unholstered. He said they have people OC'ing in the store all the time & it has never been a problem as far as he knew.

He sked what the website address was & I told him. Maybe he'll check it out.

He said he would look into it & correct the situation.

Time to start making phone calls, people. Probably help if Scutter called himself & gave more details.

 

[Crystalship1]

FYI

I just called the Cabelas store & spoke the firearms/optics manager named John Demblowski (SP?).

I told him about the incident & all the play it has received here.

He first said that no one had ever ejected anyone for just OC'ing. He said that people have been asked to leave if they had unholstered or done some other unsafe act. I said to the best of my knowledge that the story as relayed was truthful & said I didn't think that Scutter had any reason to lie about it.

He said he has not heard of anyone being asked to leave for any reason & had not heard from anyone else (customer-wise) about this either. I told him that he probably would be hearing more about it. I told him that he needed to make sure that all his employes needed to understand & follow coroprate policy.

He restated that corporate policy was as has been stated on here. OC is OK as long as its not unholstered. He said they have people OC'ing in the store all the time & it has never been a problem as far as he knew.

He sked what the website address was & I told him. Maybe he'll check it out.

He said he would look into it & correct the situation.

Time to start making phone calls, people. Probably help if Scutter called himself & gave more details.

Nice work!!!!

 

[Lex Concord]

This is about a clear violation of not only our rights granted by the State Of Indiana when we are issued a LTCH but also a clear violation of corporate policy.

I don't wish to be contrarian or hijack the thread, but the notion of rights being "granted" by any governmental entity must be dispelled wherever present.

The 2nd Amendment cannot grant or bestow any right, nor does it purport to do so. The Bill of Rights was intended to be an additional and explicit shackle to the beast which is the federal government, as many of the founders did not trust those restrictions inherent in the nature of the Constitution; how wise they were.

Neither may any state grant a right. Rights, by their nature, are inherent; they exist in nature or, as I prefer, are granted by God Almighty. Either way, all the state has the power to do is protect the right, as intended by the founders, or trample a right to one degree or another, and render it a privilege, as the State of Indiana has chosen to do.

While I am grateful that I am able to carry without concern of going to prison, with a few exceptions, I am disheartened that I must apply to the state for permission to exercise a right without experiencing unwarranted and immoral thuggery on the part of the state. I will leave that, as I'm sure there are numerous threads where this is addressed ad nauseum.

Now, you may have the same opinion and may only be guilty of misstating your point. If that is the case, I offer my apology for any misunderstanding. At the same time, I would beg of you, sir, to be more cautious in the future, as words are very subtle yet powerful things.

With all respect,

Lex

 

[mikea46996]

I don't wish to be contrarian or hijack the thread, but the notion of rights being "granted" by any governmental entity must be dispelled wherever present.

The 2nd Amendment cannot grant or bestow any right, nor does it purport to do so. The Bill of Rights was intended to be an additional and explicit shackle to the beast which is the federal government, as many of the founders did not trust those restrictions inherent in the nature of the Constitution; how wise they were.

Neither may any state grant a right. Rights, by their nature, are inherent; they exist in nature or, as I prefer, are granted by God Almighty. Either way, all the state has the power to do is protect the right, as intended by the founders, or trample a right to one degree or another, and render it a privilege, as the State of Indiana has chosen to do.

While I am grateful that I am able to carry without concern of going to prison, with a few exceptions, I am disheartened that I must apply to the state for permission to exercise a right without experiencing unwarranted and immoral thuggery on the part of the state. I will leave that, as I'm sure there are numerous threads where this is addressed ad nauseum.

Now, you may have the same opinion and may only be guilty of misstating your point. If that is the case, I offer my apology for any misunderstanding. At the same time, I would beg of you, sir, to be more cautious in the future, as words are very subtle yet powerful things.

With all respect,

Lex

Lex I agree with you 100% and I did use a poor choice of words.

What I meant was that he was 100% within legal limits because he has his LTCH.
Thanks for pointing that out I was a little upset when I posted that and was typing as fast as my temp was going up.

 

[IndyBeerman]

So, you are saying that, if a store manager doesn't agree with company policy for whatever reason, they can make up their own policy? You really think that corporate would support a store manager who decided that they didn't like company policy and refused to abide by it?

Yup that's he thinks Rookie, so I guess when that manager decides that the phrase in the corporate handbook that states "Theft is not allowed and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent" that it does not apply to him because he has been empowered to interpret rules and policy as he see fit and is allowed to enjoy the spoils of theft and pilferage to his own benefit.

He just does not get it, corporate has given their blessing for customers to enter Cabela's either oc/cc it's not a gray area, and it's a not a judgment call as long as the person is acting accordingly to the laws of the state where it takes place and that person is a holder of a lawfully approved LTCH.

I'm now officially at the point of placing someone on the ignore list for the first time ever, it's up to him if he makes me do the deed.

 

[IndyBeerman]

Eventually, a store employee came up to me and asked me if I was a police officer.

Scutter after much debate and plausible thinking that has made me dysfunctional, emotional, psychotic and downright peeved about this, I have come to the conclusion that it could have been all avoided with this reply....

I said no, But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night

 

[Nakatomi]

Ok, even though I am stepping over the dead horse to point this out, Cabela's policy of not having you unload your weapon in the store if you have a LTCH does not necessary mean that you can have it out in plain sight. Most businesses, and most cops, expect your gun to be out of sight while in public.

I have really tried to avoid getting personal in this discussion. As much as many of you accuse me of trolling, I would posit that YOU are doing that very thing with your hostility and ad hominem attacks.

You ask for my personal opinion? Fine. I think people OC mainly to show off. Or, they are frightened people who try to compensate for that with a big scary gun, thinking it makes them look more macho. I have yet to meet a person with a gun out in the open who wasn't more than a bit off in the head. Just look in this thread, who are the bullies? Who are the ones that are openly hostile? You don't see the CC advocates calling names or being abusive, do you? I wonder why that is....perhaps it speaks volumes as to your core personalities?

Am I anti-gun? lol! The people on here who know me in real life would find that funny. However, I am anti-stupidity. Acting like a kook with a gun in public does not help the cause, ladies and gentlemen. You just sow more anti-gun sentiment in non-gun owners. And frankly, just wearing an exposed gun in public makes you look like a kook to most people. You certainly look like a kook to me, and I'm on your side! The kid at Burger King may not be rolling their eyes at you while you're standing at the counter, but they will be while your walking away. Ask yourself, why do I really want to be that guy? What am I gaining here?