Hassled by Buffalo Wild Wings for OC at Dupont, Fort Wayne

[rmabrey]

nevermind, bad memory. it went the other way

 

[mk2ja]

nevermind, bad memory. it went the other way

He got arrested?

 

[rmabrey]

He got arrested?

No, Here is the link
https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/carry_issues_and_self_defense/124397-bad_dinner_tonight.html

Cops told him he had to pay.

Regardless I still dont think in your situation you should have had to IF you were asked to leave, if you had chosen to leave yes.

 

[Benny]

Yes, Thats the only fair trade off in situations where an individual is not being an ass. Both parties meet their end of the agreement.

ETA: I misread your question, my original statement was sarcasm as in the reasons would be stupid for a manager to ask you to leave and if thats how they run a business they cant afford for you to not pay.

Fair is one thing, law is another...I'd like to know more about SemperFi's post about Innkeeper's law, but I'm way too lazy to mess with it right now.

And yes, I know your post was completely facetious, but I had to answer anyway.

Was the one you (eventually) found good?

Yep, that one was just about perfect...If you would cover up in that situation, then I at least know you are (IMO) rational, compassionate and not just out for attention.

I assume you know that was sarcasm, my friend. I don't really think you're a cheap b. I just couldn't resist since you invited us all to call you one

Haha, the invitation was there, so I guess I can't be mad.

 

[Benny]

No, Here is the link
https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/carry_issues_and_self_defense/124397-bad_dinner_tonight.html

Cops told him he had to pay.

Regardless I still dont think in your situation you should have had to IF you were asked to leave, if you had chosen to leave yes.

Ahh, the truth comes out!



Like I said, situations where the LEO wouldn't make the customer pay are going to be very few and very far between.

(BTW, I haven't opened that link yet, but I'll check it out now)

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I thought of that, too. It may be that only the more boisterous people were willing to post in this thread—and being more boisterous, they were more likely OC and not be inclined to cover up if so requested—while persons such as you two, who would've simply covered up (or not OC'd in the first place, perhaps) tended to keep quiet in here. Definitely possible.

Just so you know I do OC, very rarely do I CC(except winter, I don't strap on a shoulder harness over my coat.

I was thinking some more about this, and I think I came up with a simpler way of explaining it:

Why wouldn't the person want to just cover up if asked? Well, if the person had it openly carried, he probably had a good reason to carry that way. So if somebody else wants him NOT to carry that way, they better be able to give him a better reason in order to make him change his mind.

In my mind, a good reason is, their house their rules. In a public place (not a private business open to the public) they better have a pretty dang good reason to ask me to cover up or I won't do it. Heck even if they have a good reason chances are I won't.

I was told by our police chief that you should always conceal otherwise it could be considered " brandishing a firearm" .

No brandishing law in IN as has been said, but there is Intimidation with a firearm. But I don't think there is anyway the OP could of been charged with that and had it stick.

You can add me to the list of people who would probably just cover it up.

If all I have to do is flip my shirt over it, I'd rather do that then forfeit the meal I'm legally obligated to pay for.

I would probably cover up, but not because I would forfeit the meal. They would still have to give me the food I ordered if I was required to pay. I just wouldn't be able to eat it there.

I would cover up because it's their house their rules. Even if the rules change while I'm there. I have the choice of following their rules or leaving.

Not technically, Its been discussed before, but IMO you have entered into a contract with that establishment, should they ask you to leave before your meal is finished they broke that contract.

Not necessarily, as I posted before. My local theater doesn't have any posted rules about chewing tobacco and spitting on the floor. If after I enter and pay, I start doing so and refuse to stop when asked, they can demand I leave and not refund my ticket price.

Let me be clear, I don't think mk2ja did anything wrong, I'm just asking questions to add to the discussion...I'd also like to know the answers.

Let me be clear, I think mk2ja did do something wrong. He was informed of the managers desires and decided to push it. The manager may have been a wimp about it, but that doesn't make it right.

A girl says no and repeatedly says no, but doesn't push you off. Does that make sex with her okay?

Then never go back if I felt their request was unreasonable(and/or management was being obnoxious about it).

Agreed 100%, but add in I would let their supervisor/owner know why I would never be back.

 

[Benny]

Not necessarily, as I posted before. My local theater doesn't have any posted rules about chewing tobacco and spitting on the floor. If after I enter and pay, I start doing so and refuse to stop when asked, they can demand I leave and not refund my ticket price.

I'd say there is a bit of a difference between vandalizing and carrying a tool on your belt...Don't quote me on this, but I'd imagine there is a "no tobacco" policy in most theaters as well.

Let me be clear, I think mk2ja did do something wrong. He was informed of the managers desires and decided to push it. The manager may have been a wimp about it, but that doesn't make it right.

A girl says no and repeatedly says no, but doesn't push you off. Does that make sex with her okay?

You are mistaking "asking" with "telling."

The manager never told him to do anything; he asked him.

 

[sj kahr k40]

A girl says no and repeatedly says no, but doesn't push you off. Does that make sex with her okay?

If the manager had said leave and repeatedly said leave then that would be a correct analog.

I think the young man handled himself very well, he was approached with what he considered an unreasonable request and politely informed the guy, since the rude guy never introduced himself, that he wouldn't abide by his request. If I'm ever in the same situation I hope I can remain as calm as he did.

 

[Rookie]

Restaurant rights - Your rights eating out - consumer.org.nz

Sadly, this site has no laws to back their claims. I'm still looking, but this site backed what I said about changing rules after you're seated...

 

[Rookie]

...

 

[Ragenarok007]

You think that's bad? I have a buddy that had this same thing happen to him at the Denny's on Michigan road in Indy. The funny part is that he was in his security uniform and in the company of two IMPD officers. Must have been because he's black or something. Now he's a Marion county deputy, so at least now he can eat in peace.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I'd say there is a bit of a difference between vandalizing and carrying a tool on your belt...Don't quote me on this, but I'd imagine there is a "no tobacco" policy in most theaters as well.

You are mistaking "asking" with "telling."
The manager never told him to do anything; he asked him.

I don't know about most theaters, I was referencing my local one, which if they have that policy it isn't posted. And spitting on the floor, while disgusting, isn't vandalizing. There is no damage being done, it's a concrete floor.

Would it make any difference if the girl instead of saying no, said instead, please don't, please stop? Or would it still be wrong?

Restaurant rights - Your rights eating out - consumer.org.nz

Sadly, this site has no laws to back their claims. I'm still looking, but this site backed what I said about changing rules after you're seated...

No idea what state that site is referring to but it sure as heck isn't IN. I'm sure of that because of the minor and alcohol reference. If I take my 16 year old out for their birthday, it is illegal for me to order them a glass of wine, or to let them have one in my house. The site says it's okay.

Actually I looked at that web page again, I don't believe they are referencing any US state. From the web address I'm pretty sure they are a New Zealand, from the .nz at the end of the address.

 

[Rookie]

Wow. Guess I should have looked...

I Googled with Indiana as a search term...

You will be OK to serve your child alcohol in New Zealand.

My bad...

 

[Rookie]

Now that I've officially established that my ability to search SUCKS, does anyone else wanna try to find an answer?

 

[rmabrey]

Not necessarily, as I posted before. My local theater doesn't have any posted rules about chewing tobacco and spitting on the floor. If after I enter and pay, I start doing so and refuse to stop when asked, they can demand I leave and not refund my ticket price.

Again, that falls into a category called being an ass, not minding your own business and enjoying your dinner peacefully

 

[finity]

If somebody'd asked me to leave because I was smelly or underdressed, yeah, I would've left without dispute. ... But I never feel awkward or out of place for carrying. (Though I admit there are times I do CC instead of OC because even I think it would be more appropriate—examples: weddings and funerals.) I am comfortable with my sidearm at all times, but I am not always comfortable in sweaty or dirty clothes in a formal setting.

Ok, so you concede that there are things that a property owner can ask you to do. Good. At least we’re making some progress here.

If you would have been seated because the person seating you had a cold & couldn’t smell you, then after you were seated other guests complained to the manager were offended by your smell, are you saying at that point the manager had no Right to say “Hey, I’m really sorry but could you at least put on some body spray”? Do you think that you would be within your Rights to tell him “no I won’t but I’ll leave & not pay for my meal if that’s what you want”?

Do your “Rights” hinge solely on whether YOU feel “awkward” completely disregarding the Rights of the owner?

I decry any accusation I was bad-tempered.

I don’t think anyone has claimed you were bad tempered. I know I haven’t

I decry any accusation I was hostile or aggressive.

Not every “aggressive” action is violent or loud.

“passive-aggression” is still aggression.

I think the fact that I offered to make a concession to the manager speaks to my reasonableness.

If you offer a “concession” that is not supported by fairness or law then the “concession” is not “reasonable”.

Let’s say I had a car for sale & we had agreed on a certain price. You ask for the keys but I say “you haven’t given me any money yet. You need to pay me before I will let you take it away”. Would it be a reasonable “concession” for you to say “OK in that case I’ll only drive the car for three days a week until I pay you since you didn’t tell me before we agreed on the sale that I had to pay you before I could take possession”? Not likely. You conceded something that almost everybody would see as inherently unreasonable but you thought was just fine.

Just because you thought your concession was reasonable doesn’t make it so.

I think finity has mentioned that perhaps the manager decided it wisest to not ask an armed, "apparently unreasonable", man to leave. I would argue that since I had suggested I would leave if he wanted me to leave, that should really eliminate finity's position.

You’re leaving out a few details to make your “position” sound more reasonable.

You didn’t simply say “I’ll leave if that’s what you want”. You said “I’ll leave WITHOUT PAYING FOR MY FOOD if that’s what you want”. Those five words completely change the dynamic of the scenario.

You gave two equally disagreeable options & claim it was unreasonable for the manager to not choose one or the other.

The manager gave you two options to consider that were well within his Rights to control the actions of the people on his property but you say that he was the one being the unreasonable.

In a restaurant, I am a paying customer. The paying customer does get some say because the establishment which seeks to earn money from the potential customer must, by the principles of economics, provide a service, experience, product, or any combination thereof by which to make the customer willing to pay said establishment, and if the customer is unsatisfied by that service, experience, product, a combination thereof, or the prospect of receiving the same, the customer, on "threat" (Do NOT interpret "threat" as "do this, or I'm not paying;" if you do not understand this difference, I can explain in a separate post.) of not giving money to the establishment, can exact change to make it worth purchasing. This concept is the very basis of a competitive market economy.

We aren’t discussing economics here. We’re discussing Rights.

For economics considerations the manager has the option to make choices about how he runs his business. You have the option to make a choice about whether you will spend your money there based on the choices the manager makes.

You don’t have the right to act in contravention of the managers wishes then force him to take a financial loss when he complains as long as he fulfills his part of the “contract”.

The contract between you & the manager was that he would provide you with a meal (implied by law “safe to eat”) & you would pay him a predetermined price. That’s it.

Anything outside of that contract is extraneous.

If you don’t like the atmosphere you can’t refuse to pay. If you don’t like the food you can’t refuse to pay. If you don’t like anything else you can’t refuse to pay. You can choose to not go back if you want but you can’t refuse to pay.

If you act in a way that the manager feels he doesn’t want to allow on his property he can make you leave – and you still have to pay. You know, even if you came in, sat down, ordered your food & then when it was delivered the manager said “You can’t eat that here. You have to take your food and leave” you still have to pay.

In all those cases the “contract” between you & the manager would have been fulfilled. He gave you food & you paid. If you don’t pay YOU violated the contract.

There are some things the manager has to provide by law. Those things aren’t part of the contract. You can’t sue for breech of contract because the kitchen is dirty.

A third option exists, though you may be disinclined to consider it among your own options in that scenario. You can also try to get what you, as a customer, want out of your experience. I am sure there are other scenarios wherein you would not discard that option, such as when negotiating the price of some good you'd like to purchase, such as a car or a gun. The difference here is that I was negotiating the service/experience I was going to receive for the money rather than the money I would pay for the good.

You can try to renegotiate the contract if you want but the manager doesn’t have to concede. He provided you with food & you have to pay. If the manager does comcede because he feels that it’s in his best interest, fine. Otherwise, you still have to pay.

Hey, for the sake of this surprisingly cordial discussion, would you mind defining for me what you mean when you refer to little 'r' and big 'R' rights? Maybe it is something you frequently use in your posts, but I'm not altogether clear on your distinction. I've been wondering it basically every time you mentioned it in this thread.

'Preciate it!

People always throw around the word “right” when no such Right exists. What they really mean are “option”. You have Rights on your property & on public property. You have options on someone else’s property. You don’t have the “right” to act however you want on someone else’s property but the manager has the Right to not allow your actions by virtue of him owning it.

I've been on this site for two years and it's like this that wants me to put about 10% of the membership here on my ignore list.

Go ahead. I probably wouldn’t lose any sleep over it, though.

You see, that’s your choice but only because Fenway gave you that option. If he took me off your ignore list then you would have no Right to complain.

So using your far fetched unfathomable reasoning, the next time a server comes to your table and persistently insists several times that you buy the daily special and you "politely" refuse, stop and think a bit about you being disrespectful to the servers wants and needs in you purchasing that daily special because he/she "wants" you to.

Simply refusing an unreasonable request that the manager has no Right to demand isn’t being disrespectful.

OTOH, if the server said “you must buy [this] to stay here” then I have two choices. I can buy [it] or leave. The manager shouldn’t tell me I have to leave. I should just do it.

Have you ever gone to a bar then found out after you were there that they had a two drink minimum? If so, then what did you do? You either bought the two drinks or left. Isn’t that the same thing? You can’t tell them no just because the “rule” wasn’t posted on the door.

I despise the smoking ban Fort Wayne enacted because it restricts the right ("Right"? Finity, you gotta help me out here, man!) of the property owner to decide what he wants to allow on his own property. The fact that it is open to members of the public does not change that he is (well, *should be*, but no longer is in Fort Wayne) allowed to dictate policy on his property.

So you’re OK with the Right of the owner to say whether someone smokes on their property but not the Right to say whether someone carries a gun on their property?

Interesting.

If somebody wants to smoke at McDonald's but McDonald's has decided to ban it, the owner has the right to say, "Hey, I don't allow smoking, so either put it out or take it outside."

Why yes, yes they do.

They also have the Right to say “we don’t allow guns in here so either cover it up or take it outside”.

doing nothing to disturb the peace.

Obviously, at least someone else felt otherwise.

Exactly. Well "said", finity!

You intentionally quoted my reply out of context. That was in reference to being on public property or my own property. That all changes when you’re on someone else’s land.

A pro-gun manager might very well have decided instead to visit the tables of the complaining customers to explain that the man with the gun was not being offensive, abusive, suspicious, disruptive, or otherwise behaving or appearing in a way to cause alarm or discomfort.

And that would have been within his Rights to make that decision. He didn’t mke that choice. He chose to confront you. That was his Right.

They may very well have replied to that information with, "Well, either tell him to take that gun outside or we're leaving and not paying!"

Well, you almost had it correct. They still would have had to pay. (see above)

I did get to educate the friend of my friend about several issues as a result of the events which transpired. Perhaps the manager didn't learn anything other than "that kid with the gun was really stubborn and unreasonable", but my fellow patron learned some aspects of carrying, rights, and law.

I’m not sure the “education” he got was entirely correct.

Also, I remind you that I did not create a scene. The manager initiated the confrontation, made his request, and I provided my answer. I provided an alternative resolution, but it was declined. Any scene caused was the result of the manager to accept that he could not compel me to cover or disarm for the duration of my visit.

See above

Even if the cops showed up, I would not have covered up or disarmed. The cops are unable to compel a citizen to disarm or carry in a concealed manner in any location unless local, state, or federal law specifies that that location is "gun free" or "CC only". The cops do not have the authority to enforce the rules of a particular private property. By way of example, the cops could no more require me to cover up or disarm at BWW than they could require me to take off my clothes at a nudist colony. In that situation, if I didn't want to undress, the colony's staff would ask me to leave, and if for some reason I refused, THEN the cops would be able to take action.

No they can’t compel you to cover it. They would have given you options. They could ask you to follow the property owner’s request. They could have made you leave. AND YOU WOULD HAVE HAD TO PAY or go to jail.

You were fully ready & willing for the police to get involved. If those would have been the only possible outcomes & those were the same outcomes that the manager had in mind then why did the police need to get involved in the first place? Why not just take the initiative on your own?

Indeed. Perhaps the manager shouldn't have thrown a tantrum.

Wait. I thought you said that the manger was polite about his request? So if he gives you two options that he had the Right to give HE was the one throwing a tantrum ut you weren’t for not complying with his request when you had no Right to?

As long as he didn't tell me to leave his restaurant, there's nothing the cops could do (legally, though they would have still tried to "resolve the issue," no doubt).

"OK, we're here. Where's the guy causing trouble?"
"Over there. Be careful! He has a gun!"
"He looks pretty calm. What's he doing to cause problems?"
"He wouldn't take his gun outside or hide it under his shirt!"
"Did you tell him to leave? He doesn't look like he's doing anything illegal or dangerous."
"Well, uh, no. I don't want him to leave. He offered, but I said I wanted him to stay."
"Why the heck did you call us, then?!"


Yeah, yeah, yeah... I doubt it would've gone down that way, too.

Good. At least you know what the actual outcome would have been.

Does a demonstration of understanding of rights and economics not betray a level of maturity not found in a child? A youngling unsure of his ability to decide for himself how he wants to carry and unaware of his ability to carry on in a safe, non-threatening manner without yielding to silly requests would have given in, yet my actions are those of a person who has gained a more mature understanding of what can and cannot be done.

I don’t think you have as good of an understanding of rights as you think you do.

I also need to clarify that I’m not saying you are ALWAYS immature in other actions/interactions you have undertaken. I don’t know you well enough to make that claim. I’m just saying in this ONE instance you were wrong & acted immaturely. We’ve all done it. Maturity means that you accept the wrongs we’ve done when others point them out.

As far as the manager, sure he had the right to ask that the firearm be covered. The OP had the right to refuse.

No. He had the physical ability to refuse.

You almost had it correct.

Yup. Apparel does affect impressions. If I'd walked in with super baggy sweat pants and a really loose hoodie jacket with the hood up covering half my face and my gun visible in my waistband, people would no doubt—and I wouldn't argue with them—claim that I had it coming by looking like a common thug, a gangster, a criminal even, who would obviously make other customers uneasy. So I provided information that I was not dressed in such a manner.

Oh, so now we find that you believe that our “rights” are determined by the way we dress?

Interesting.

Anyone who cannot have a civil conversation devoid of personal attacks or insults will be asked to leave.[

/quote]

So just to be clear:

You are requesting that I be civil here?

Are you sure you have that Right?

You are free to discuss and disagree all you want, but trolling, name-calling, and personal attacks will not be tolerated. As long as you can remain civil, everybody's happy.

Hey, Mr Strato has 1A rights! Doesn’t he?

No need to be personally insulting.

Play nice or go home.

So, are you TRYING to insult half the members of this Forum (OCers) or do you just type before you think?

There's nothing you haven't answered.

The fact that you have remained level-headed through the barrage of insults Mr. Strato has tossed around speaks volumes for both of you.

Someone check to see if the manager's last name is Strato.

Dont I wish

Huh.

Not one person has stood up & gave Strato “kudos” for standing up for his 1A rights & told Scutter he had no Right to tell him otherwise.

Interesting.

As far as not paying (other post) because you are "kicked out", don't do it. It's a violation of the Innkeeper's law (don't know the statute and too lazy to look it up tonight). You can absolutely go to jail for failing to pay a food bill when asked to leave.

Really?

Who’d a thunk it?

You and I could be in the minority, But there are several thousand INGO members, and only a couple of dozen have stuck their necks out and posted in this thread.

I suspect a lot more folks agree with us. But, I really don't know.....

Yeah, I think you’re right. I’ve gotten more positive rep for this thread than I have for any in a LONG time.

I was thinking some more about this, and I think I came up with a simpler way of explaining it:

Why wouldn't the person want to just cover up if asked? Well, if the person had it openly carried, he probably had a good reason to carry that way. So if somebody else wants him NOT to carry that way, they better be able to give him a better reason in order to make him change his mind.

The above is all well & good on public property & I agree.

That all changes on private property that’s not yours.

You can add me to the list of people who would probably just cover it up.

If all I have to do is flip my shirt over it, I'd rather do that then forfeit the meal I'm legally obligated to pay for.

Call me a cheap bastard if you wish, but it would take less than 1 second to cover up, then I could finish my meal and never return if I wish.

I can see you are a mature reasonable person. Thank you.

With all of that being said...IMO, if there isn't a sign in plain site on the front door prohibiting firearms, you shouldn't have to pay when asked to leave. You also shouldn't OC into that establishment anyway(or even give them your business in the first place, for that matter).

Unfortunately, your opinion isn’t law.

nevermind, bad memory. it went the other way

Really?

Who’d a thunk it?

You are mistaking "asking" with "telling."

OK. So as long as they “asked” the girl to have sex & she said no & they did it anyway against her wishes, it’s not rape?

Good to know. I’m sure you’ll tell your daughters that if you ever have any.



I think this is the longest post I've ever written.

And that's saying something!!

 

[Mr.Strato]

I'll stand by what I said.
The op tried to deny his "friends" of their 1st amendment rights when he told them not to talk to the police. That fact, when presented gets some kind of response about a wife's need to relenquish her 1stA during a traffic stop-that's weird to me.
The op says he was cautious not to show off his pistol, yet he walked around the resturant with it oc. Initially presented as "kept it shielded, gun towards the wall, obscure, bla bla bla; then oops! Well, I DID walk around a bit
Now we discover they had come from the "YMCA"...Gee, wouldn't it be sweet if there was a preschool there? Wait, I don't wanna know.

Nobody here is gonna say anything that's gonna hurt my feelings.

I've pointed out just 2 of the many inconsistencies I see in this tale.
The Moderator has warned me about personal attacks- that's his Right, right, duty, rule....Just as it was the same for the Mgr. to ask for the gun to be covered up.
I can comply, or I can leave...Anybody see the correlation?
My "rights" aren't being limited, I'm smart enough to realize HIS house HIS rules.

Now, I'm tapping out, wrangling the truth out of this tale, getting to what REALLY happened and how it went down, well it's kinda like trying to pick a turd up by the "clean end". You all know what I think of the deal- just like you- the only info I have is the evidence presented by the op.

I simply cannot read a tale like this and swallow it hook line and sinker.
I see inconsistencies in the presentation. If you don't, you're not looking.

 

[Mike_Indy]

Finity, well done. Amazing time investment on the reply, and well said.

 

[public servant]

OP...I may have missed it...but what kind of tip did you leave?

Oh...and finity...

 

[LegatoRedrivers]

I think the fact that I offered to make a concession to the manager speaks to my reasonableness.

Telling someone "I know you want to play four square or basketball, but I am only willing to play soccer. Since we're playing in your yard, if you would like for me to leave, I am perfectly willing to take my ball and go home;" Is neither a concession, nor reasonable.