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

[Timjoebillybob]

Also, if food was the only consideration then movie theaters, music concerts, dance clubs, etc could all ask you to leave their property before you get entertained without giving you you're money back.

They can. To use your movie theater analogy, my local theater does not have a no chewing tobacco, no spitting on the floor sign. If I went in there and paid to watch a movie, then sat down put a big ol chunk of chew in, and then started spitting on the floor, the manager could ask me to stop and/or tell me to leave. And not have to refund my money.

I would contact BWW and see if the manager had the authority to demand you leave. We have to get to the bottom of requests like this to see if we have to leave or not. This concerns me.

I will almost guarantee any corp or business will tell you that the manager has the authority to demand you leave. Walmart from what I understand has a corporate policy of follow the state law in regards to carried handguns. But someone on here posted about being asked to leave because of one, he wrote corp and asked about it. Their response was we do have a policy of allowing firearms but the manager has ability to refuse service. Or words to that effect.

I think you are right - I should go talk to the store and make it known the manager handled situation poorly. There was no need to keep asking and asking and asking when I'd already stated that I wasn't going to cover or disarm.

I agree the manager handled it poorly. If I was him after you declined the second time, I would of brought you your check, told you to leave and that I would have the waitress box up your meal and I would deliver it to you outside. And informed you that you were not welcome in my establishment again. And possibly called the LEO to have an official record of you being trespassed.

 

[snowman46919]

And possibly called the LEO to have an official record of you being trespassed.

It is only trespass if he refuses to leave, he stated that if requested he would leave so I don't see where a LEO is even warranted or where trespass occured.

 

[RTroy29035]

I think I will go to BWW this week and OC, just to see what happens.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

It is only trespass if he refuses to leave, he stated that if requested he would leave so I don't see where a LEO is even warranted or where trespass occured.

Trespass and being trespassed are two different things, being trespassed is notice that you are prohibited entry. As in no notice be given before you can be arrested for trespass if you come back. Having a LEO there when you do it makes an official report and stops any "he was trespassed/no I wasn't" bs.

 

[snowman46919]

Trespass and being trespassed are two different things, being trespassed is notice that you are prohibited entry. As in no notice be given before you can be arrested for trespass if you come back. Having a LEO there when you do it makes an official report and stops any "he was trespassed/no I wasn't" bs.

gotcha, misinterpreted your previous.

 

[Lead Head]

I didn't read any of the other post so this is purely my opinion and nothing more or less.

You go out to eat with friends/family, etc. to have a good time. Right ?

By going OC, you "invited" a dark cloud to your table. Even an off-duty LEO would likely go concealed in this situation. Most people would for obvious reasons. I don't want to think about it 24/7/365. When/if I need it, then my practice will have paid off or so the plan goes.

The bottom line, in my opinion, is that you affected other people for your own gain (not sure what it was) and even though you may have the right, and may have handled yourself well (I was not there) your choice brought trouble to the table.

This reminds me of someone having something to prove. We all should be able to carry outside and everywhere we go so I acknowledge the overall desire to do so. There just isn't a need, yet.

Also, the manager can ask any patron to ultimately leave (for any reason) if the other patrons (and staff) are uncomfortable. The manager failed to do so right from the go and failed by being courteous and providing level of options. Why ? Customer service. I would have directly and professionally asked you to exit and "if" you wish to return, please do so without any sidearm visible. Warning number 2 would have been the cops showing up.

Do as you will but please try to think of others and match the conditions to your level of armed dress.

Rights are to be used wisely by all of us.

 

[IndyBeerman]

It must make you guys feel good to push the limits, then stand there with your hands on your hips (Errol Flynn like) and shout "I am in my rights!!"

IMO, you gain nothing by doing this. "They" can just change the law....

Immediately hand in your man card and turn all owned firearms to the nearest INGO member, you do not deserve to keep them if you feel it is not your right to stand up for it.

BTW, "They" could have changed the law years ago, but because of "US" who are willing to go head to head, they did'nt.

 

[Roadie]

Yes.

You are in the wrong.

You don't have any rights to free speech while on someone else's private property.

What, you thought I was going to agree with you because you played the "O"-card?



Also, to answer the question about the PDA by gay men:

If the owner of the establishment asks you to stop then I don't see how you have any "right" to continue. The same would be true of PDA by two heterosexuals, also.

Are you really trying to say that if my wife & I decided to engage in some very heavy petting that it would be OK to just ignore the request by the manager to stop? Are you saying that if I did ignore them & continued then others wouldn't think more poorly of ME?

Again, did you think I would say differently because you played the gay-card?



It's true that they don't have the ability to "make" you do anything other than leave but just because the owner didn't take that ultimate step doesn't mean that you still wouldn't be an ass for continuing to act in opposiion to the PRIVATE property owners wishes.

The manager didn't handle it poorly, Mk2ja did. I think the manager handled it professionally. And Mk2ja acted like an ass...

Mk2ja, If you think differently then why don't I just come in to your house & proclaim loudly & repeatedly that Christianity is the cause of all the worlds ills & that anybody who follows it should be thrown in the loony bin? I mean, don't I have the right to freedom of religion & free speech, even in YOUR house?

If you asked me to stop & I refused wouldn't you think I was being an ass if I made you ask me to leave before I complied?

If I understand it correctly,(a big IF lol):
.. a businesses "right to refuse service" stops at "protected classes" making them unable to discriminate by race, gender, religion, and it some states, sexuality etc.

Hence why they can say "No Redheads" legally, but not say "No Asians". For this to change regarding gun owners, we would have to win a major discrimination lawsuit, and have us recognized as a "protected class".

Thoughts?

 

[Mike_Indy]

"Immediately hand in your man card and turn all owned firearms to the nearest INGO member, you do not deserve to keep them if you feel it is not your right to stand up for it."

Here we go again, Only those that OC 24x7 deserve to own a gun.

 

[Roadie]

I didn't read any of the other post so this is purely my opinion and nothing more or less.

You go out to eat with friends/family, etc. to have a good time. Right ?

By going OC, you "invited" a dark cloud to your table. Even an off-duty LEO would likely go concealed in this situation. Most people would for obvious reasons. I don't want to think about it 24/7/365. When/if I need it, then my practice will have paid off or so the plan goes.

The bottom line, in my opinion, is that you affected other people for your own gain (not sure what it was) and even though you may have the right, and may have handled yourself well (I was not there) your choice brought trouble to the table.

This reminds me of someone having something to prove. We all should be able to carry outside and everywhere we go so I acknowledge the overall desire to do so. There just isn't a need, yet.

Also, the manager can ask any patron to ultimately leave (for any reason) if the other patrons (and staff) are uncomfortable. The manager failed to do so right from the go and failed by being courteous and providing level of options. Why ? Customer service. I would have directly and professionally asked you to exit and "if" you wish to return, please do so without any sidearm visible. Warning number 2 would have been the cops showing up.

Do as you will but please try to think of others and match the conditions to your level of armed dress.

Rights are to be used wisely by all of us.

Obviously you are anti OC, but you miss the point that it is LEGAL to do so, and many carry that way not to "cause trouble" but because that is the way they CHOOSE to carry. Be it comfort, be it access, whatever the reason.

You disparaging portrayal of OCers as "trouble makers" with "something to prove" just insulted half the members of this Forum. I would suggest thinking a little better before you speak.

As for

"We all should be able to carry outside and everywhere we go so I acknowledge the overall desire to do so. There just isn't a need, yet. "

So you are able to discern when and where one "needs" to carry? Maybe the Police should hire you for your psychic ability to know when a citizen is "safe" and when they are not.

 

[SirRealism]

"Immediately hand in your man card and turn all owned firearms to the nearest INGO member, you do not deserve to keep them if you feel it is not your right to stand up for it."

Here we go again, Only those that OC 24x7 deserve to own a gun.

I'm not speaking for IndyBeerman, but nowhere did he say standing up for your rights involves compulsory OCing. He was responding to someone likening the OPs actions to Errol Flynn.

 

[IndyBeerman]

Trespass and being trespassed are two different things, being trespassed is notice that you are prohibited entry. As in no notice be given before you can be arrested for trespass if you come back. Having a LEO there when you do it makes an official report and stops any "he was trespassed/no I wasn't" bs.

Trespass is where you are not to be on the property without prior invitation.

This is a restaurant open to the public, so trespass is not possible.

Trespassing on the other hand is after a warning is issued.

The no firearms sign is not a warning.

 

[Hammerhead]

I didn't read any of the other post so this is purely my opinion and nothing more or less.

You go out to eat with friends/family, etc. to have a good time. Right ?

By going OC, you "invited" a dark cloud to your table. Even an off-duty LEO would likely go concealed in this situation. Most people would for obvious reasons. I don't want to think about it 24/7/365. When/if I need it, then my practice will have paid off or so the plan goes.

The bottom line, in my opinion, is that you affected other people for your own gain (not sure what it was) and even though you may have the right, and may have handled yourself well (I was not there) your choice brought trouble to the table.

This reminds me of someone having something to prove. We all should be able to carry outside and everywhere we go so I acknowledge the overall desire to do so. There just isn't a need, yet.

Also, the manager can ask any patron to ultimately leave (for any reason) if the other patrons (and staff) are uncomfortable. The manager failed to do so right from the go and failed by being courteous and providing level of options. Why ? Customer service. I would have directly and professionally asked you to exit and "if" you wish to return, please do so without any sidearm visible. Warning number 2 would have been the cops showing up.

Do as you will but please try to think of others and match the conditions to your level of armed dress.

Rights are to be used wisely by all of us.

Yes, and he used his rights wisely. He politely offered to leave, and politely denied any attempt at bullying by the "manager". The manager kept asking a question that had already been answered (don't ask a question you don't want an answer to) and resorted to "I'm calling the cops." And threatening to take down your license plate number will get him exactly jack squat. What was he going to do, call in a patron who ate quietly, paid his bill, and exercised his legal rights?

I OC everywhere I'm legally allowed. I would handle this situation exactly the same way the OP did. A manager can ask me for anything and everything their little heads might think up. I am not required to comply with anything other than "leave now", "pay now", or "don't ever come back".

Just like no guns signs are company policy and a request that you not be armed, verbal requests hold the same weight. The "manager" in this situation just expected the OP to "respect his authoritah!" and when the OP didn't, he didn't know what to do. So he wandered off, dumbfounded.

Don't roll over. This is the exact situation we need to stand up and positively exert our rights. It's been talked about regularly here that people don't see OC very often, so they don't know how to handle those who do so legally, respectfully, and positively. The OP did exactly that.

If you (generic you) CC, good for you. I do too, sometimes. But only when I feel like it, not because others feel I should, including spineless ignorant restaurant managers.

 

[finity]

If he or anyone doesn't like the way you were acting in their home, they would ask you to quit or leave. It's that simple. That's all they have a right to do.

I agree.

As I said already - They can't "make" you do anything but leave.

However, just by virtue of the fact that I was acting in such a way as to force the home/business owner to ask me to quit, then having to ask me to leave when I didn't comply would, by most normal peoples definition of the word, make me an ass. Whether he actually asked me to leave or not is immaterial.

I honestly can't believe that people are defending the actions of someone who acted the way he did JUST BECAUSE it was about guns. We always hear on these boards that "a gun is just a tool". Act like you believe it instead of just using it to your advantage when it suits your agenda.

Would you be defending his actions if he was a plumber & the manager asked him to take his covered pipe wrench to his vehicle? It's just a tool, isn't it. You won't catch E. coli from just looking at it or smelling it.

We aren't debating etiquette here (being an ass or not), we are debating rights and legality.

No, but it sounds as though you may be tacitly admitting that he was being ass though. Good. We're making progress.

The question of the existence of that so-called "right" to open carry into that restaurant in opposition to the direct request of the manager is really not open to debate.

IT DOESN'T EXIST!

I've already admitted that the manager didn't have the legal "authority" to make him cover it up (i.e. use force), so there is no debate there either.

We are debating whether the OP's actions in trying to stand up for a "right" that doesn't exist deserves an "atta-boy".

I say "no way".

He acted like a thug. Granted he was a calm thug but a thug nonetheless.

Imagine how this conversation would be looked upon by most of you saying that what mk2ja did was somehow noble:

(Pardon me while I slip into 'stereo-type mode'. I'm just doing it to make a point.)

A young black man walks into the restaurant in a predominantly white upper middle-class part of town along with two of his black friends.

They are all wearing the stereo-typical "gangsta" type clothing & one of them is carrying a "glock fo-tay" tucked into the front of his waist-band - sans holster.

After they are seated & they place their order, the manager notices a slight commotion from some of the guests & realizes the cause. He approaches him & in a very polite & subdued tone (as it was related that the manager did in the OP) said "hey, could you please cover that up? Some of my other customers are getting nervous."

In a calm voice the guy says, "Naw. I ain't f***ing covering it up. Why don't you get the f*** out of my face?"

Manager: "OK could then you please just take it to your car? It's company policy not to allow guns in our store, anyway. I was just trying to compromise & not ask you to take it out."

"Why don't you just tell 'whitey' up in here that if they don't like a brotha packin' they can kiss my black ass. I ain't doin' nuthin' wrong. I jus' came in here to get some wings."

"I'm just asking you to cover it up or go put it in your car."

"I'm not doing nothin'. But I'll tell you what, if you want me to leave, I'll get the f*** outta here. But if you ask me to leave, I ain't paying for this food. You still want me leave?"

"I can just write down your plate number. But, I just want you to cover it up and go put it in your car. Would you like a cop to come take care of this?"

"I'm not doing anything illegal. If you ask me to leave, I'll leave because you da owna'."

After several rounds of the manager asking and the black man saying "hell naw" the manager stood and declared that he would be calling a cop to "come take care of this. They'll be here in a minute."

"I don't give a sh!* if you call the po-lice. Go ahead & call 'em. I'll be right here waitin' for 'em when they get here. I'll tell those f***in' cops the same as I told you. I ain't coverin' it up or takin' it to the car. If you make me leave I ain't payin' for dis meal. "

As the manager walked away, one of the black guys friends asked "what the f*** was homey all up yo' sh** about, man?" The guy replied, "Some mothaf***a' in here don't like to see a n***a' wit' a gun." The other guy says "Sh** ni***a", I didn't even know you was packin'!"

Now the manager is possibly thinking "Man, I don't want to **** this guy off. He has a GUN. He's almost done with his food anyway. It'll be done & over with pretty soon. I never would've thought that he'd have acted that way just because I asked him to cover it up."

They finished eating several minutes later. As they got up to leave the guy said to his friends "I knew the guy was too much of a p***y to call the cops."

Read it carefully. I incorporated every element of the OP with the addition of the foul language (to bring in the "right" to free speech that many here are saying the OP had).

I've been around here long enough to know what many (most?) of the replies would be. We've all seen it here before.

I can only imagine how the people on here would be saying that the kid is just a thug & the manager would have been getting "atta-boys" for the restraint he showed in dealing with a ghetto-rat with an obvious chip on his shoulder against white people.

There was no threat. He didn't do anything illegal. He had "rights" to do & say what he did. How dare those other people there be offended by the sight of a "gangsta" with a gun using foul language in a family restaurant?

Using your thinking the black guy should get "kudo's" for standing up against "whitey" to ensure his 1A & 2A rights.

Or maybe the black guy was just being an ass...like mk2ja.

You decide...

Also, not everybody likes guns. Some people are honestly afraid of them. People are always saying how stupid it is for someone to confront a guy with a gun in some of those OC threads. Now when the manager decides to actually take that advice & stop the confrontation when he realizes that he's dealing with an obviously armed man acting in an unreasonable manner, he's now "spineless"?

Holding hands ain't no heavy petting.

So.

Don't we have a right to do some hot & heavy kissing in McDonalds Play-place as long as we're not doing anything explicitly sexual? That's not illegal is it?

Even if the manager asked us not to even hold hands I should comply or leave. Why should I be so immature as to act like a defiant little 2 year old who's not getting his way & say "make me!"? What makes it OK for me to say "I'm not going to stop but if you want me to leave, I will...but I'm not paying for my meal. Go ahead & call the cops. I'll be sitting right here when they get here."

Asking to wear an apron, because of a mild political statement would be crossing the line in an open-to-the-public establishment.

Unfortunately, that line is not established by you. It's established by the owner of the property. You really don't have a say.

I don't usually end my retorts with a personal insult, because it's usually bad form. But here it seems fitting.

You sir, are insane.

Eh...

I've been called worse by better.

 

[IndyBeerman]

"Immediately hand in your man card and turn all owned firearms to the nearest INGO member, you do not deserve to keep them if you feel it is not your right to stand up for it."

Here we go again, Only those that OC 24x7 deserve to own a gun.

You sir are misinformed, I never mention anything about OC, I don't care how you carry, heck for all I'm concerned is you can carry mexican and take that chance to blow your jewels off.

I was referring mostly to this:

IMO, you gain nothing by doing this. "They" can just change the law....

And a little of this:

It must make you guys feel good to push the limits, then stand there with your hands on your hips (Errol Flynn like) and shout "I am in my rights!!"

 

[finity]

If I understand it correctly,(a big IF lol):
.. a businesses "right to refuse service" stops at "protected classes" making them unable to discriminate by race, gender, religion, and it some states, sexuality etc.

Hence why they can say "No Redheads" legally, but not say "No Asians". For this to change regarding gun owners, we would have to win a major discrimination lawsuit, and have us recognized as a "protected class".

Thoughts?

As it stands right now, yes.

Those "rights" that people have based on "race, color, creed, religion, etc" aren't really Rights (big R rights not little r rights) when it comes to private businesses. They are a standard of conduct that we have, as a society, deemed important enough to codify into law to be the best for the largest number of people.

I also happen to agree with those laws. It can be reasonably argued that the people in the "protected class" can't choose to not be who they are or shouldn't have to choose to be something different in their basic human make-up just to simply be afforded the dignity to be served in a business otherwise open to the public.

Also, those "rights" aren't even "rights" when it comes to individual private property (private homes & such) which obviously shows that they aren't really Rights but "rights".

I also support the lack of those laws, as well. I shouldn't be told as a private person on my own individual (not open to the public) property that I can't discriminate on whatever grounds I choose. If someone doesn't like Mexicans they shouldn't be forced to like them or let them enter their homes. They can hate all they want. Just as I have the right to think they are uncivilized bigots for their backward beliefs.

They are only Rights when it involves government discrimination or infringement. There shouldn't even have to be a law for that. The government is supposed to be open to everyone. The government is ALREADY restricted from infringing on our RKBA.

Private property is a whole other thing altogether.

 

[LeeStreet]

There has been numerous discussions on the subject of OCing, & there will be more I'm sure. MHO on the following.

I won't OC because of the " fear factor " that others might have, just because I can OC. There are alot of SICK people out there that spoils it for the law abiding gun carrying public.

I will CC into an establishment even though there might be a no weapons sign posted, other than schools, federal buildings, etc.

I want an advantage over the BG, even though OCing might deter the BG.

I want to exercise my 2nd amendment right, & my LTCH.

I want to protect myself & those around me.

Maybe I will visit the Auburn Buffalo Wild Wings tomorrow night & try the mango habenero wings.

 

[finity]

Yes, and he used his rights wisely. He politely offered to leave, and politely denied any attempt at bullying by the "manager". The manager kept asking a question that had already been answered (don't ask a question you don't want an answer to) and resorted to "I'm calling the cops." And threatening to take down your license plate number will get him exactly jack squat. What was he going to do, call in a patron who ate quietly, paid his bill, and exercised his legal rights?

I OC everywhere I'm legally allowed. I would handle this situation exactly the same way the OP did. A manager can ask me for anything and everything their little heads might think up. I am not required to comply with anything other than "leave now", "pay now", or "don't ever come back".

Just like no guns signs are company policy and a request that you not be armed, verbal requests hold the same weight. The "manager" in this situation just expected the OP to "respect his authoritah!" and when the OP didn't, he didn't know what to do. So he wandered off, dumbfounded.

Don't roll over. This is the exact situation we need to stand up and positively exert our rights. It's been talked about regularly here that people don't see OC very often, so they don't know how to handle those who do so legally, respectfully, and positively. The OP did exactly that.

If you (generic you) CC, good for you. I do too, sometimes. But only when I feel like it, not because others feel I should, including spineless ignorant restaurant managers.

Some people aren't getting the message:

YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY!!!

If you don't believe me try to sue a private non-business party for a rights infringment. It won't work. You can't sue me because I told you to shut up. You can't sue me because I didn't like you because of your religion or ethnicity. You can't sue me because I didn't invite you to a party at my house for one of the above reasons.

YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY!!!

If you want to be able to carry a gun on private property without the owner having any say in it then get someone to PASS A LAW! Just like it was done recently for the employer parking lot law that was enacted. Take the next step. Until then YOU HAVE NO "RIGHT" TO CARRY A GUN ON SOMEONE'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.

It won't be illegal if you do but it is still "wrong". I shouldn't have to tell you to leave. You should be mature enough to not push the issue & put it in someone's face.

IF I OC into a store that has a "no guns" sign then I should only expect trouble (which is why I CC there ). Who in their "reasonable" mind would think otherwise? Why would you OC into a store that is posted "no guns" EXCEPT to stir up trouble?

Since...

YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY!!!

...that could be the ONLY reasonable expected outcome of that action - hence the charges of doing it just to "cause trouble". If you do get a negative response in a situation like that YOU HAVE NO ONE TO BLAME BUT YOURSELF. If it doesn't happen that way then consider yourself lucky. If I CC & get found out I would accept that I did something "wrong". I would be a little sheepish (FTR, that's totally different than "sheeple") & completely accept the chewing I would rightly get from the owner.

If the place isn't posted then as soon as the owner lets you know their policy you are now back to it being a known "no guns" location. Either follow the owners wishes or leave.

DO THE RIGHT THING WITHOUT HAVING TO BE TOLD TO DO IT OR WITHOUT THERE NEEDING TO BE A LAW ABOUT IT!!

Why is that so hard to understand?

Isn't that what they taught you in the military, mk2ja?

 

[mk2ja]

I'll go ahead and mention that a friend of mine read my account in the OP and suggested that this might have been an appropriate response as a Christian:
"Sir, I want you to understand that as a citizen I have no oblligation to cover up or disarm, but as a Christian, I'll go ahead and cover up."

@finity - I appreciate your well-thought, well-written, and well-collected posts. I can understand the viewpoint of those who think, as you do, that my actions while legal were inconsiderate and/or inappropriate.

Will I respond the same way if faced with a similar situation in the future? That's still something with which I'm struggling. I'm torn between wanting to appease people (in this case, by covering my sidearm) and not doing something JUST do make somebody *feel better* without changing anything (I still have my gun, so if I wanted to shoot them, big deal if it is covered). If I'm not doing anything wrong, why should I have to stop doing it?

Some people need to get over themselves. "The sight of a gun/gay couple/black man makes me uncomfortable." Deal with it! Overcome your ignorance, but don't bother me, don't disrupt me from going about my business myself just because you can't handle the truth! Er, I mean, handle your discomfort. (Good movie, couldn't help it.)

Obviously, people at large can be educated about our rights as citizens, about guns, about self defense, and many other topics if they see a person OC'ing and ask questions; my friend's friend had the opportunity to learn a lot Friday night all because I was OC'ing. But has Christ not called me to be considerate of others?

Ugh.

I really tried to be as polite as possible to the manager. But being polite doesn't mean you give them everything they want, either. Some people just have to learn to hear the word "No" as a response to their request.

 

[jsgolfman]

As it stands right now, yes.

Those "rights" that people have based on "race, color, creed, religion, etc" aren't really Rights (big R rights not little r rights) when it comes to private businesses. They are a standard of conduct that we have, as a society, deemed important enough to codify into law to be the best for the largest number of people.

I also happen to agree with those laws. It can be reasonably argued that the people in the "protected class" can't choose to not be who they are or shouldn't have to choose to be something different in their basic human make-up just to simply be afforded the dignity to be served in a business otherwise open to the public.

Also, those "rights" aren't even "rights" when it comes to individual private property (private homes & such) which obviously shows that they aren't really Rights but "rights".

I also support the lack of those laws, as well. I shouldn't be told as a private person on my own individual (not open to the public) property that I can't discriminate on whatever grounds I choose. If someone doesn't like Mexicans they shouldn't be forced to like them or let them enter their homes. They can hate all they want. Just as I have the right to think they are uncivilized bigots for their backward beliefs.

They are only Rights when it involves government discrimination or infringement. There shouldn't even have to be a law for that. The government is supposed to be open to everyone. The government is ALREADY restricted from infringing on our RKBA.

Private property is a whole other thing altogether.

I happen to disagree with those laws and in (my)perfect world, there would be no gray area. Private property owners would be just that and could maintain whatever standards they see fit. However, in the world in which we actually live, I would hazard a guess that this particular establishment and most if not all others are not strictly private property as they have most likely received either some type of tax deferral, loan or other such subsidy from the state(i.e., you and me). Therefore, they no longer fall under the guise of "private property" and have no claim to discriminate on any grounds.

There are no rights based on color, creed, etc. nor are they a code of conduct that we as a society have agreed upon. I don't recall agreeing to them at least (whether they be a good code or not is not the debate). As has been said many times here and elsewhere, you don't have the right not to be offended or your dignity bespoiled.

As for the government being open to anyone, I don't believe you are that naive. The state has never been an entity that operates on fairness and openness. It is not restricted in any manner other than what it allows itself to be restricted.