• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Whataburger says no to OC

bushwacker

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
203
Location
pottsboro,texas
For me, if I had any interest in going to Whataburger, I'd be taking the position that they don't want my money and I wouldn't simply go nut CC. But as I'm a Vegan, their policy won't have any impact upon me personally as they have nothing that I would eat! :banana:

oh come now...they have lettuce ,onions, tomatoes and pickles at whata pity...I mean whata mistake ...oops ummm thats wwwwwhatburger guess I could be mistaken for mel ..... yeah that's reaching back, some here may be too young to catch that...sorry
 

HPmatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
1,467
Location
Dallas
Legal Insurrection article by cute little Kimberlee - loves w/b and the 2A[emoji173]️!!

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/07/no-whataburger-is-not-defying-texas-open-carry-laws/

Doesn't understand Texas has summer 9 months a year, so the WeenieBurger VP would prefer folks to CC into their stores in July when it was 98F today, wearing Bootlength Dusters to conceal? That would make their anti-gun mommies feel more comfortable? Last time I ate inside a w/b it was construction crews and football boys chowing down on double/triple burgers, not the Happy Meal moms eating what-a-salads.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
If even in Texas they never post signs, and say if reports start rolling in that people are OCing to WB and have no trouble, nobody says anything about it, will you then decide it's ok to eat there or will you refuse as a result of the public statements/"official" (albeit, unenforced) policy?
 

HPmatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
1,467
Location
Dallas
I think I would OC unless posted. If told to coverup, I think I would give the manager a No Guns, No $ 2A card and honor their property rights. I would expect Twisted Root, Maple & Motor burgers, Hoppdoddy and Jakes would allow OC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
I think I would OC unless posted. If told to coverup, I think I would give the manager a No Guns, No $ 2A card and honor their property rights. I would expect Twisted Root, Maple & Motor burgers, Hoppdoddy and Jakes would allow OC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was also going to ask what good burger shop alternatives there are in Texas, and if there are any openly welcoming of OCers.

I know of a good Chicken place that is overtly welcoming of lawful carry and even accommodating of activists, but I don't think I know of any burger joints like that off the top of my head.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
I think I would OC unless posted. If told to coverup, I think I would give the manager a No Guns, No $ 2A card and honor their property rights. I would expect Twisted Root, Maple & Motor burgers, Hoppdoddy and Jakes would allow OC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you will find many will post 30.07 if not 30.06, either on purpose, accidentally, or at the request of the insurance folks.

And Hopdoddy is Austin based so I expect a posting.

But you cannot compare Whataburger to the others you mention. Mooyah will probably not post, but they are franchises so who knows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
i'd like to know why a business is not allowed to refuse to serve gay people, which is now essentially a "lawful" activity and also a "fundamental right". but they can prohibit open carriers, which is also a "lawful" activity, and also a "fundamental right".


i'm tired of hearing "it's two different things". no, it's not. they are actually one in the same.
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
i'd like to know why a business is not allowed to refuse to serve gay people, which is now essentially a "lawful" activity and also a "fundamental right". but they can prohibit open carriers, which is also a "lawful" activity, and also a "fundamental right".


i'm tired of hearing "it's two different things". no, it's not. they are actually one in the same.

Because the meaning of discrimination has been bastardized, misapplied, and wrongfully outlawed by legislatures and courts to [strike]protect selected people[/strike] create a hierarchy wherein certain folks may violate the rights of others by ignoring property and association rights, while other people lower in the hierarchy are still subject to the laws protecting those property and association rights.
 
Last edited:

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
i'd like to know why a business is not allowed to refuse to serve gay people, which is now essentially a "lawful" activity and also a "fundamental right". but they can prohibit open carriers, which is also a "lawful" activity, and also a "fundamental right".


i'm tired of hearing "it's two different things". no, it's not. they are actually one in the same.

Freedom for all, but more freedom for others.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
i'd like to know why a business is not allowed to refuse to serve gay people, which is now essentially a "lawful" activity and also a "fundamental right". but they can prohibit open carriers, which is also a "lawful" activity, and also a "fundamental right".


i'm tired of hearing "it's two different things". no, it's not. they are actually one in the same.

+1

It is obvious that appeals to property and association rights are losing propositions at this point in time even if one does believe strongly enough in private property rights to oppose anti-discrimination laws.

So I believe gun owners/carriers should be pushing for equal protection under anti-discrimination laws.

For those who support anti-discrimination laws or even just public health and safety laws, lawful and peaceful possession of a gun should get as much protection in places of public accommodation as wearing a T-shirt announcing membership or participation in some group or activity the store owner finds offensive.

For those who don't support anti-discrimination laws, they might consider if forcing those on the left to provide services to those they find morally offensive (or scary) might not be the only thing to cause them to reconsider forcing business owners to provide services to all comers.

Right now, Christian business owners are being legally required to provide services to events they find offensive, while homosexual business owners are not being likewise forced to provide services to promote messages they find offensive. When everyone suffers equally, maybe everyone will decide they prefer to let everyone make certain decisions for themselves. And if not, at least everyone is equal and gun owners/carriers are not the only group forced into the closet, out of civil society.

Charles
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
+1

It is obvious that appeals to property and association rights are losing propositions at this point in time even if one does believe strongly enough in private property rights to oppose anti-discrimination laws.

So I believe gun owners/carriers should be pushing for equal protection under anti-discrimination laws.

For those who support anti-discrimination laws or even just public health and safety laws, lawful and peaceful possession of a gun should get as much protection in places of public accommodation as wearing a T-shirt announcing membership or participation in some group or activity the store owner finds offensive.

For those who don't support anti-discrimination laws, they might consider if forcing those on the left to provide services to those they find morally offensive (or scary) might not be the only thing to cause them to reconsider forcing business owners to provide services to all comers.

Right now, Christian business owners are being legally required to provide services to events they find offensive, while homosexual business owners are not being likewise forced to provide services to promote messages they find offensive. When everyone suffers equally, maybe everyone will decide they prefer to let everyone make certain decisions for themselves. And if not, at least everyone is equal and gun owners/carriers are not the only group forced into the closet, out of civil society.

Charles

I would point out how illogical all that is, but I suspect you'd just object to the use of logic in discussion and we'd get nowhere. :rolleyes:
 

FreedomTx

Newbie
Joined
Jul 15, 2015
Messages
6
Location
Behind enemy lines in occupied territory
http://whataburger.com/company/pressreleasedetail/whataburger-addresses-open-carry-policy

You Texans should express your desire to be able to carry openly or concealed in their stores, whenever you feel like it.

Believe me, if I see a 3006 or 3007 sign, regardless of how I'm carrying, I'll be taking my money elsewhere.

The CHL stasi on the tx chl forum completely shout down anyone who supports open carry. Other places like KROGER have said they will abide by state law and have ignored the mommy squad. KROGER will continue to get my grocery money as they have been.

Whataburger made a political statement in an effort to have it both ways. Bye bye Whataburger.
 
Last edited:

rushcreek2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
909
Location
Colorado Springs. CO
Is it possible to "open carry" .....without displaying "in plain view".....?

Is this a conundrum...an oxymoron.....or.....perhaps...a solution....?
 
Last edited:

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
Is it possible to "open carry" .....without displaying "in plain view".....?

Is this a conundrum...an oxymoron.....or.....perhaps...a solution....?

Anything that forces you to something you don't normally do is not a solution.
 

bushwacker

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
203
Location
pottsboro,texas
Any word from In-N-Out?

when I go to in and out burger in vegas I always open carry , nobody ever said anything about it.. now in dallas I found a Griffs still open on irving blvd and they are better than whatapity especially the double meat and cheese... hope they will have no issues with oc
 

bushwacker

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
203
Location
pottsboro,texas
i'd like to know why a business is not allowed to refuse to serve gay people, which is now essentially a "lawful" activity and also a "fundamental right". but they can prohibit open carriers, which is also a "lawful" activity, and also a "fundamental right".


i'm tired of hearing "it's two different things". no, it's not. they are actually one in the same.

I don't think it is about rights with companies as it is about what kind of gun you are carrying. gay people carry a different type of gun and it is kept cc hope fully we will see equal treatment if they ever get to carry their's in the fashion ( pun there) of oc .... really I think that when the whole scare of oc disappears you will see business lightening up but as one pointed out it will more than likely be the insurance companies that will be the problem. I drive an 18 wheeler and have been turned down for food at jack in the box and taco bell for walking up to the window when the dinning room was closed (even tho they had seen my truck taking up the front parking lot) and told that the insurance company wouldn't allow it now go away before we call the cops. sad to say but whatabutt#ole did serve me at the drive thru window ...been 14 yrs since the jack and the bell has gotten any of my money
 

SteveInCO

Regular Member
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
297
Location
El Paso County, Colorado
i'm tired of hearing "it's two different things". no, it's not. they are actually one in the same.

Well guess what? You may be tired of hearing it, but others are tired of hearing YOU deny that there is a difference. They'll stop saying it, when you quit denying it. Because there is a difference. One is a behavior, and the other is what the person is.
 

FreedomTx

Newbie
Joined
Jul 15, 2015
Messages
6
Location
Behind enemy lines in occupied territory
Well guess what? You may be tired of hearing it, but others are tired of hearing YOU deny that there is a difference. They'll stop saying it, when you quit denying it. Because there is a difference. One is a behavior, and the other is what the person is.

Wrong. You've completely lost the plot. His point was that the behavior of the business is the same in each case. Denial of service. Gay is what a person is? I think you're on the wrong forum to be preaching rubbish and that is a totally straw-man argument on which I won't even begin to engage you. The "difference" you speak of is simply the leftist drivel that is bombarding everyone each day in the media and even leftist churches.

NO there IS NO difference.
:mad:
 
Last edited:

HPmatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
1,467
Location
Dallas
....
Whataburger made a political statement in an effort to have it both ways. Bye bye Whataburger.

It took me a while chewing on that to remember that is a burger phrase at Whataburger you can 'have it both ways'....,now are they talking about the burgers or recent court rulings?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top