Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Toby Keith Restaurant Anti-Gun


StirrupTrouble

Recommended Posts

I wasn't sure if this needed to be in the saloon or Team SASS, so feel free to move if appropriate.

 

Toby Keith opened a restaurant in Virginia and is anti gun? That is stunning to me...

 

http://www.newser.com/story/179819/toby-keith-no-guns-allowed-in-my-restaurant.html

 

Link to comment

I must not have had my glasses on when I went in last time. Nor will I the next time either. Don't have any idea how I missed that notice.

Link to comment

We can't have guns in town at EOT after five does that make them anti gun?

Link to comment

We can't have guns in town at EOT after five does that make them anti gun?

 

That is a darn good question. Given both [Toby's place and EOT] are private property governed by the rules of the owners. I have not been to either place, so I will ask, what happens in EOT town after five pm? Would it be the same as Toby's place?

Link to comment

I've been to EOT and guns are banned after five except for the security detail and law enforcement. At The Cowboys two annual matches guns are banned in town after five and all events except for the night black powder shoot. My point is that sometimes we paint with a broad brush when we label someone anti gun. If Toby has indeed switched sides then the label would apply. SASS has not and neither has The Cowboys.

Link to comment

I've been to EOT and guns are banned after five except for the security detail and law enforcement. At The Cowboys two annual matches guns are banned in town after five and all events except for the night black powder shoot. My point is that sometimes we paint with a broad brush when we label someone anti gun. If Toby has indeed switched sides then the label would apply. SASS has not and neither has The Cowboys.

Unless I am mistaken, Tombstone was more restrictive. Yet people glorify the Earps,

 

Lets throw our copies of the movie away. Its the Earp's restrictive gun laws that led up to the OK Corral.

Link to comment

I'd bet it has something to do with insurance. "You serve alcohol. If you allow your customers to carry, it will cost you (just grabbing a number out of the air) $10,000,000/year for your liability insurance. If you post "No Guns Allowed" signs, or don't serve alcohol, it will cost you $1,250,000/year. Your choice."

Link to comment

I'd almost guarantee that is the case, Joe. The carrier may have even refused to offer insurance if the no guns policy was not in place.

 

I worked for a private communications company many years ago that had a no firearms allowed on the premises or in a company vehicle rule. The owner of the company got me into quail, dove, javelina and elk hunting in Az. He was very pro gun. When I took the job I had to sign the no guns contract. When it was presented to me before I signed it I asked why they had this no guns policy and it was explained to me that a previous employee had a handgun in his tool cabinet in the shop area and it accidentally discharged one day narrowly missing two female employees in the adjoining room. It was not hard to understand the reasons for implementing the no guns policy.

Link to comment

We know the NFL is anti gun there is no question about that. Let's say they weren't and allowed everyone that was legally able to carry a handgun into a pro football stadium where alcohol is served with virtually no limits on consumption. Let's say the two teams playing were the Raiders and the Chargers, I'm willing to bet the body count would be in the hundreds before the national anthem. How about a Red Sox, Yankees game? Phillies, Braves? There is a time and place for everything and the Bell Union Saloon at EOT probably isn't the place to be wearing sidearms when they start serving drinks. The insurance carrier for SASS probably made that abundantly clear to the folks in charge.

 

Personally I've sat around camp at main matches in the evening when the effects of the scotch and other cocktails are starting to take hold and I'm really glad that the guns are put away. That doesn't make me anti gun.

Link to comment

I'd bet it has something to do with insurance. "You serve alcohol. If you allow your customers to carry, it will cost you (just grabbing a number out of the air) $10,000,000/year for your liability insurance. If you post "No Guns Allowed" signs, or don't serve alcohol, it will cost you $1,250,000/year. Your choice."

 

This was why I asked about EOT vs. Toby's place. Its about cash or local law. Some municipalities out law firearms in the same place alchoholic beverages are served. This may be true in both places. Its not the case where I live.

 

So, is it anti gun policy. Yes. By the owners? Maybe not. By the pople who have ultimate financial liability, yes. It is basically trading or limiting rights for coin.

Link to comment

look into the specifics of the state for the legal posting of such requests. I bet, if it does not correctly post all the correct information at the correct location, with the correct font, etc, etc, well its just there for scare tactics.

And if it is correctly posted, then you have to follow that lead. Leave your gun(s) in your vehicle.....Or go somewhere else. There are other locations that sale less expensive food and drink and are probably better.

Link to comment

Read and understand your concealed carry permit. Here it is illegal to carry into a bar or where alcohol is served. EOT may be insurance. And it maybe not wanting to take responsibility for a bunch of people who have been drinking and are carrying, Or it may be the dqays over, put your guns away. You can have fun without them.

Ike

Link to comment

At EOT the rule is no guns in town after 5 PM. They are not concerned about the parking lot or the camping area. Alcohol consumption is not confined to the Belle Union. There is plenty consumed by persons sitting at the picnic tables and strolling around town. A few pards are focusing hard to remain upright. Some are talking very loudly. Given this situation, no guns in town after 5 PM when the Belle Union opens is sound policy.

Link to comment

It is my understanding that a resturant chain paid Toby Keith money to use his name. He does not actually own these resturants or have any control in how they do business.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.