The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 12, 2013, 04:16 PM   #1
Nasty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2008
Posts: 323
Regal Theaters

I sent a message to them about their no carry signs (which carry weight of Law in Ohio) and this is what I got in return:

Quote:
February 12, 2013

Dear <real name>:

Thank you for taking the time to communicate your concerns regarding our facility security policies. Please understand that Regal Entertainment Group, with the assistance of safety experts and law enforcement personnel, has developed policies and procedures designed to provide the safest environment for our guests and employees. Rest assured these policies and procedures are not designed with the intent to inconvenience or otherwise cause hardship to our guests. However, we believe these policies appropriate to assure the general safety of all guests and employees.

Please note all law enforcement officers, whether on or off duty, are exempt from our gun prohibition policy in the theatre, as long as they identify themselves as such either by display of a badge or other identification upon request.

Again, thank you for taking the time to advise us of your concerns.

Sincerely,
Customer Relations Department
Operational Services
Regal Entertainment Group

I replied:

Quote:
Thank you for your response.

Considering recent events in which the LAPD have gone into panic mode and are shooting innocent civilians at random based on nothing more than their driving pickup trucks, I believe that *your* trust in them which allows them to be armed while denying a lawfully trained and licensed individual to protect himself and his family is both irresponsible and dangerous.

Rest assured that I have both your business and our safety in mind. Bear in mind that the State of Ohio has already determined that I met or surpassed all requirements to provide for my own safety, yet you have decided to disallow my lawfully demonstrated right.

Please note that not only will I, my family and friends no longer do business with you, but as an individual and as a member of several of the largest firearm forums on the internet, I will both publicize your response and support a boycott of your businesses.

Thank you for taking the time to clearly state Regal Entertainment Group's lack of respect for individual rights. Best of luck in filling your theatres with law enforcement personnel.

Folks...if we don't all stand up to these self serving businesses they will continue to deny us our rights.

Thanks for reading,
Nasty
____________
__________________
Above is based on the opinion of a 20 year Small Arms Marksmanship and Training Unit USAF instructor with more than 30 years in competitive shooting sports. Your mileage may vary.
Nasty is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 04:21 PM   #2
Texshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 17, 2006
Posts: 261
Well done & well stated.
Texshooter is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 04:22 PM   #3
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
I would seem to me that a reference to the Aurora shooting would be the best response to their claims of "assuring safety".



Quote:
...not only will I, my family and friends no longer do business with you,...
As a point of (hopefully) constructive criticism, this is a remark that I always discourage. No one believes that your entire circle of friends and family will boycott the theater. Saying so puts you firmly in the "blowhard we can ignore" category. Doesn't even matter if it's true for your particular cases or not, it's NOT true 99.99% of the time it's claimed and they know it.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 05:34 PM   #4
Nasty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2008
Posts: 323
In Ohio, if they think you are carrying in a posted area, they don;t need to confront you. They can call a cop and if the officer finds you armed, you are in violation.

If the Judge finds you guilty of a minor offense, the Court can let you off with *only* a 2 year suspension of your CCW.

Thanks to those in support.
__________________
Above is based on the opinion of a 20 year Small Arms Marksmanship and Training Unit USAF instructor with more than 30 years in competitive shooting sports. Your mileage may vary.
Nasty is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 05:58 PM   #5
Flopsweat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 28, 2011
Posts: 182
You need to get that law changed. Businesses will open and close, corporations will change policy with the wind direction. You can play whack-a-mole with the no carry signs from now 'till eternity. I'm not saying that you did anything wrong - in fact I love that letter - but I hope you folks are making a calculated, determined effort to change that law - it's ridiculous. They can achieve the same illusion of safety if the signs don't have the force of law - a force that is naturally ignored by the lawless.
Flopsweat is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 01:51 AM   #6
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,813
Been down this road with them and they didn't react much. One of the problems is what theatre are you going to send them receipts from showing you took your business elsewhere? Every last one in my area bans carry.
Does this policy fixing behavior fall under the anti-trust laws? JK.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 02:03 AM   #7
shaunpain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 555
I'm just playing devil's advocate here and do not personally condone or recommend what I'm about to say, but what is keeping anyone (good and bad guy alike) from carrying inside these theaters? I understand that it's a violation, but we haven't seen the case where an armed civilian in violation of any posted policy has effectively stopped a criminal. What sort of repercussions would there be if this happened? Would the civilian be deemed a hero/charges pressed? My personal opinion is, and always has been, that a business owner can dictate the terms of his transactions with their clients. If they want to post a "Gun Free Zone" sign, then they have every right to do so. When you conduct business with them, being shot by an armed gunman is the risk you have to be willing to take. I love your letter, don't get me wrong. Will it do any good? No, I don't believe so. I also respect their right to ignore your letter and think they should do whatever the hell they please. I have Netflix, so I'm good.
__________________
"Shut up, crime!"
shaunpain is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 02:04 AM   #8
shaunpain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 555
Let me also add, a little off topic, that I don't believe this should apply to any government institutions or schools. We own those as taxpayers, and we should be able to vote carry in those institutions.
__________________
"Shut up, crime!"
shaunpain is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 02:18 AM   #9
geetarman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,750
Quote:
I have Netflix, so I'm good.
Yep! I got tired of the cell phones, laser pointers and the local car dealers trying to sell cars. I have not been to a theater in at least 25 years.
__________________
Geetarman

Carpe Cerveza
geetarman is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 09:34 AM   #10
Willie Sutton
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
I understand that it's a violation, but we haven't seen the case where an armed civilian in violation of any posted policy has effectively stopped a criminal.


Probably depends on the jurisdiction, but the first shooting by a CCW in Wisconsin took place about a year ago, when an armed robber with a shotgun was engaged by a citizen standing in line, resulting in the criminal suffering a wound and being neutralized. This took place in a larger supermarket that had "no firearms allowed" signs posted. The Prosecutor declined to present any charges.

Actual mileage will most obviously vary, and no general observation is offered.


Willie

.
Willie Sutton is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 09:47 AM   #11
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
I can't speak to any generalities but I have seen a number of different cases in different states and involving different versions of possession violations which also involved self-defense and I have never seen the relatively minor possession charge pursued.

For example, there was a case in NY where a woman shot an attacker with a handgun that she was not authorized to possess, as she did not have a permit of any kind, say nothing of that particular firearm being on her permit. However, the shooting was obviously righteous and no charges were brought.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old February 14, 2013, 10:55 AM   #12
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,444
Quote:
Folks...if we don't all stand up to these self serving businesses they will continue to deny us our rights.
Interesting statement. Believe it or not, for profit businesses are in fact self serving. That is why they exist, regardless of whether they allow you to carry or not.

As for your rights, they have rights to. Strangely, theaters also squelch your 1st amendment right, but I noticed that you apparently are okay with giving up that right.

Simply put, carrying a gun into a business as a patron isn't your right. It isn't your right by the plain fact that you can only do it legally if it is allowed by the business. So it is a privilege regardless of whether you think it should be your right to do so or not. Until laws change, that is the way it is.

Quote:
Please note that not only will I, my family and friends no longer do business with you, but as an individual and as a member of several of the largest firearm forums on the internet, I will both publicize your response and support a boycott of your businesses.
Efforts to force businesses to make them comply with our carry needs through threats, protests, and boycotts, from what I have read on this forum and others, have all failed, IIRC. These are all very negative attacks on the business and businesses generally all respond defensively to such insults. Since they don't want you in with your gun, they are happy to not have you in their business. That you are boycotting doesn't bother them. In fact, it helps them with their desire that you not carry in their business.

The efforts to get business to let people carry in them that have been successful seem to be those efforts that don't try to punish businesses for not complying, but instead are those efforts that attempt to persuade in a logical manner the reasons why it is in fact beneficial for a business to allow law abiding citizens to carry.

Obviously, this is the much harder way to try to make a business change because it requires quite a bit of maturity, eloquence, business logic, and humbleness, not to mention being personable and having the gift of persuasion. Being combative, argumentative, or expressing a sense of entitlement when going into a business personally, verbally, or with written communication isn't likely to result in a beneficial outcome. This just reinforces the business' perspective that it doesn't want people like you as patrons.

That you are now engaging in your punitive action by publicizing the horrors of Regal theaters will undoubtedly help you to feel empowered and feel better about your decision, but Regal hasn't a clue about these "largest firearm forums on the internet" and isn't likely to notice any actual effect outside of the normal business variation they experience from day to day or cycle to cycle. They know this.

You don't change peoples' minds by trying to force them to see things your way. If you haven't noticed, their policy hasn't forced you to see things their way so why would you think your policy will force them to see things your way?
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 04:19 AM   #13
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
It's nice to live in a state where such signs have no legal meaning.
MLeake is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 04:29 AM   #14
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,950
Quote:
I can't speak to any generalities but I have seen a number of different cases in different states and involving different versions of possession violations which also involved self-defense and I have never seen the relatively minor possession charge pursued.
Mas has written up at least one of those. Not sure about the details, though I do remember it involved being on the wrong side of a state line (the good guy lived very close to the border...?)

Can't remember anything else about that one. Someone else help me out here?

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 04:33 AM   #15
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,950
Quote:
The efforts to get business to let people carry in them that have been successful seem to be those efforts that don't try to punish businesses for not complying, but instead are those efforts that attempt to persuade in a logical manner the reasons why it is in fact beneficial for a business to allow law abiding citizens to carry.
This!

And we've had especially good luck with rewarding and reinforcing good behavior -- witness the Starbucks "buycott" where gun owners dedicated a day to buying something from that company.

Probably happens that way because the business owner doesn't see the dollars that would have come into the business. They only see the dollars that actually do come in.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 05:42 AM   #16
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
One example Mas has discussed, where the self-defense case found in favor of the defendant but possession charges were pursued, would be that of Bernard Goetz.
MLeake is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 05:50 AM   #17
flybuddy
Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2013
Posts: 22
They can post in Florida but they have no legal recourse.
flybuddy is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 08:49 AM   #18
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Regal Theaters

Quote:
Originally Posted by MLeake View Post
One example Mas has discussed, where the self-defense case found in favor of the defendant but possession charges were pursued, would be that of Bernard Goetz.
That's true, I hadn't considered places where the gun was completely illegal. I'd imagine other such cases have happened in NY, Chicago, etc that never made the public attention threshold.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 09:37 AM   #19
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,444
Quote:
And we've had especially good luck with rewarding and reinforcing good behavior -- witness the Starbucks "buycott" where gun owners dedicated a day to buying something from that company.
We need to have these more often. We did it once for Starbucks for one day, but punitive boycotts are ongoing. We need to make an ongoing show of supporting especially pro-gun businesses that specifically say or have made it know to have welcome gun policies.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 09:51 AM   #20
insman1132
Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2009
Location: FL in winter, MI in summer
Posts: 33
Have never had a problem in any Regal Theatre. I CCW always. They don't ask. I don't offer. We get along well.

However I will join your boycott on general principles.
insman1132 is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 10:21 AM   #21
MWalsh
Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2009
Posts: 31
Quote:
However I will join your boycott on general principles.
No point in boycotting unless they know why, remember

Apparently most mass shootings occur in gun free zones, so really the concept of them is very stupid.
MWalsh is offline  
Old February 15, 2013, 04:01 PM   #22
Gaerek
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
Quote:
I can't speak to any generalities but I have seen a number of different cases in different states and involving different versions of possession violations which also involved self-defense and I have never seen the relatively minor possession charge pursued.

For example, there was a case in NY where a woman shot an attacker with a handgun that she was not authorized to possess, as she did not have a permit of any kind, say nothing of that particular firearm being on her permit. However, the shooting was obviously righteous and no charges were brought.
I remember hearing or reading something from someone, I'm pretty sure it was Mas Ayoob, about the idea of Competing Harms. In this case, between getting shot because you couldn't defend yourself, or carrying a gun somewhere you're not supposed to, you probably won't be brought up on possession charges because obviously, being shot is a bigger harm than possessing illegally. Not every state has this, and handgunlaw.us doesn't go into it, so you might have to do some digging.

I'm pretty sure the person who said it, concluded with something like, "Think about how many times you've had to use your gun in self defense, compared to the number of times you've accidently flashed, or your gun printed, or something like that." Basically, you are far more likely to get a possession charge, than you are to have to use your gun in defense. So...do what your going to do at your own risk.

Wikipedia entry on this concept:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competing_harms
Gaerek is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 03:05 PM   #23
Kevin Rohrer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2010
Location: Medina, Ohio
Posts: 507
We have a Regal theater in Medina, and I can't remember seeing a No Guns sign. We will be going to a chic flick there Monday and I will look.

Signs such as those should be ignored. Better to be tried by twelve, than carried by six.
__________________
Member: Orange Gunsite Family, NRA--Life, Varmint Hunters' Assn., ARTCA, American Legion, & South Cuyahoga Sportsmen's Assn.

"Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery...all else is twaddle!" --Admiral Sir John Fisher, RN
Kevin Rohrer is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 04:47 PM   #24
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,444
Quote:
Apparently most mass shootings occur in gun free zones, so really the concept of them is very stupid.
No, apparently they don't. The ones you hear about most often occur there, but that is not where they most often occur. That is media hype. What is commonly missed are the localized mass shootings that don't occur in public areas that fail to make national news or that are in public areas but fail to garner much attention because they are not particularly unique. As near as I can tell, most mass shootings happen in private residences, usually but not always are composed of multiple numbers of family members. These get written off by the media as domestic problems and usually carry little national newsworthiness.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthrea...=gun+free+zone.

Here are just a few examples from this year and you may not have heard of any of them.

1 Jan 2013 - 4 shot at a house party, McKeesport, PA
http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2013/...in-mckeesport/

Jan 2013 - teenage shoots and kills 5 in ABQ home
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2516424.html

Feb 2013 Mardi Gras Bourbon Street mass shooting, 4 shot
http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/m...-say-1.4610011

Feb 2013 - 5 shot and 1 killed in a home in SF, CA
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...lejo-shooting/

This morning, Feb 16 2013 - 5 shot outside of a club in Columbia, SC
http://www.wyff4.com/news/columbia-s...yff%2Bnews%2B4
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 07:00 PM   #25
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
DNS, it seems like you are using shootings that don't meet the normal standard for mass shootings.

Some of the examples you listed involved shooting of family members or persons known to the shooter.

Some involved a shooting subsequent to a verbal or physical altercation.

I thought the way the government and media defined "mass shootings" or "spree shootings" required 4 or more victims; victims not friends or family of the shooter; not the result of another crime (such as killing hostages during a standoff with SWAT).

Using those criteria, the vast majority occur in either Federal Gun Free Zones, posted no gun zones, or in the case of Luby's in an area where there was no mechanism for lawful concealed carry.
MLeake is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13330 seconds with 9 queries