Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:03 AM
Status: "Smartened up and walked away!" (set 27 days ago)
 
11,786 posts, read 5,795,007 times
Reputation: 14208

Advertisements

Update - there' s more to the story as there always is - response from owner - and yes - I would have asked him to leave to given the previous circumstances:

"Unfortunately, we have been besieged with a misrepresentation of the facts regarding the incident with the National Guardsman, Mr. Welch, at one of LexiDan Foods Waffle House establishments. The facts are simple. We do have a policy posted on our Waffle House franchise buildings stating our policy in permitting firearms in our buildings. We normally are very loose on how we enforce that policy in terms of the military. However, on this particular incident, two facts have not been reported accurately that facilitated the situation with Mr. Welch. First, he was an active participant in a fight on the premises several weeks prior to September 27th. He was restrained and taken off the premises by off-duty police officers that were eating in the restaurant at the time. The second item not reported accurately was the time the most recent incident occurred, 2AM. We have associates who have to make snap decisions on our third shifts to provide for their own safety and the safety of our customers. Our associates decided because of Mr. Welch's recent altercation, which they witnessed, it was in their best interest at 2 AM to ask Mr. Welch to leave his firearm in his vehicle. Mr. Welch decided to leave. We still tried to garner his business at that point. I am supportive of my team's decision. I was not there and will not judge their decision making after the fact. If this incident occurred at 10am in the morning and Mr. Welch had not been involved in a previous fight I'm sure the outcome would have been different. I feel Lex 18 did not do due diligence in their reporting. We are highly supportive of all our military branches and especially supportive of our veterans. I hope this provides some clarification on the matter. Thank you for taking the time to read this and understanding that in any business, judgment decisions have to be made to provide for the safety of our associates and customers."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:09 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,051,710 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Why would this guy need to carry a sidearm? I see military personnel in restaurants all the time, I have never seen one armed. IMO he should have left his gun at home.
For the same reason you put a seat belt on when you get in a car. Military personnel are now potential targets of terrorists, I really can't blame him. Don't be surprised if in the future they are all armed, one more Fort Hood and I can can almost guarantee they will be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:11 AM
 
50,795 posts, read 36,486,545 times
Reputation: 76590
Quote:
Originally Posted by xray731 View Post
Update - there' s more to the story as there always is - response from owner - and yes - I would have asked him to leave to given the previous circumstances:

"Unfortunately, we have been besieged with a misrepresentation of the facts regarding the incident with the National Guardsman, Mr. Welch, at one of LexiDan Foods Waffle House establishments. The facts are simple. We do have a policy posted on our Waffle House franchise buildings stating our policy in permitting firearms in our buildings. We normally are very loose on how we enforce that policy in terms of the military. However, on this particular incident, two facts have not been reported accurately that facilitated the situation with Mr. Welch. First, he was an active participant in a fight on the premises several weeks prior to September 27th. He was restrained and taken off the premises by off-duty police officers that were eating in the restaurant at the time. The second item not reported accurately was the time the most recent incident occurred, 2AM. We have associates who have to make snap decisions on our third shifts to provide for their own safety and the safety of our customers. Our associates decided because of Mr. Welch's recent altercation, which they witnessed, it was in their best interest at 2 AM to ask Mr. Welch to leave his firearm in his vehicle. Mr. Welch decided to leave. We still tried to garner his business at that point. I am supportive of my team's decision. I was not there and will not judge their decision making after the fact. If this incident occurred at 10am in the morning and Mr. Welch had not been involved in a previous fight I'm sure the outcome would have been different. I feel Lex 18 did not do due diligence in their reporting. We are highly supportive of all our military branches and especially supportive of our veterans. I hope this provides some clarification on the matter. Thank you for taking the time to read this and understanding that in any business, judgment decisions have to be made to provide for the safety of our associates and customers."
Ah, the truth comes out! Bolded that part to help out the people who won't read it all the way through but will comment on it regardless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:13 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,850 posts, read 26,275,432 times
Reputation: 34059
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
It's either private property or not. They can either deny a constitutional right or not. Explain to me why they have the "right" to deny this constitutional right to bear arms, yet MUST serve someone even though it goes against the company's constitutional right to practice their religion freely.
What about my right to eat in a restaurant without having to worry about some yahoo sitting next to me rubbing his gun?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:15 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,051,710 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
It's either private property or not. They can either deny a constitutional right or not. Explain to me why they have the "right" to deny this constitutional right to bear arms, yet MUST serve someone even though it goes against the company's constitutional right to practice their religion freely.
Funny how that works isn't it? You can't deny a gay person but you can deny someone exercising a right specifically spelled out in the Constitution.


My position on this has always been consistent, it's private property and how the owner conducts their business is up to them. If they want to deny gay people, it's their right as far as I'm concerned. If they want to deny people armed, so be it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:17 AM
 
Location: San Diego
50,290 posts, read 47,043,365 times
Reputation: 34079
Quote:
Originally Posted by ringwise View Post
You liberals crack me up. Funny, you DON'T think the restaurant would have a right to dictate policy and refuse to make wedding cakes for a gay couple. Ah, the hypocrisy......
Seriously
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:18 AM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,489,598 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
You don't leave a weapon in a car in particular if someone knows you just put it there. That's how they get stolen. Carrying a gun is a huge responsibility, it's actually a PITA... sometimes literally.

Waffle House is entitled to their no gun policy but if they are going to be refusing service to armed military personnel then let the whole world know.
It is incumbent upon the weapon holder to educate himself of those locations where he will be accepted; not the other way around. It's called "onus of responsibility".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:20 AM
 
50,795 posts, read 36,486,545 times
Reputation: 76590
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Funny how that works isn't it? You can't deny a gay person but you can deny someone exercising a right specifically spelled out in the Constitution.


My position on this has always been consistent, it's private property and how the owner conducts their business is up to them. If they want to deny gay people, it's their right as far as I'm concerned. If they want to deny people armed, so be it.
READ THE STORY just posted. They HAVE let armed military eat in this restaurant previously. They told THIS ONE to take his gun out because a week before he had been in a fight in the place and had to be restrained by off-duty cops who were eating there. It was about this particular hot-headed man, not any desire to take away your rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:23 AM
 
17,401 posts, read 11,975,567 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
What about my right to eat in a restaurant without having to worry about some yahoo sitting next to me rubbing his gun?
That yahoo has a right to that gun, per our constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 10:23 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,051,710 times
Reputation: 17864
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
It is incumbent upon the weapon holder to educate himself of those locations where he will be accepted; not the other way around. It's called "onus of responsibility".
If Waffle House wants to deny armed military personnel service that's fine with me, they should put a giant sign in the window. No Guns!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:19 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top