Letter to BoneFish
On Thursday, July 21 2011, my wife and I sat and prepared to have a wonderful meal at your fine restuarant; BoneFish at North Hills Raleigh. Halfway through the appetizer of Bam Bam Shrimp, which is one of my wife’s all time favorites, we had a visitor at our table.
A member of the North Hills mall security came and asked if I was in possession of a sidearm. When I answered yes, I was asked to remove my weapon from the premises. I went to my vehicle, removed the sidearm which was in an open carry, belt-mount holster, and locked it inside.Then my wife and I decided to leave, even though the manager invited us to stay and finish our meal, free of charge, apologizing for the incident.
No lectures to the other patrons. No "shall not be infringed" to the security guys. Acknowledgement that the restaurant was 100% in its rights to deny service to the armed patron, including the acknowledgement that the Second Amendment does not cover private business. Instead, this gentleman removed himself and his wife from the premises - despite the promise of a free meal - and wrote a calm, objective, and informative letter to the powers-that-be.
It does raise a very interesting point. The manager was put in a difficult position - he had to chose between patrons - and his choice was going to be unacceptable to one or the other. The sheep who complained would most likely have left and may have written his own letter had the manager informed him that the other patron was welcome to stay, armed. It's quite telling, though, that the option chosen was, as Bubba states, the "politically correct" option.
For what it's worth, from a sales/marketing standpoint, it's my opinion that the manager made the "right" decision. Someone who panics upon seeing an openly carried sidearm is not going to listen to reason; they're suffering from an abnormal fear of an inanimate object. If they were to go to the media with their story of how they ZOMG WERE FORCED TO EAT NEXT TO AN EEEEBIL GUNZ!!!, the restaurant - and the chain - becomes the subject of unwanted bad publicity.
Now, from a freedom standpoint, it would have been gratifying to hear the manager tell the whining sheep to go pound sand. It would be wonderful to hear that his unfounded and irrational fears are not sufficient to ask another patron to capitulate to their unreasonable demand. I'm certain that this restaurant - and chain - would be duly and rightly fêted for the decision. And I hold out hope and foolish optimism that someday this will indeed be what happens.
Until that someday, this is how to handle such situations, IMHO, and I offer kudos to Bubba.
That is all.
15 comments:
Well played indeed.
I would have also politely mentioned that I would not be returning to the establishment, not because of the food or service, but because of the policy.
I would have then paid for the food I had eaten (even if they attempt to waive all fees) and quietly leave.
You attract more flies with honey than vinegar, be polite, be an upstanding person, but also be principled, and do not be a doormat.
In New England where binding signage is not in the law I frequently carry where it is prohibited by the establishment. I do know that at any point they may refuse to serve me or ask me to leave, and at that point I will.
Note that I do this only while conceal carrying. Open carrying in a posted location (binding signage or not) is just rude.
Its like smoking next to the no-smoking sign. Say what you want about the morality of it all, it does make you look like an asshole.
In the OC / Starbucks kerfluffle, Starbucks told the antis to GTH. So I have some hope that sense is returning to the world.
One thing I noted - it was a mall security drone. I would bet that it's a mall policy, as opposed to a restaurant policy, and the manager didn't have any choice under the terms of the lease. I think the fact that the manager apologized and offered a free meal speaks well of him.
The restaurant owner does have the choice of who he leases from, but sit-down restaurants at popular malls are generally pretty lucrative. Without knowing his other options, I can't blame him for accepting the mall's lease terms even if he doesn't like them.
Jake,
Given that the author seemed pretty thorough in his analysis I'm more inclined to believe that the manager pulled in mall security to gain "official" sanction and some degree of protection (based on the belief the "armed guy" might be dangerous and respond with violence) without actually involving the police.
Which brings into question whether there actually is a policy or if that claim by the manager was CYA as well. It's happened more than once when a given chain location wants a carrier gone but doesn't want to simply "refuse service".
@Matthew: That's certainly equally possible, and is a perfectly reasonable assumption. It is still possible that whoever complained went directly to security rather than to the manager, or that the guard noticed it and went to the manager first.
Another possibility is that the manager felt he was required to make the request once a complaint was made, because of an anti-gun mall policy, to avoid having that person complain to the mall management and risk the restaurant's lease. There's too much we don't know to immediately vilify the restaurant or the manager. I hope we get to see the restaurant's response to the letter.
His letter doesn't really make it clear. I left a comment at the original post asking for clarification.
Either way, like Jay said, he handled the situation appropriately.
In NC, carry is prohibited in establishments that serve alcohol for consumption on the premises.
The manager did the guy a favor.
Agreed! But sad none the less...
What Weer'd said. I would add my own personal whine, though. I'd like to see more people open-carrying. I think over time, the exposure would wear down the resistance of the sheep, and it's the sheep that the anti's count on.
On a positive note, while Governor Mitch may have no use for the 4th amendment, at least he's supporting the 2nd; today the library staff received a memo reversing our "no guns" policy, as that policy is now illegal in our state. Score one point for freedom.
There are places to open carry, and places to not open carry. To me, a mall is not a place to open carry. YMMV.
Yup, as We'erd said; better that they should be sorry, and not glad, to lose your business.
In re the rest, it seems clear that we don't know nearly enough about some relevant facts of the situation. I too look forward to hearing the restaurant's response.
My favorite anecdote about carry in a restaurant was when several of us got together for an open-carry dinner (at the time it was illegal in the state to conceal a firearm in a restaurant that served alcohol).
A patron at another table told the waiter she didn't like looking at all those guns. He told her she should eat rapidly, then, so she could leave quickly.
Needless to say, I patronize that restaurant.
Looks like Matthew got it right. It's not even the type of mall I thought it was.
However, pdb is also correct that NC prohibits carrying a firearm - openly or concealed - in any establishment that serves alcohol.
Radisson, Marriot, Lidia's, hmm, I seem to remember a large number of people Openly Carrying lots of Different Firearms (many in Dragonleatherworks Holsters), yet, there wasn't any hassles involved. Plus, Adult Beverages were being Consumed in Large quantities, also. So where was the Blood that must have been pouring down the Streets of Pittsburgh? There should have been Blood, right?
I got something right for once?!
I'll be in my bunk. :)
Easy - would they have asked a cop to leave? Even an off-duty cop? No, a quick explanation would have mollified the complainer.
Post a Comment