Results of Dickson City RTK request - Polling of local business firearms policies

[pahandgunner]

My disagreement with your statement was with your praise of Thomasj "behaving incredibly well" in answering the same questions over and over again. I don't see multiples of the same question over and over and over again. Earlier I said that what they are doing must be illegal in some way. So he accused me of having the exact same attitude as the police. That was very insulting to equate my simple statement with the overzealous illegal actions that occured that night. "behaving incredibly well", I don't think so.

[ThomasJ]

Originally Posted by JoeWilliams

The fact that you resort to name calling instead of answering the question speaks to the vapidness of your argument, you know.

I haven't called anyone a name. A strawman argument - which is what your post is - is a logical fallacy. It is a distortion of a position or statement and then an attack on that distortion.

Originally Posted by Emptymag

Name calling, and not answering questions?
I'll say one thing... ThomasJ is behaving incredibly well considering how many people do not agree with him, and I've never seen anyone as willing to politely explain himself and address the same questions over, and over, and over again.

Personally, I'm not seeing the overly simplified version of "If you say guns are welcome, we won't respond to a call."

What I'm seeing is a piss-poor police chief, making a half-assed attempt to reduce the likelihood of another OCB incident, by seeing who it is that may have an issue with having armed people in the store.
Simply put, I don't think he wants to cause a scene, only to be told by the management, "Hey, we didn't have a problem with it."

Do I think he's sharing his feelings about gun owners as he contacts these people? Yes.

Do I think he's implying that the police will not respond unless the business owner says "no guns"? No, but I think it's possible that some people could be influenced into putting up "no guns" signs. I don't have all the facts, so I can't be 100% certain on all of this yet. Thankfully, gnbrotz is on the case, and I know he's not going to leave any stone unturned.

Thank you. I appreciate that, and I agree with your assessment.

Hate to disagree with a super moderator but....... I do.

I do not wish to get into an argument, but compare your first response to my initial post: http://www.pafoa.org/forum/321924-post-19.html.

[pahandgunner]

Thomasj, this back and forth with you is a waste of my time and is serving nothing constructive any more. Have a nice day.

[gnbrotz]

If anyone has OC'd without any issues at any of the Dickson City businesses on the list (since 'the incident'), PM me or post so I can update the list with that info.

[rich]

Maybe I'm wrong if I am please correct me but it dose not matter if a business has a sign or not if you are asked to leave and do not the police can than be called. If the presence of a sign dose not matter than why should a list. If you are carrying a gun and are asked to leave with or without the list the police must respond. The list in this case is a waste of time and OUR money.

[ThomasJ]

Originally Posted by rich

Maybe I'm wrong if I am please correct me but it dose not matter if a business has a sign or not if you are asked to leave and do not the police can than be called. If the presence of a sign dose not matter than why should a list. If you are carrying a gun and are asked to leave with or without the list the police must respond. The list in this case is a waste of time and OUR money.

I don't think it's a waste. Any customer can use their cell phone to call the police to say "there's an armed man in Widgets 'R' Us". That customer doesn't necessarily know the policy of the store or whether the patron has been asked to leave or not. Regardless of any ulterior motives, it is a somewhat proactive thing for the police to do.

[gnbrotz]

Originally Posted by ThomasJ

I don't think it's a waste. Any customer can use their cell phone to call the police to say "there's an armed man in Widgets 'R' Us". That customer doesn't necessarily know the policy of the store or whether the patron has been asked to leave or not. Regardless of any ulterior motives, it is a somewhat proactive thing for the police to do.

Since the response to such a call supposedly doesn't hinge on which list a particular business is on, what's the point in having the lists again??

This is a matter of law, not bookkeeping.

[ThomasJ]

Originally Posted by gnbrotz

Since the response to such a call supposedly doesn't hinge on which list a particular business is on, what's the point in having the lists again??

The statement in the paper that we discussed last night seems that it does hinge on the list a particular business is on. At least, it will guide the response. The previous poster assumed that it would be the shop manager/owner making the call in regards to trespassing, but as I pointed out that's not necessarily going to be the case. Refer back to that statement that Danger Control pulled from the article.

For example:
customer - "there's a man carrying a gun in the store."
cop/dispatcher/whoever - "is he brandishing the gun or is it holstered?"
customer - "it's in a holster on his hip."
c/d/w - "that's not against the law and...{consulting list}...the store allows it."

or:
manager - "there's a man carrying a gun in the store."
c/d/w - "what's he doing with it?"
manager - "nothing. it's in a holster on his hip, but it's against store policy. we've asked him to leave and he refuses."
c/d/w - "we'll send someone right over."

[rich]

customer - "there's a man carrying a gun in the store."
cop/dispatcher/whoever - "is he brandishing the gun or is it holstered?"
customer - "it's in a holster on his hip."
c/d/w - "that's not against the law but you may alert the store manager and make him aware of it. Have a nice day

[larrymeyer]

Is anyone going to get in touch with the corporate stores on the list to get their policies on carrying a gun in their stores ? If so can we post the responses ?