Hypothetical question about carrying in a store that does not have a no gun sign

[internet troll]

I know there is a lot of debate about what to do if a property owner asks you to leave your establishment because you are carrying.

My question is what if you are in someplace like a restaurant or bar, have already ordered and are eating/drinking (but have not paid yet) when they ask you to put your firearm in a car. To be clear I am talking about a case where there are no signs or anything indicating they are a "no firearms" establishment. Maybe you are open carrying and a manager just happens to be walking by and notices it, or you are concealed carrying and your shirt comes untucked or something.

In my situation your principles would not let you continue eating/drinking in the establishment and you would rather leave than disarm and put your firearm in the car.

Not something that ever happened to me, just curious. Would you be justified in getting up and leaving without paying for your half eaten food and drinks since they just sprung this on you, or would you be guilty of theft by doing so?

Opinions?

[Justin///M]

I would say, "I'm leaving, I don't think I should have to pay, but if you insist, I will."

Cover your ass..., let them know you don't want to pay, but I also wouldn't risk my career for a theft of service charge. Fact is, you were served, and you owe for what you've been provided to that point. IMO. So I wouldn't walk off refusing to pay.

Maybe someone will post some statute that would change my mind.

Justin

[iamtommyboy]

I would say that if you have already eaten or begun eating, you should either get it to go or ask the manager to discount it (or both) and leave. He isn't asking or making you leave, only that you remove your firearm from the premises. It is, at that point, your choice to leave, this you are responsible to pay, at least for part of the food.

Now, if you have just ordered and it hasn't arrived yet, I think you are well within your rights throw a fiver down for drinks and walk out.

[tl_3237]

IMO you and the establishment have entered into a contract - they made an offer to provide foodstuff (via the menu or advertising), you accepted that offer by virtue of your entry/ordering with the commitment to an exchange of consideration (payment) upon delivery of said commodity.

Considering that you met all published conditions of entry at the onset and further at their acceptance of your order, the unilateral imposition of additional conditions after the contract had come into being are not applicable. Sure they could ask you to disarm but you are under no obligation to accept that contract modification. If they insist or simply tell you to leave then I would think they are in breach which voids your payment obligation under said contract.

[internet troll]

I would say, "I'm leaving, I don't think I should have to pay, but if you insist, I will."

Cover your ass..., let them know you don't want to pay, but I also wouldn't risk my career for a theft of service charge. Fact is, you were served, and you owe for what you've been provided to that point. IMO. So I wouldn't walk off refusing to pay.

Maybe someone will post some statute that would change my mind.

Justin

That's probably what I would do but playing devils advocate, they are changing things on you.

1. There is no sign stating their policy, for all you know they are just making this up as they go along.

2. They are choosing the time to pop this on you. They could choose to wait until after your meal is over instead of disrupting/ruining it and ask you to not carry in the future after you have already enjoyed the experience. By choosing to do so now, they are ruining your dining experience. Part of what people pay for when they go out is a good positive dining experience. They are not providing it.

3. Is it different than them coming up to you half way through a meal and saying "we have a policy against green shirts, you have to put that shirt in your car. Would this be okay. Would most people comply and then continue eating without feeling uncomfortable or would most people just get up and leave at this request without paying.

Like I said, I would probably go with your original response, but would it be reasonable to leave without paying?

[sprrdhawk44]

If there was no prior indication of any kind that weapons might be prohibited, and they then ask you to leave, they are choosing to lose the money. They offered me a service. That service was not rendered if I am forced to leave. Therefore, no shillings for them.

[internet troll]

IMO you and the establishment have entered into a contract - they made an offer to provide foodstuff (via the menu or advertising), you accepted that offer by virtue of your entry/ordering with the commitment to an exchange of consideration (payment) upon delivery of said commodity.

Considering that you met all published conditions of entry at the onset and further at their acceptance of your order, the unilateral imposition of additional conditions after the contract had come into being are not applicable. Sure they could ask you to disarm but you are under no obligation to accept that contract modification. If they insist or simply tell you to leave then I would think they are in breach which voids your payment obligation under said contract.

One of the lines of thinking I had. Are you at the mercy of their every whim just because you have received your food. Dining out is more than just food, it is also the experience and they are in some ways ruining your experience.

[QuackXP]

I would attempt to have them comp the meal and leave, baring that I would ask for it to go and a discount, however if they are going to take a hard line on paying they will probably call the cops about theft of service and one meal out is worth it not to have to go to court and/or hire a lawyer.

In any case I would let them know that I will tell everyone I know about how I was treated.

I would still tip the waitstaff, unless I reasonably knew they where the ones who complained.

I CC and I do it well so the chances of this happening to me are something approaching zero.

[tl_3237]

One of the lines of thinking I had. Are you at the mercy of their every whim just because you have received your food. Dining out is more than just food, it is also the experience and they are in some ways ruining your experience.

Agreed - there is an implicit, anticipatory benefit of the dining experience beyond the food itself.

Although some may want to argue 'quantum meruit' for partially consumed product I would counter argue that the disruption/non-completion of the meal, solely attributable to the seller, rises to a 'frustration of purpose' with respect to buyer's purpose for entering into the contract initially.

If the issue cannot be readily resolved to the satisfaction of BOTH parties (remove to car, cover-up, etc) then the contract is breached and voidable by the buyer with no payment due.

[Aggies Coach]

I have actually had this happen to me at a Buffalo Wild Wings. Just as our wings were set in front of us the manager noticed my weapon under my shirt and asked me if I was a LEO. I told him no. He then told me they didnt allow firearms there and if I would put it in the car. I informed him that I dont eat where I cant carry. So the 4 of us tipped our waiteress, and got up and left. As we were leaving the manager thanks us for coming and told us not to worry about the check. I calmly informed him that it may be a good idea to put a no weapons sign on the front door to allow people to make an educated decison on whether or not they wish to enter the establishment.