Reply With Quote
I agree. This is exactly why there should be Threat Neutralization Training incorporated into any kind of carry classes.
that's not an opinion.
I agree. This is exactly why there should be Threat Neutralization Training incorporated into any kind of carry classes.
blackness isn't a belief either. Can Whataburger just not serve black people?
From experience, once you get locked in to this kind of argument, the thread is basically ruined. If you have a strong opinion on something and want a real debate, you need to start a thread with a clear le as to your stance.
What is that?
It's high intensity training where you learn to use a gun non-lethally by targeting points of the body that neutralize a thread. Like a knee or hip. Once the potential threat is neutralized, you can decide to either place a fatal shot or to call the authorities.
I haven't heard of that but it doesn't make much sense in terms of the risk of missing a target lie a knee.
It's pretty new so it's unlikely that it's being taught yet. But it's preconceptions like yours along with the desire to kill that leave the anti gun argument where it is today.
why is your username pink and interlineated? in your opinion?
The only thing your keyboard has stopped is you getting laid.
it's for breast cancer awareness. the line is some kind of glitch I guess.
that's really cool. good on you.
Wait, so people are getting pissy about not being able to whip out their uzis in a store?
Oh America
"You're denying my right to kill god damnit"
Nobody wants to eat a live burger, damnit!Wait, so people are getting pissy about not being able to whip out their uzis in a store?
Oh America
"You're denying my right to kill god damnit
Except the Dutch. Rarest meat I've ever eaten I ate in Amsterdam.
The 2nd Amendment doesn't preclude States from regulating the use of arms. While the Supreme Court has found certain regulations uncons utional because they effectively ban the use State-wide and that in effect infringes on citizen's rights, it has also stated that States do retain the right to license and regulate, including banning the use of arms in certain areas (ie: gun free zones) or banning licensing to certain individuals (ie: mentally ill).
Under that authority to regulate Texas passed certain laws. But, AFAIK, those laws affords "private property owners" the right to ban the practices.
As such, Whataburger (alongside any other private property owners), have the authority to ban open carry in their premises. It's perfectly legal and cons utional.
These open carry gots should be carrying concealed and enjoying Whataburger's.
Pretty much any restaurant over 250sq feet that seats over 50 patrons and is open to the public is considered a public place. That has nothing to do with this though.
Damn you have to try really hard to get pinked. nice work.
People feeling like their opinion is being validated because Whataburger agrees with them...
Bunch of fatasses and cucks.
I didn't do anything. This it how it starts. Denigrating the intellectuals. Next, I'll just be gone one day.
Do you agree or disagree with whataburgerPeople feeling like their opinion is being validated because Whataburger agrees with them...
Bunch of fatasses and cucks.
I think open carry is pretty ing re ed, tbh. This isn't the old ing West. At the same time, I think it's stupid of Whataburger to get political. Just like you freak out and scream bigotry when a Christian bakery doesn't want to bake a cake for a gay couple; there's people equally passionate about their right to bear arms, concealed or not.
At the end of the day, just make me my damn patty melt and spare me the bull .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
