Online MSNBC Poll on Restaurant Carry

[doming83]

the poll said restaraunt carry

[Scarecrow]

I hope that if some one was carrying legally they would have enough smarts not to get piss drunk and forget which way is up. I never touch a drop of alcohol... unless I am sick and need some dayquil or something, but being responsible is the key.

[ragsflh]

guns and alcohol dont mix.

[Cocked _and_Locked]

the poll said restaraunt carry

I don't know what poll you looked at, but the link goes to a page that starts like this:

Would you patronize a bar that allows customers to bring in their guns?

[6shootercarry]

Yea, I read the restaurant thing and said “hell yea why not”, like minded folks, good company. Then the link page read bar. People who could be at any level if intoxication? Impaired and armed??? Not a good combo. When I’m drinking the guns are in the lock box, not in the holster.

[mrjam2jab]

I don't know what poll you looked at, but the link goes to a page that starts like this:

Would you patronize a bar that allows customers to bring in their guns?

Yea, I read the restaurant thing and said “hell yea why not”, like minded folks, good company. Then the link page read bar. People who could be at any level if intoxication? Impaired and armed??? Not a good combo. When I’m drinking the guns are in the lock box, not in the holster.

Thread title says restaurant...the poll title says bar. The poll is based on new law in AZ that allows carry in establishments that serve alcohol which includes bars and restaurants. The media intentionally worded the poll the way they did....its misleading...

If the poll question was..."Would you patronize a restaurant that serves alcohol (ie Olive Garden) that allows customers to bring in their guns?" what would your answer be then?

[Cocked _and_Locked]

There's a big difference between a restaraunt and a bar. Most bars serve food, and most restauraunts also serve alcohol. The difference is the primary activity supported at the establishment: Bars = drinking, Restaraunts = eating.

If AZ is lumping them together for the purpose of concealed cary, then they've just opened up a big can of worms. We are already discussing the reason for the expected results here. Next will be drunken brawls ending in gunfire.

[JJFlash]

Guns and Booze...

You guys amaze me; you're all for gun rights until your own prejudices come into play. We can not only carry in places that serve alcohol here in Nevada, we can drink while carrying. The legal limit in Nevada for BAC while carrying is .10, it was not changed when MADD coerced the nation into .08 for DUI.

Guess what--you and the other anti gun rights folks are wrong--blood isn't flowing in the streets.


Believe it or not, almost everybody who legally carries a gun is a responsible law-abiding person.

Gotta go with the evidence, I believe. How long as the law been in effect in Nevada? Do we have enough of a timeline to draw conclusions?

Remember, the "blood in the streets" argument was used by the antis when concealed carry really started making its debut in the 80s. It never happened, either.

[AZSATT]

There's a big difference between a restaraunt and a bar. Most bars serve food, and most restauraunts also serve alcohol. The difference is the primary activity supported at the establishment: Bars = drinking, Restaraunts = eating.

If AZ is lumping them together for the purpose of concealed cary, then they've just opened up a big can of worms. We are already discussing the reason for the expected results here. Next will be drunken brawls ending in gunfire.

Wow. Another blinded summarization of a supposition NOT BASED AT ALL ON LAW or the purpose the bill becoming law.

If you CC in AZ, your right to defend yourself does NOT have to end because the establish you may enter serves alcohol. However IF you enter said establishment, according to the AZ law that the blind do not read or try to understand, you - as the CCW Permit holding, gun carrying citizen CANNOT drink.

Any 'drunken brawl ending in gunfire' will not lawfully include the RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER with a CCW.

Criminals who get into drunken brawls at bars have been doing so for years, without regard for the law - hence, they are criminals.

More simply put, when AZ legislature passed this bill into law, they did so without regard 'for the kitchen.' Olive Garden or Crazy Eddie's Tavern - your right to defend yourself in AZ exists, but your lawful ability to drink does not. (Anti-gun establishment with signs posted are the natural exception.)

The fear of drunken gun battles in the streets has no bearing on this new law as it applies only to the law-abiding.

[Cocked _and_Locked]

Sounds like your definition of "patronage" does not include "drinking" in a bar, Azsatt.

Would you agree to that statement?

Any 'drunken brawl ending in gunfire' will not lawfully include the RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER with a CCW.

I cannot imagine how it could lawfully include anyone, but I suppose stranger things have happened.