Panera Bread requests its customers be unarmed

[mallrat]

They say they won't post signs or require employees to confront armed customers.

Meh, their sandwiches are okay, but the bread turns rock hard in about 15 minutes if you don't eat it right away. Still a disturbing trend developing.

 

[Donr13]

Let's not forget they own paradise bakery which is one of my favorite places to eat lunch. Sucks.

 

[shoot4fun]

They prefer to let you believe that their stores are in the "safe" part of town and you really don't need to have a firearm there to enjoy your sam'ich.
I laugh every time I hear "I don't own or carry because I just don't go to the bad part of town". My answer?
The people in the bad part of town have cars moron; and they know where you keep the good stuff!
I will still eat at Panera bread but will stay in CCW mode.

 

[crawdad1]

Never liked their food much anyway.

 

[BoilerUP]

"Request".

That's an interesting word, very different in meaning from "demand", "order", or "prohibit".

 

[ncbowhnter]

While I am always carrying concealed I can see why some businesses would do this. Lets say they have an armed robbery and a citizen carrying concealed confronts the suspect and makes the decision to shoot at him, and accidentally shoots the clerk that was standing just off from the suspect and complying with the demands to empty the cash register. Idk. Maybe thats how they are looking at it and just trying to protect their employees. Or they could just be with the wrong side that believes in taking away our rights and our guns.

I'm pretty sure that is one of the reasons that a lot of businesses don't allow their employees to carry. Cause if someone was to rob them, there is a pretty good chance that in the heat of the moment the clerk would just start popping off rounds and inadvertently shoot some customers causing some major law suits.

 

[EddieNFL]

Isn't Panera spanish for bread? "Let's eat at Bread Bread."

We have them. Never been in one.

 

[mallrat]

"Request".

That's an interesting word, very different in meaning from "demand", "order", or "prohibit".

Yep, I think they're trying to have it both ways, please the antis while not totally alienating those of us who believe in the Constitution. In the meantime, concealed means concealed, but I'll probably still avoid giving them any more money.

 

[z7.jled]

Most of these requests come after people think that private businesses are a good place to crash with open carry sit-ins. I support the 2nd amendment and the individual right to posses and use firearms for recreation and defense, but imposing yourself with an open display of weapons on private property is not OK. Wanna walk down a street with an ar15 cool. Wanna hold an open carry rally in my place of business, uninvited, then you will be asked nicely to leave once, told to leave again and then local law enforcement will escort you away.

There is responsibility for gun owners to ensure they act with good judgment and safety in mind. I also believe we should act with the public in mind and don't behave in ways that causes those around us to feel uneasy. I'm a gun owner and I don't like public ranges because of idiots. I can't imagine the feeling of the clerk when a group of people walk in with ar15's. A private business has the right to ask people to not come by, their business will either fail or flourish based on their decision.

 

[EddieNFL]

I support the 2nd amendment and the individual right to posses and use firearms for recreation and defense

This is why we constantly fight an uphill battle.

 

[z7.jled]

Eddie how so? The 2nd amendment applies for your right to own a tool for the only reasons it was made, recreation meaning competition, hunting, tin cans etc. Defense being yourself, property and the other unalienable rights. If you can come up with another use that does not fall under defense or recreation I'm all ears, but to me those are broad categories

 

[Maggot]

Most of these requests come after people think that private businesses are a good place to crash with open carry sit-ins. I support the 2nd amendment and the individual right to posses and use firearms for recreation and defense, but imposing yourself with an open display of weapons on private property is not OK. Wanna walk down a street with an ar15 cool. Wanna hold an open carry rally in my place of business, uninvited, then you will be asked nicely to leave once, told to leave again and then local law enforcement will escort you away.

There is responsibility for gun owners to ensure they act with good judgment and safety in mind. I also believe we should act with the public in mind and don't behave in ways that causes those around us to feel uneasy. I'm a gun owner and I don't like public ranges because of idiots. I can't imagine the feeling of the clerk when a group of people walk in with ar15's. A private business has the right to ask people to not come by, their business will either fail or flourish based on their decision.

Could not have put it better. Thats exactly what happened with Starbucks. It got out that they were carry tolerant and a bunch of jack asses flooded them with firearms til they had to back off on their statement. Idiots.

 

[pawprint2]

While I am always carrying concealed I can see why some businesses would do this. Lets say they have an armed robbery and a citizen carrying concealed confronts the suspect and makes the decision to shoot at him, and accidentally shoots the clerk that was standing just off from the suspect and complying with the demands to empty the cash register. Idk. Maybe thats how they are looking at it and just trying to protect their employees. Or they could just be with the wrong side that believes in taking away our rights and our guns.

I'm pretty sure that is one of the reasons that a lot of businesses don't allow their employees to carry. Cause if someone was to rob them, there is a pretty good chance that in the heat of the moment the clerk would just start popping off rounds and inadvertently shoot some customers causing some major law suits.

Can you site a few examples of employees, that are have a carry permit, after being robbed, "just start popping off rounds"????? When you say they would 'just start popping off rounds, do you mean with their eyes closed, or do you mean that they would just start shooting at the customers? I just don't see how working at Panera would make you act differently than in 100,000s of cases where an Armed Citizen was able to keep from being killed, keep others from being killed, or from being robbed. Are the fumes from Panera's bread that intoxicating? The evidence, based on years worth of data (even the liberals own FBI) shows armed citizens are less likely to be killed or robbed etc. than unarmed, now, if Panera is not hiring American citizens, I guess the data may not have as much validity. But all in all, if a Panera employee has a Concealed Carry Permit, in TN, he/she had to attend classes and range qualify-this in no way makes them ready for whipping ass up at Camp Perry, however; I don't see anyone I know with a permit, "just start popping off rounds", then reloading and popping off another high cap mag, it sounds ridiculous.

 

[LegioX]

Humph, me wife makes killer sourdough bread, she also keeps a 12 ga in the dining room. Ima thinkin I'll just stay home......not that there's one of them joints close by anyhoo.

 

[bp7178]

EVERYTHING in the place is horrible for you anyway.

This policy is just the latest addition.

 

[EddieNFL]

The 2nd amendment applies for your right to own a tool for the only reasons it was made, recreation meaning competition, hunting, tin cans etc. Defense being yourself, property and the other unalienable rights.

Self defense and shooting tin cans were not on Madison's mind when he drafted the second amendment.

 

[ncbowhnter]

Can you site a few examples of employees, that are have a carry permit, after being robbed, "just start popping off rounds"????? When you say they would 'just start popping off rounds, do you mean with their eyes closed, or do you mean that they would just start shooting at the customers? I just don't see how working at Panera would make you act differently than in 100,000s of cases where an Armed Citizen was able to keep from being killed, keep others from being killed, or from being robbed. Are the fumes from Panera's bread that intoxicating? The evidence, based on years worth of data (even the liberals own FBI) shows armed citizens are less likely to be killed or robbed etc. than unarmed, now, if Panera is not hiring American citizens, I guess the data may not have as much validity. But all in all, if a Panera employee has a Concealed Carry Permit, in TN, he/she had to attend classes and range qualify-this in no way makes them ready for whipping ass up at Camp Perry, however; I don't see anyone I know with a permit, "just start popping off rounds", then reloading and popping off another high cap mag, it sounds ridiculous.

I'm not speaking of Panera Bread employees. Hell, I've never even eaten at one. I'm thinking of armed robbery calls that I've benn on where the clerk tells me if they would have been allowed to have a firearm, they would have taken care of it. But their policy does not allow them to carry one while working.
I've seen a lot of people take the concealed carry class and tons of people ask me about taking it and all I can think is, there is no way I would want to be around with that person shooting. Some people are just not cut out for it.
Now for someone who is familiar with firearms and high stress situations, I am all for it. The more the better. But a lot of these people that ask me about the classes tell me they have never even shot any kind of gun before and those are the people I worry about cause gettting your permit to carry is not hard at all.
Take it for what its worth, but just wait til an innocent bystander gets shot in somebody's business by a ccw holder (trying to do the right thing) and watch the lawsuits fly stating the business is responsible for allowing ccw in their business. It will happen and then watch the businesses jump on the band wagon. Its only gonna get worse.
I just try to look at it from both sides of the fence , thats all

 

[KYpatriot]

Eddie you are correct but I think what he is saying is that private property is not the correct place to make political statements. Open carry sit ins are political statements. If I invite you onto my property to make that statement that is one thing. But to use my property for your political purpose without asking first is quite another. Panera does not have to put up with political rallies on their property whether they are open carry sit ins, gay marriage marches, or anything else.

Keep political statements in the public realm, and exercise your second amendment rights on private property...privately. Let's advocate for all our rights, including private property rights, and respect others as we wish to be respected.

 

[EddieNFL]

there is no way I would want to be around with that person shooting.

I feel the same about cops and NRA instructors.

If I'm sitting in a business when some thug walks in to rob the place, I have no intention of trying to stop him if all he wants is money...unless I or my family are directly threatened. As I would likely face intense scrutiny from the police and probably civil lawsuits, I'm in no hurry to protect those who refuse to protect themselves and I have zero interest in protecting the business' assets.

 

[EddieNFL]

Eddie you are correct but I think what he is saying is that private property is not the correct place to make political statements.

I don't disagree with that, at all. My post was directed at the lack of knowledge indicated by the sport and self defense comment.

 

[KYpatriot]

I'm not speaking of Panera Bread employees. Hell, I've never even eaten at one. I'm thinking of armed robbery calls that I've benn on where the clerk tells me if they would have been allowed to have a firearm, they would have taken care of it. But their policy does not allow them to carry one while working.
I've seen a lot of people take the concealed carry class and tons of people ask me about taking it and all I can think is, there is no way I would want to be around with that person shooting. Some people are just not cut out for it.
Now for someone who is familiar with firearms and high stress situations, I am all for it. The more the better. But a lot of these people that ask me about the classes tell me they have never even shot any kind of gun before and those are the people I worry about cause gettting your permit to carry is not hard at all.
Take it for what its worth, but just wait til an innocent bystander gets shot in somebody's business by a ccw holder (trying to do the right thing) and watch the lawsuits fly stating the business is responsible for allowing ccw in their business. It will happen and then watch the businesses jump on the band wagon. Its only gonna get worse.
I just try to look at it from both sides of the fence , thats all

The problem with your line of thinking is that despite your fears, the stats show just the opposite, that cops shoot innocents at a much higher rate than private citizens. I think the reason is that because of their unofficial status most private citizens are much more hesitant to shoot, and truly use it as a last resort because they do not operate under qualified immunity. You say you wouldn't want to be around "that person" shooting, but in fact firearms are used in defense situations far more often by citizens than police, and besides... Is the alternative of "that person" NOT having the ability to defend themselves and others actually safer? Just because we are well trained does not mean that others cannot do well for themselves, and besides in a free society it is their call, not ours, to make.

 

[ncbowhnter]

The problem with your line of thinking is that despite your fears, the stats show just the opposite, that cops shoot innocents at a much higher rate than private citizens. I think the reason is that because of their unofficial status most private citizens are much more hesitant to shoot, and truly use it as a last resort because they do not operate under qualified immunity. You say you wouldn't want to be around "that person" shooting, but in fact firearms are used in defense situations far more often by citizens than police, and besides... Is the alternative of "that person" NOT having the ability to defend themselves and others actually safer? Just because we are well trained does not mean that others cannot do well for themselves, and besides in a free society it is their call, not ours, to make.

You may be correct in your line of thinking but you should also consider what someone else already posted....If they don't feel directly in harms way they won't act. Or the ccw holder could possibly lack the confidence to act appropriately.
And I would be the last person to say that a person should not have the right to defend themselves.
Cops may be responsible for innocents being shot in some situations but imagine if a private citizen shot an innocent. You don't think that would fuel the fire for them to try and take away our rights to carry then? I still don't think that alone should discourage anyone from carrying or defending themself.
I'm all for it being each person's decision. Carry if you want but understand that it is a huge liability if you decide to act.

 

[proneshooter]

They can request/order/command/prohibit what they want, I will still do as I wish.

The way I read between the lines of their press release is this:
Don't be an asshole in our restaurants by making a scene with your guns. Just keep it out of sight and it will be out of our minds. We won't ask you to leave and if you're carrying legally it's all cool.

 

[1911fan]

I support the 2nd amendment and the individual right to posses and use firearms for recreation and defense...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Where does it say anything about recreation? The Founders of this country, having fought off the British yoke, wanted to ensure that the new nation's capability to do such was not impaired in the future.
They were specifically addressing the preservation of the right of the common man to own light arms specifically in order to fight off future oppression.
Read up a little, or a lot, on the debates and letters surrounding the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights.


1911fan

 

[Maggot]

They can request/order/command/prohibit what they want, I will still do as I wish.

The way I read between the lines of their press release is this:
Don't be an asshole in our restaurants by making a scene with your guns. Just keep it out of sight and it will be out of our minds. We won't ask you to leave and if you're carrying legally it's all cool.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[LRI]

Chick Fil a or death!

 

[LRI]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Where does it say anything about recreation? The Founders of this country, having fought off the British yoke, wanted to ensure that the new nation's capability to do such was not impaired in the future.
They were specifically addressing the preservation of the right of the common man to own light arms specifically in order to fight off future oppression.
Read up a little, or a lot, on the debates and letters surrounding the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights.


1911fan

Amen. The LAST thing the founding fathers were concerned with was a highpower match.


Reading comprehension needs to be reinforced in our skewel system.

 

[Maggot]

Chick Fil a or death!

With the steroids and antibiotics they pour into those chickens it may be more:

"Chick Filet = death"

 

[z7.jled]

I accidentally created a debate on the meaning of the second amendment, and I apologize. I specifically said "defense" not "self defense". To me, defense is applied to life, liberty, property and individual rights. I have read, at some length in my education, the writings of the founding fathers. They did not include competition or recreation. The 2nd amendment is designed to protect the people from oppression and tyranny. I poorly communicated that in my previous posts.

Private property is also not the place to make an uninvited political statement. I believe in the right of the individual to make their own decisions and live with it, and if a business doesn't want guns at their business I respect that, I will just buy my overpriced food somewhere else and continue to exercise my individual rights without interfering with rights and wishes of another on their own property.

 

[pawprint2]

I don't really know how low life, piece of shit, scumbag criminals think, but If I were planning to rob someplace, it wouldn't be Panera-not enough money, but with that said, knowing a place is "anti gun", and in fact don't want customers that have a permit, this would make it an attractive place, as I would have just reduced my risk of being shot. On the other hand, if a place catered to the 2nd Adm loving, real Americans, in fact offered a 10% discount on all purchased by showing your current permit, I would really avoid attempting to rob that place! In fact I wouldn't even want to rob the place next to that place...... It is a proven fact: the mere presents of a firearms (or the high likelihood of the presents) detours crimes such as armed robbery. I would really like to see a chain offered the deal I've described-they'd get my business-I'd even go out of my way to do business with them, as I'm sure many others would do too.

 

[40xs]

I carry,,,,but I hope I am never in a situation in a public establishment when a perp or two comes in to do harm. We never imagine the "down side" of the scenario of after you present your weapon and one or both of the perps grabs a hostage,,,OMG! what then? What do we do now? Can i get off an incapacitating shot without hitting the hostage, or the bullet passing through and hitting another innocent? Am I going to be killed now because I can't execute just the right shot? Is my wife gong to be hit with flying bullets all over the place? Not a good situation to be in. We always imagine the best case scenario, unfortunately, that rarely happens.

 

[proneshooter]

I carry,,,,but I hope I am never in a situation in a public establishment when a perp or two comes in to do harm. We never imagine the "down side" of the scenario of after you present your weapon and one or both of the perps grabs a hostage,,,

There's an old saying that has much truth to it: when it's time to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.

When you think about the practical applications, it becomes clear. If danger is so imminent that deadly force is legally warranted, that application of force needs to be near instantenous and very brutal.

Thugs don't have time to take hostages when they are taking fire. Probably 95% of them will run like girls. The other 5% needs to be cut down immediately.

 

[BapZander]

"the right of the common man to own light arms"

Actually, at that time, you could own cannons, and in fact many did. In fact, individuals owned battleships with many cannons.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

I'm not sure there is a weight limit in there...

 

[40xs]

I Hope I'm able to do "everything" right if and when the time comes to act as you describe, but, again, we tend to think in perfect terms. Most LE officers will say you are not fully in control of every situation. You say "start shooting immediately". with 30 or 40 civilains standing around. Still sounds like thinking in perfect terms. A tremendous responsibility. I think in worst case scenarios, not best case scenarios where the bad guys are just standing there in a close cluster waiting to be gunned down by the hero. You play the hand you are dealt, but you have no control over who's dealing the cards.

 

[proneshooter]

My first priority when confronted with violence in a public place is to GTFO. My state has a duty to retreat in public, so at least I have to attempt to do so. In addition to that, having my family with me makes me very reluctant to get them involved in a gunfight. On top of that, I do not subscribe to the Grossman/Nutnfancy "sheepdog" concept. Other people's safety simply is not my fucking problem. Most adults in this country choose to be unarmed even though they are legally entitled to do otherwise should they choose to. Those who live in states where legally carrying a weapon is difficult or near impossible made their choice to live there so not my problem either.

Bottom line is this: I'll get in a gunfight to keep myself or those with me from being severely injured or killed if I have no other choice. Others are on their own. If, however, my hand is forced into violence I hope that I can deliver extremely quickly and brutally enough to win.

That is all

 

[Ultraman550]

I say whatever to these places and their gun free requests. I'm still going to carry concealed when I eat there. In the event something happens I'm going to save myself and not give a flying fuck what they say. In a perfect world I would hold my gun to the perpetrators head and say "hey bud, this is a gun free store so I'm going to take my sandwich to go and you can do what you like when I walk out those doors. Try the Roast Beef Au Jus, its pretty good"