restaurant carry

[David]

I know you can't carry in places that sells alcohol to be consumed on site, but I recently got a little shock.

I frequent a Chinese restaurant and usually carry when I'm there because there's no bar and no mention of alcohol. This is a buffet place and the choice of beverage is is tea or a soft drink.

So I never gave it much thought about carrying in this place since there's no signs prohibiting guns or mention of alcohol. But one day I was there and noticed these people did order beer.

Are we actually supposed to ask if they sell alcohol even if it's not advertised or on the menu?

[Ed__357]

The way I see it, you have 2 options here:

1). Inquire at the door whether or not the establishment sells alcoholic beverages and if you may bring your gun inside, or.....

2). Keep your mouth shut and your gun concealed as it should be, and go on in and enjoy your meal.

[cbridges]

David, I've noticed the same thing with Chinese restaurants. Most of them seem to serve beer but don't advertise it aggressively. To be on the safe side, I just assume if a place is Chinese it sells beer. Mexican places usually seem to have bars.

[SomeGuy]

I assume all restaurants have some form of alcohol, or beer. Therefore, I carry concealed the first time in.

I either ask, or check the menu. Sometimes (often) both. After confirming the place is safe, I may choose to carry open in the future.

Though I am a big proponent of open carry, even I go concealed in new restaurants.

[John Sides]

Concealment , Concealment , Concealment . any questions ?

[Tim Nunan]

[ThreeHeadedDog]

I dont understand all the "what if" questions that are being discussed here.

A law is not and should not be(though wrongfully sometimes is) based on "what if" if the "what if" is already an illigal action.

The common "what if"
-WHAT IF I am carrying at a bar and have a drink. Well than my friend YOU ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW
-Kind of like WHAT IF I am driving and purposly run over 16 children. Sorry but you are in violation of the law.

The other common "what if"
-What if I am legally carrying and joe-shmoe steals my gun and shoots everyone in the restraunt. Well JOE-SHMOE IS IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
-Very much the same as what if I am driving my truck to work and somone forces entry into it at a redlight and subsequently runs over 16 children.

I probbly was a bit too long winded but can you see the flawed logic in basing the existance of a law restriction someones actions on if he breaks the law (or even more flawed logic looking at if he breaks an unrelated law)after it is outlined so specifically for him.
Worse yet is basing the law on If someone ELSE breaks the law. To me it is pretty cut and dry if someone else breaks the law even if he does it with my car/gun/WIFE I am not at fault. Just think if we were held criminally responible for rapes committed against our love ones.

Laws should be set up much like a speeding law is supposed to be set up(though not always is). In Montana (my home state) there are some very high speed roads(at one time legal speed limit was "resonable and prudent" not a number) but they are on straight boring highways where you can see trouble well in advance. The exact opposit is true of tightly packed streets where pedestrians are present. There could easily be someone legally pulling onto a street or walking but if I was going 75mph I would not have the time needed to react or the space needed to stop.

And the last point(I promis) is that you can not base your opinion on what someone else might do...EVER. That mentality of "I trust myself but john doe over there might do something stupid" is/was the driving force behind every govermentally enslaved society in the history of the world. You can not think your self so above others that you have the right to speak for someone else, or interpret there intentions or actions.

Sorry again for the somewhat unstructered response, I hope I wrote it close to what I am trying to say.