How Do Guns in Restaurants Help Our Economy?

As of Monday, March 28, 2011

What does it say about your state when your General Assembly thinks you need concealed weapons to be safe in restaurants?

Welcome to North Carolina - or, as seen through the eyes of some of our state's congressmen, Beyond Thunderdome.

N.C. House Bill 111, which would permit concealed weapons in parks and restaurants, is one of several bills before the General Assembly intended to make it easier for people to carry handguns in public. Another, House Bill 184, would exempt elected officials from the concealed-carry restrictions that other gun owners face. House Bill 63 would allow employees to keep a gun in a locked vehicle in their workplace parking area.

The bills would alter the balance between public safety and an individual's right to self-defense.

HB 111 would make it legal to carry concealed weapons into restaurants, including those that serve alcohol. While it would still be illegal to serve alcohol to anyone with a weapon, making guns routine in restaurants would make it easier for someone who's already loaded to carry an equally loaded weapon into an establishment.

The bill forces another responsibility, another liability and more potential for confrontation on restaurant workers.

With regard to HB 63, it's hard to understand what good a gun locked in a car would do in the event of a workplace shooting. All HB 63 would do is save that disgruntled worker-turned-perpetrator the trouble of driving home and back.

HB 184 comes as a reaction to the shooting of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona. The problem is that having a concealed weapon wouldn't have changed the events of that tragic day unless the congresswoman also had extrasensory perception.

By the time Giffords saw Jared Loughner's weapon, if she ever saw the weapon, it was too late. Elected officials who think they might fare better should consider the likely fallout if, God forbid, they pulled a loaded gun on a constituent who turned out to be reaching for a business card.

As sensational as tragedies like the one in Phoenix are, homicidal psychopaths are pretty rare. The murder rate in North Carolina has declined from 8.5 per 100,000 in 1996 to 5.3/100k in 2009 - small comfort if you or someone you love is one of the 5.3, but it is an encouraging trend. Is it rational to believe that putting more guns in the hands of amateurs improves that number?

Carrying a concealed weapon in public does not make one part of a "well-regulated militia." We have professionals for that. That "defensive weapon" does not inspire confidence in people to whom the carrier is just an armed stranger. Rather, it makes them one more unnecessary and potentially lethal variable in an uncertain world.

Even assuming that the carrier only intends to use the weapon defensively, can his or her judgment be trusted? That's why we pay cops, to whom such people present an unwelcome complication.

The National Rifle Association contends that guns don't kill people; people kill people. They're right. People are just too unstable to be trusted with the deadly product they advocate so relentlessly for.

Our emotions cloud our judgment. Putting more guns out in public won't make people more stable; it will just make it easier for more people, including the more criminal and less stable among us, to acquire them. Second Amendment enthusiasts insist that the gun is not the problem. Fine, but can we quit pretending that it's the antidote?

Finally, these bills at the state level once again call into question the new General Assembly's priorities. In a state with best community college system in the country and some of the best universities in the country, our unemployment rate remains nearly a full point over the national average.

What does HB 111 say to businesses that might expand or relocate here? It says you might need to be armed to eat at our restaurants.

Kevin Smith lives in Aberdeen. Contact him at kevinasmith@gmx.com.

More like this story

fugitiveguy 2 years, 2 months ago

I always get a chuckle when I see those "no firearms" signs at various places. As if someone determined to rob or shoot someone is going to be deterred by a little sticker on the door.

marathonman 2 years, 2 months ago

You, Kevin Smith, are entitled to your opinion, but your attitude on guns in general clouds your ability to understand the issue. Those who subject themselves to all of the requirements to carry a concealed weapon are among the most stabile citizens and in many cases are as qualified to carry and use a weapon as many law enforcement officers. Included in the process is a psychological evaluation along with classroom instruction and field qualification. Finally, it is signed by the chief law enforcement officer in your county. It is my intention, as one who has gone through the process, that I will not be a victim but will make a miscreant perp the victim should the situation present itsself, God forbide. And in the process help law enforcement who may not be present when someone does decide to take the law into their own hands. Kevin Smith, I hope you are never a victim of a gun crime, even then I suspect you would not change your mind. To bad. But if it should occur and someone with a concealed permit does come to your aide, I expect you to thank them.

dogboy 2 years, 2 months ago

..you'll get more bang for your buck !!!

Darkwing 2 years, 2 months ago

Growing up in Colorado, where gun laws were more lax, it was impressed upon me that carrying a weapon gave me a greater responsibility to avoid confrontation and escalation. Of course, this was also when the police had to tell the principal that yes, I could bring my rifle to school. After such policies changed, Columbine happened, and the gun control lobby has been doubling down on the fear and hysteria ever since.

Ross 2 years, 2 months ago

I just don't understand some people and their antiquated gun views - liberal crybabies.

If the students had been armed - they could have filled those sickos full of holes - and maybe a few others.

And to be honest - I just don't feel comfortable without packing some sort of "heat" - especially at a restaurant. I have seen that goofy "TV chef and how rowdy he can be. If he ever did that to me - I would pull out my "armor" and shoot that silly hat off. If he wanted more - then he would certainly understand the meaning of "lead poisoning".

Jibbs 2 years, 2 months ago

What a ridiculous headline for this story. It's like asking how choosing chunky peanut butter helps the economy.

Kevie: If I was allowed to carry a cop around, I wouldn't carry a gun, but until that day.... There is absolutely no law that we could pass that would prevent what happened in Arizona, we can only hope to be better prepared. I, for one, will be, and everyone around me is safer because of it whether they know it or not, including you.

As our society aligns itself more and more with the thought process of a fifteen-year-old girl and our male population becomes more and more effeminate, there still needs to be regular citizens that stay properly trained and equipped so they may effectively wreak havoc on those trying to harm the innocent.

Grow up! Seriously.

eflat7 2 years, 2 months ago

It probably won't help the economy, but it could save your life. Don't you read The Pilot? These restaurants are getting robbed all the time. It's usually the same story; kid takes out garbage at 11 m and perp grabs kid and takes him into the store and empties the register. Now even though the kid may not have a weapon, someone leaving the restaurant may, and may or may not end up saving a life. At least there is a slim chance that a life will be saved. I'd take a litte over none any day.

I wish there weren't that many guns out there to worry about, but the fact is, there are. And there are people out there willing to use them. I am just thankful that I am allowed to slip my little pistol into my pocket legally. You see I have no record at all, I have never even been stopped for speeding and have been driving for almost 20 years.

Crime happens, and it is only getting worse. I hope I never have to defend my life, my family's, or anyone else's life with a gun. But if I have to, I will. I shouldn't have to compromise my rights just because I am having a burger at an establishment that sells beer.

Ross 2 years, 2 months ago

I agree - I read of that "garbage" thing dozens of times. maybe they should think about storing the garbage inside........

Just a thought!

srsheffield2 2 years, 2 months ago

Mr. Smith, Please take the time to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0By...

"People are just too unstable to be trusted with the deadly product they advocate so relentlessly for. " If you truly believe the statement above attributed to you, then you need to surround yourself with a more mentally stable class of people. Possession of a firearm and knowing how to use it does not somehow automatically make you unstable mentally. If for some reason you can't trust yourself to possess and handle a firearm, then by all means, don't. But by the same token, don't tell me I shouldn't when you have absolutely no knowledge of me or my abilities to handle a firearm.

DaveyNC 2 years, 2 months ago

The law would hardly make it "routine in restaurants". The law may change but people's habits don't change that quickly and most people are not in the habit of toting iron.

Until the Sheriff's department gets funding for their new teleporter, it's a good idea to be able to defend yourself if necessary.

Ross 2 years, 2 months ago

Not to be a smart ### - but NEVER EVER have I been even close to anything that was remotely dangerous in a restaurant except maybe the food. What I really fear is gun toting patrons getting a bit excited over something small and all of a sudden lead is flying everywhere.

What a crazy discourse!

elguapo9 2 years, 2 months ago

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.

Ross 2 years, 2 months ago

whew - you need a haircut!

DaveyNC 2 years, 2 months ago

Well looky what I found! Here is what happens when people have the means to protect themselves, their loved ones and their property--a happy ending: http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/couple-recount-fatal-fray-at-their-tierra-verde-home/1158689

srsheffield2 2 years, 2 months ago

Scotlass49, No one is advocating everyone going out and trying to be a law enforcement officer and stopping robberies. The idea of my being armed is really the same as your husbands, 'To go home at night'. Not to be some sort of vigilante who is looking for a situation to solve. It is just to be the one who get to go home and not to the hospital or morgue at the end of the day. I'm as glad as anyone that your and the others were not hurt (physically) by the shotgun robber. He could have just as easily decided not to leave any witnesses. Please look at this: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/08/us/soldier-kills-4-people-and-hurts-6-in-a-restaurant-in-north-carolina.html

I think you have the right to defend yourself just as I do. And it is your choice not to do so if you so choose. Please do not try to restrict me from defending my family and myself though. It is not necessarily that a gun is going to save you every time by any means, but it is an aid to try to level the 'playing field'. Awareness and tactics are sometimes more important than the possession of a weapon.
If I were to see someone with a holstered weapon in a restaurant, I would never automatically assume they are there to do harm. Perhaps that is the major difference between you and I in this discussion. As I understand the legislation, It is to allow concealed permit holders to go into a restaurant carrying concealed. Which means you would never know they were carrying a weapon. It does NOT allow the permit holder to drink alcoholic beverages.

eflat7 2 years, 2 months ago

Thats why it is called "concealed carry". No one should ever know you are carrying. I would be nervous of anyone carrying a gun that I could see also.

A gun most certainly does not guarantee absolute protection. I agree it only gives you a small chance of protecting yourself. Like I said before, I will take "small chance" over "no chance" any day, when it comes to my family.

SouthernShooter 2 years, 2 months ago

Please keep in mind that the compelling event that spurred the passing of the NC CCH law was the massacre at Luigi's Italian restaurant in 1993. That summer a scumbag walked into the restaurant and opened fire, killing 4 and wounding 6. A little over 2 years later the concealed carry law was passed in December of 1995. However, the law as written wouldn't have prevented the massacre. You see Luigi's served wine, which the law forbids carrying concealed in a place that serves alcohol. I am glad that the legislature is seeing fit to correct this some 16 years later. It will still be illegal to carry concealed when consuming alcohol, as it should be. So please, no fears about drunken shootouts at the Olive Garden.

TinMan 2 years, 2 months ago

Thumbs up SouthernShooter!!

Zoey 2 years, 2 months ago

What, No JER or jimt ?? Dejected ? I understand, but these comments need more variety. Hurry Back... :)

Scoot 2 years, 2 months ago

It's a shame the world we live in has come to this but it's more important everyday that you have protection for your family. Having experienced a situation of not being armed while a gunman entered the produce market that I was in. That was the worst feeling you could ever imagine. I am 100% for anyone being responsible with a gun and protecting themselves and their families.

SouthernShooter 2 years, 2 months ago

Thanks, tinman. I've been teaching the concealed carry class for several years now. Recently I have seen a huge increase "non typical" firearm buyers interested in training. Especially the middle to older female demographic. Even those traditionally on the blue team are showing increasing interest. This past weekend at the wildlife club I saw more middle age females there than I can ever recall. I guess its a sign of interesting times. God created man (and women). Samuel Colt made us equal. :)

TinMan 2 years, 2 months ago

Times have changed for sure SoutherShooter and not for the better.

TinMan 2 years, 2 months ago

http://www.wral.com/news/news_briefs/story/9312403/

Here you go! "Witnesses: Man, child shot outside Fayetteville restaurant"

nuff said about this topic.

BTW. Liberals... feel free to cross the pond if you do not support or like our Constitutional Rights.

Ross 2 years, 2 months ago

TinBrain - typical post from an true conservative "intellect". You know that there were several amish children killed in a school house a few years ago. I imagine the chances of that happening again are incredibly high. In fact - the sale of firearms to amish quadrupled that year.

BTW - I will gladly pay for a one way ticket over the pond for you........and I will bet you can even pack that side arm :)

srsheffield2 2 years, 2 months ago

http://www.wral.com/news/news_briefs/story/9312403/

Having somewhat of a chance is better than no chance at all.....

jimt 2 years, 2 months ago

Guns are stupid. They don't care who fires them. They don't care who the kill or maim.

If only there was a way to begin the process of disarming those who have no legal right to own guns, or came into possession of guns through illegal means.

Actually there is such a way -- at least in theory. Development "biometric" sensors that can be integrated into a gun's design and act as the gun's safety mechanism. If you are the gun's rightful owner(s), the sensors will recognize your unique biometric signature and unlock the safety mechanism within .5 seconds. Otherwise the safety mechanism remains locked.

The FBI has estimated that over 150,000 handguns are stolen every year from gunowners and from gunshops. By definition they enter the black market and are used to arm gangs, and other criminals. Making biometric handguns, and over time making them the only kind of handguns that can be sold to the public, will mean that robbing civilian gun owners of their gun is pointless, the gun can't be fired by anyone who comes into it's possession illegally.

But we as a society, I'm afraid won't do this. The NRA, among others, has sown so much disinformation and raised such ridiculous objections about them, which nonetheless have gained credibility among the "absolutist gun rights" segment, that neither the political will to fund their development or especially to consider legislation regarding their sale in the future exists, or is likely to exist.

So every year, a thousand or more innocent victims of murder by handgun by strangers will continue, year after year after year. Better that, apparently, than investing in a technology that could reduce this number significantly.

We deplore the murder of wonderful people like Eve Carson. We cry. We vent our anger at the killers. We ask God, why? But, in the final analysis, we learn nothing, we do nothing.

Behan 2 years, 2 months ago

I would wager that if you presented me with such a device, I could develop a workaround in a couple of hours. And I'm not particularly bright.

You give far too much credit to the NRA and not nearly enough to the craftiness of the modern thug.

To answer the question in the title:"How do guns in restaurants help our economy?"

It's simple, really.

I put more money into the economy each day I stay alive and make purchases.

I stay alive longer by being better armed and better trained by the common thug.

2+2=4

Ross 2 years, 2 months ago

Hmmmm.......masters degree in math no doubt!

Behan 2 years, 2 months ago

PhD in common sense.

jimt 2 years, 2 months ago

Behan,

Yeah, it's sure easy to make assertions about your cleverness in getting around a biometric technology, in the absence of that technology. I've heard that for years.

Tell you what, let's develop the technology, make it as fool-proof as possible with regard to both false-positive and false-negative readings by the sensors, and as tinker-proof as possible with regard to getting around the technology. Then we can speak about how quickly you and criminals can undermine their utility.

And I am not giving the NRA and other gun-right's absolutists too much credit. I've researched this topic very, very deeply in the wake of Eve Carson's murder, and I've seen the role the NRA and their ilk have played in undermining R & D efforts by Colt, and other handgun manufacturer's to develop these guns. They have the blood of innocents on their hands, and thinking like yours, in my estimation, help fuel their efforts.

Behan 2 years, 2 months ago

Such technology fails. It doesn't irk me too badly when my high-speed remote control garage opener fails at the worst possible moment. It would trouble me greatly if my weapon failed at the worst possible moment because a handful of anti-gun nuts decided they should decide when my weapon should work and when it should not. Feel free to install whatever gizmo you like on your collection. Stay away from mine, if it is not too much trouble.

Blog entries

Tell the whole story Kevin by SemperFi1775 2 years, 1 month ago

Comments No Longer Accepted