Guns in restaurants draw stares but little outcry
Credit: sxc.hu
In Virginia, gun owners are allowed to carry firearms in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, as long as the restaurant permits it and they carry their weapon openly. Legislation to allow concealed weapons in restaurants serving alcohol passed the General Assembly this year, but was vetoed by Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
By MATTHEW BARAKAT
Associated Press Writer
Published: May 9, 2008
RESTON, Va. (AP) — The patrons at Champps, an upscale restaurant and bar chain, were eating ribs and drinking beer on a recent Saturday when customer Bruce Jackson stood up and made an announcement: He was armed, and so were dozens of other patrons.
The armed customers stood up in unison, showing off holstered pistols and revolvers. Jackson said a word or two about the rights of gun owners to carry firearms in Virginia, then thanked everyone for their attention and sat down.
And the diners returned to their burgers and Budweisers.
The Virginia Citizens Defense League organized the dinner at Champps to prove a point: that the presence of armed customers in northern Virginia restaurants would elicit little more than shrugs.
The dinner — and several other restaurant visits throughout northern Virginia last month — were a response to comments from the majority leader in the state Senate, Democrat Richard Saslaw, who said during a legislative debate that armed patrons would be unwelcome in northern Virginia restaurants.
“In most urban areas, you walk into a restaurant with a gun on your hip, they’re going to tell you to get out,” Saslaw said.
In fact, with a few exceptions, the gun owners got their meals. The group went to eight different restarants in April — at two of them, they were asked to leave. More often than not, though, their presence failed to generate a stir.
All the restaurants were in Fairfax County, a bastion of suburbia and soccer moms outside Washington that is the wealthiest county in America, according to the most recent Census data. It is also a place where nerves over the gun debate are still somewhat raw a year after the shootings at Virginia Tech, where 32 people were slain, including many from northern Virginia.
The restaurants included numerous family establishments including the Fuddruckers burger chain and the McLean Family Restaurant.
“We wanted to prove not only that (Saslaw) was wrong, but we wanted to make the point that we have the right to self defense. That’s a God-given right,” said Dave Vann, a retired D.C. police officer and VCDL member who organized the restaurant visits.
In Virginia, gun owners are allowed to carry firearms in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, as long as the restaurant permits it and they carry their weapon openly. Legislation to allow concealed weapons in restaurants serving alcohol passed the General Assembly this year, but was vetoed by Gov. Timothy M. Kaine.
While Virginia is generally considered friendly to gun owners, it is only one of two states along with Montana, that requires people to openly carry arms in restaurants that serve alcohol, according to the Web site opencarry.org, which promotes and monitors gun owners’ rights. Eleven states ban guns altogether in restaurants that serve alcohol, while the rest make no distinction between open and concealed carry.
At Champps, several patrons failed to notice that so many customers were armed, even though dozens of gun-toting men and women had walked right past them.
Tomas Nolasco of Reston said he hadn’t noticed the guns and didn’t care as long as they weren’t drinking. (They weren’t.) His wife was a little more concerned.
“There are families in here, children in here,” Cathy Nolasco said. “It bothers me.”
Brendan Fitzgerald of Reston and his friends noticed the guns immediately. They were curious but unconcerned.
“I’m just laughing because it’s totally unnecessary in my opinion,” Fitzgerald said, pointing to one individual who not only was armed but also had several clips of ammunition attached to his belt.
“This is Reston, not Southeast,” said his friend Nathan Dicken, contrasting the northern Virginia suburb to a section of the District of Columbia that has been known for gun violence.
The gun owners say those patrons’ comments miss the point. Vann said the gun owners’ presence make the restaurant more safe, not less. Champps’ manager — Carey Vereen, a gun-rights supporter — agreed.
“This is an area with a large population of government agents — FBI, CIA, local,” Vereen said. “In terms of people seeing open carry, it’s not a shock to our customers.”
Indeed, many of the men who carry weapons say people frequently just assume they’re police or retired police.
For women who carry, it’s a different story. At one restaurant — Mike’s American Grill — the group had gone essentially unnoticed until a woman in her 20s with a satin-finished, stainless-steel revolver got up from her table.
The restaurant’s manager spotted her and asked the group to either put the guns in their cars or leave. They left.
“When I saw the gun on her hip, I was like, ‘What is going on here?”‘ said the manager, Gabba Kaye, who hadn’t noticed the guns when the group of 20 checked in for their lunch reservation.
Kaye said he hadn’t received complaints from customers, but that the weapons made him uncomfortable. He also said he had been warned by the restaurant’s ownership after word got out that VCDL planned a series of restaurant visits. He was specifically instructed not to allow them service while carrying.
The woman who caught the manager’s attention said the gun always attracts notice.
“Every time I go out, I notice people’s eyes going right here,” said the woman, pointing to her hip. She de-clined to give her full name out of privacy concerns. “It’s interesting because it’s not a reaction of fear. It’s more a reaction of ‘You can’t do that. You can’t carry a gun.’ ... It’s like disdain.”
She said she only recently began carrying a gun after a string of sexual assaults in her Alexandria neighborhood.
The second restaurant that turned the group away was Kilroy’s in Springfield — a restaurant where Saslaw was popular enough to once have a sandwich named after him. The owner also said he had been aware of earlier news reports that the VCDL was planning a series of armed lunches.
“We’d just prefer they not come to the restaurant,” said the owner, Phillip “Pip” Thomas. “I’m sure it would offend some customers.”
Saslaw said he’s not necessarily surprised that VCDL found restaurants in the region that would allow them to dine while armed. But he said that carrying guns is simply not normal behavior in this area.
“What normal person walks around with a gun on your hip? Something’s wrong in your life” if you feel compelled to carry a gun as part of your daily routine, he said.
The gun owners bristle at that stereotype. Nearly 100 people attended the various lunches and dinners, including many retired military personnel. Others were white-collar professionals. While most were white men, the group included blacks, Hispanics, Asians and women.
“This isn’t a bunch of drunk rednecks sidling up to a saloon,” said Christopher Wu, 28, of Alexandria, carrying a Springfield XD45 pistol.
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( Cosmo Wafflefoot ) on May 13, 2008 at 8:43 am
(japov) You share the views of EVERYBODY with a phobia. None of them think they are “unreasonable” either. They think everybody else is. (Navywings)You post..“So Cosmo, data is on the side of the people who chose to minimize their risk of becoming a victim of violent crime.“ No kidding? Who wants to Maximize their chance of being a victim of crime? BUT, that is a far cry from jumping to the conclusion that EVERYBODY should walk around armed! Has it not occured to you that the statistics you offer make a FAR better case for the confiscation of ALL guns? Your statistics are the very same ones used by ANTI-GUN advocates! Use your head man! Countries that have far, far fewer violent crimes and crimes committed with a gun have one thing in common. It AIN’T more people walking around armed! Look, I know you and the eloquent (japov) will NEVER see this. Ever try to get a person afraid to fly on a plane? They never ever run out of unreasonable reasons not to fly. Do your thing. More and more guns will be sold and things will continue to get worse. If the trend ever starts to go the other way (be alert for pigs flying out of your behind) get back to me and I will gladly agree with you.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( japov ) on May 12, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Cosmo Wafflefoot,
In spite of your blind assumptions, and am not afraid to be unarmed. The rest of your argument was based on that, so I can safely just pass all of that up.
You’re pathetic man.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( japov ) on May 12, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Cosmo Wafflefoot,
In spite of you blind assumptions, and am not afraid to be unarmed. The rest of your argument was based on that, so I can safely just pass all of that up.
You’re pathetic man.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Cosmo Wafflefoot ) on May 12, 2008 at 8:12 pm
I always stay on topic (navywings), you just missed the point. I understand why you would. So, I will be more specific. People “who minimizes their risk” of getting eaten by a shark by never going in the ocean are phobic. People who “who minimizes their risk” of not crashing in a plane by not flying are phobic. In your own words, the definition of a phobia is (an UNREASONABLE fear). OK, so now ask yourself if people who won’t go in the ocean, on planes, in elevators, near snakes of leave the house without being armed are “reasonable” people. EVERYBODY “thinks” they are reasonable, I give you that. But, society decides weather they are, or are not, based upon how the overwhelming majority thinks. CLEARLY, people who don’t feel comfortable leaving the house unarmed make up a tiny minority of our population. Ergo: your fear qualifies, by all measures, as an unreasonable one. But not to you. Exactly like the people with phobias involving planes, elevators and all the rest. I want you to know that it is OK by me. I don’t want to force ANYBODY to do things they are uncomfortable with. Just do me a favor in return. Don’t call me crazy because I don’t share your fears. I’m 58 years old and I have never crashed in a plane, been eaten by a shark, crashed in an elevator, been bitten by a snake or ever wished I had a gun with me. (I too have lived and worked in many dangerous places) One day any or all of those unfortunate situations may befall me. I totally understand that. But 58 years of doing things like diving with sharks, flying all over the world, riding in elevators, being called by neighbors to “get the snake out of my yard” and working nights in Manhattan without carrying a gun have all worked out fine for me. It would be “unreasonable” of me to look back on a very satisfying life and say to myself….“What was I thinking?..I must have been CRAZY!“ I wasn’t crazy at all. I just don’t share your fears or find them “reasonable”. I suggest I am in the majority. I never said what you were doing is against the law. Unreasonable fears should NEVER be against the law. Do what you need to do. Just don’t expect me to agree or say thanks. With regard to [psychopathic wackos] with guns. Remember, almost every crazy person who kills people with a gun already had the gun before they went crazy. Since almost every family I know of has a gun, potentially, it’s a snap for crazy psychopaths to put their hands on one. That fact explains why America leads the world in murders by a country mile. You think we solve this with MORE guns. I strongly disagree. I see no reason to believe that more of what clearly doesn’t work will work. You do. End of story.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( navywings ) on May 12, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Cosmo,
I might have led you to believe the chance of being a victim of violent crime was infinitesimally small. It’s not as small as you might think. This link will shed some light for you: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE0D9163EF93AA35750C0A961948260
Basically, 1 out of 133 americans will be a murder victim, a 12 year olds will have an 83% chance of being a victim of violent crime in their lifetime. According to the report, people who are now 20 years old have a 72 percent chance of being raped, robbed or assaulted, and the figures drop to 53 percent at age 30, 36 percent at age 40, 22 percent at age 50, 14 percent at age 60 and 8 percent at the age of 70.
So tell me Cosmo, what is your threshold at which you deem protecting your life is worth it? Or are you willing to rely on law enforcement to protect you when they statistically arrive AFTER the violent incident?
National average response time for an ambulance is 10 minutes. Police, 6 minutes. Typical violent crime is over in less than 5 minutes.
So Cosmo, data is on the side of the people who chose to minimize their risk of becoming a victim of violent crime. You’ve provided nothing more than incorrect definitions of pop psychology, circular logic and emotional reasons for either being afraid of wackos or law abiding citizens (still not sure which if your main point of argument).
You’d be much more credible and believable if you could support your position with tangible data. Calling people “phobic” based on your own logic is tantamount to asserting ones “genius” based on ones own self assessment.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Vann ) on May 12, 2008 at 5:44 pm
Crispy Daisy: Taking your questions/arguments seriatim: The God given right to carry a gun comes from the God given right to self defense and having the means to defend yourself. No gun, no self defense.
Regarding the right to life, this right, is that you are made in the image of God, and that you have been placed on this earth for His purposes. Remember that from the bible?
Inalienable rights are those that are granted by our Creator. Rights cannot be granted by governments. Privileges are granted by governments - the privilege of voting, driving, etc. Inalienable rights - those granted by our Creator - the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are ours as human beings naturally.
Remember your history class? In 1776 Thomas Jefferson said: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.
Note the words “...endowed by their Creator…“ Those referenced words and similar thoughts can be found throughout time.
Now, if you are an atheist, we have fundamental differences of opinion and it’s pointless to continue. You have your beliefs and I have mine. Otherwise, I think that pretty much covers it.
By the way, just because God gave us rights does not mean that we are to infer that he owes us anything. It is simply what he has done. If anything, it should be implied that WE owe him.
Dave Vann
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( navywings ) on May 12, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Cosmo,
Again you display your flawed logic and circular thought. You cite: plane crashes, snake bites, elevator cable breaks, shark attacks. People (and yourself) minimize their risks for activities they participate in (life too). So any surfer who minimizes their risk of shark attack has a phobia? Same for the hiker who carries a snake bite kit?
Please stay on topic too. Is your issue with “uncomfortable as I feel in a society where any psychopathic wacko can buy a gun” or as this topic is centered, with law-abiding citizens exercising their right to defend themselves? We can discuss “uncomfortable as I feel in a society where any psychopathic wacko can buy a gun” if you like but that is a different topic.
What’s your issue again? Wackos or law-abiding citizens? As you seem to keep ascribing the incorrect definition of a phobia (an UNREASONABLE fear) to acts of law abiding citizens to their reasonable preparedness against acts of violence, I’m not sure you’re centered on topic.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( crispy daisy ) on May 12, 2008 at 1:56 pm
riegnman, I was not referring to what Dave Vann said in the article. I was referring to what he said in the first comment he posted about this story. In his comment, he specifically said that carrying a gun is a God-given right. Unfortunately, the earliest comments posted about this story now seem to be gone.
And, regarding God-given rights, I would love for someone to tell me where in the Bible it says that we have a right to anything, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—never mind where it says you have a right to self-defense. God did not give us rights; He gave us rules and obligations for living our lives. To say that He gave us rights is to imply that He felt He owed us something. Any rights we have are conferred by governments, based on what the powers that be feel that its citizens are entitled to.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Vann ) on May 12, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Regarding God and guns: What I said was that the right to life, and therefore selfdefense of your life or of anyone else’s is a God given right. The Constitution and the Second Amendment merely reaffirms that God given right just as they only reafirm the God given right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In earlier times that right to life was preserved by swords, spears or whatever means was available. Today it’s firearms. In the future, who knows?
The carrying of firearms is not a, well, it’s okay here or politically correct here and not there issue. Those who would rape, rob and murder do not follow those rules. You find violent crime everywhere, even churches are robbed in the middle of Sunday Service.
Being prepared is not being paranoid, after all, you have insurance on your house but you don’t expect it to burn down!
Those who do not wish to arm themselves have that right and the rest of us should respect that. However, those folks do not, EVER have the right to tell us that we have to be unprepared and submit to their wishes just because they don’t care for what we believe in.
I’m happiest if I have no unpleasant incounters in my life. But I will be prepared to defend my family if need be. And I prey that need never arises.
Dave Vann
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( riegnman ) on May 12, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Crispy Daisy,
I am always surprised how people that don’t have an argument tend to make up facts just so they can be heard. Nowhere does the article say that it’s a God-given right to carry a gun. It says that it’s a God-given right to self defense. Please, if you can’t make a somewhat intelligent argument, then sit on the sidelines and keep quite.
Report Inappropriate Comment