|Oh, GROW UP. <ach-pthooey>|
Posted by: TEEBONE ® |
Author Profile Mail author Edit
Gun-control activists threaten Jersey Mike's with boycott for open-carry policies - WND
C. Douglas Golden, The Western Journal
And the mob has come for Jersey Mike's, purveyor of sandwiches, because it's dared to allow customers to exercise their right to carry firearms inside their stores.
The controversy began, according to TheBlaze, when a photo appeared on social media showing a customer inside the sub chain with two guns, one of which was improperly holstered.
The photo was posted by Travis Akers, the liberal pundit is best known for his work with Left of Bang, a gun control group made up of veterans. In the post, Akers criticized the carrier without going after Jersey Mike's.
"This man is brandishing two firearms, one of which is not retained properly," Akers tweeted on Oct. 26."I could easily take that gun from him and shoot him, and take the other gun, all within 3 seconds.
"If you can’t carry safely, you shouldn’t be allowed to carry."
It's worth noting that the man isn't "brandishing" anything. The two guns are being carried, albeit one being carried improperly. As per Merriam-Webster, brandish means "to shake or wave (something, such as a weapon) menacingly."
Hyperbolic, incorrect language aside, there's kind of sort of a kernel of truth here; carrying requires carrying responsibly, which this man isn't. That said, I don't think Navy Intelligence veterans are going around to Jersey Mike's looking for guys carrying firearms tucked into their jeans above their derriere so that they could "take that gun from him and shoot him, and take the other gun, all within 3 seconds."
If these are the things Akers might be thinking about while waiting to order his chipotle chicken cheesesteak, perhaps some time away from the gun control community might do him some good.
Anyhow, Akers' post didn't call out Jersey Mike's, per se, merely the gentleman in the photo for improperly carrying a firearm. Fair enough. This metastasized quickly after Jersey Mike's fired back with a joke, which -- let's face it -- is never a great idea when dealing with the humorless.
"If the laws were up to us, we'd make it so everyone had to eat Jersey Mike's Subs on Sundays," the company said in a now-deleted tweet.
Guess where this went next?
Any evidence that mass shootings of opportunity are a problem, or that banning open or concealed carry in public spaces reduces crime, is notably absent in these tweets. Instead, the thinking is: Guns are bad. This guy is carrying a gun improperly. He's in a Jersey Mike's, which allows customers to exercise their legal right to carry. Ergo, Jersey Mike's is bad. Try plotting that one out using formal logic.
Jersey Mike's deleted the tweets and apologized.
Again, while fair, this was never the point for the other side of this debate:
So, in short, for the gun control movement, the only acceptable apology for a bad joke and a viral photo of a guy with his guns (who wasn't "brandishing" them, no matter what you think about his dedication to gun safety) is to ban guns from the chain, talk to gun control advocates upon penalty of boycott and make donations to gun control groups.
While other companies have caved to gun control activists' demands amid boycott threats, the calls for a Jersey Mike's boycott seem to have fallen primarily upon deaf ears.
No policies have changed, despite the apology for the Twitter post. The media attention that Messrs. Akers and Guttenberg have threatened hasn't exactly materialized. The social media mob has mostly stayed within its own bubble.
It's entirely reasonable for a business to make rules that get as many people in the door as possible. Take this as a piece of evidence that bending to the social media mob doesn't necessarily do that.
The folks at March for Our Lives might be staying away from Jersey Mike's, but this makes me a bit more likely to grab a sub there. I doubt I'm alone.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
LIBERTY HAS NO EXPIRATION DATEDemocrats wouldn't buy a clue if it was government subsidized.
|Post Reply | Recommend | Alert||Previous | Next | Current page|