Regal Theaters

Nasty

New member
I sent a message to them about their no carry signs (which carry weight of Law in Ohio) and this is what I got in return:

February 12, 2013

Dear <real name>:

Thank you for taking the time to communicate your concerns regarding our facility security policies. Please understand that Regal Entertainment Group, with the assistance of safety experts and law enforcement personnel, has developed policies and procedures designed to provide the safest environment for our guests and employees. Rest assured these policies and procedures are not designed with the intent to inconvenience or otherwise cause hardship to our guests. However, we believe these policies appropriate to assure the general safety of all guests and employees.

Please note all law enforcement officers, whether on or off duty, are exempt from our gun prohibition policy in the theatre, as long as they identify themselves as such either by display of a badge or other identification upon request.

Again, thank you for taking the time to advise us of your concerns.

Sincerely,
Customer Relations Department
Operational Services
Regal Entertainment Group


I replied:

Thank you for your response.

Considering recent events in which the LAPD have gone into panic mode and are shooting innocent civilians at random based on nothing more than their driving pickup trucks, I believe that *your* trust in them which allows them to be armed while denying a lawfully trained and licensed individual to protect himself and his family is both irresponsible and dangerous.

Rest assured that I have both your business and our safety in mind. Bear in mind that the State of Ohio has already determined that I met or surpassed all requirements to provide for my own safety, yet you have decided to disallow my lawfully demonstrated right.

Please note that not only will I, my family and friends no longer do business with you, but as an individual and as a member of several of the largest firearm forums on the internet, I will both publicize your response and support a boycott of your businesses.

Thank you for taking the time to clearly state Regal Entertainment Group's lack of respect for individual rights. Best of luck in filling your theatres with law enforcement personnel.


Folks...if we don't all stand up to these self serving businesses they will continue to deny us our rights.

Thanks for reading,
Nasty
____________
 
I would seem to me that a reference to the Aurora shooting would be the best response to their claims of "assuring safety".



...not only will I, my family and friends no longer do business with you,...

As a point of (hopefully) constructive criticism, this is a remark that I always discourage. No one believes that your entire circle of friends and family will boycott the theater. Saying so puts you firmly in the "blowhard we can ignore" category. Doesn't even matter if it's true for your particular cases or not, it's NOT true 99.99% of the time it's claimed and they know it.
 
In Ohio, if they think you are carrying in a posted area, they don;t need to confront you. They can call a cop and if the officer finds you armed, you are in violation.

If the Judge finds you guilty of a minor offense, the Court can let you off with *only* a 2 year suspension of your CCW.

Thanks to those in support.
 
You need to get that law changed. Businesses will open and close, corporations will change policy with the wind direction. You can play whack-a-mole with the no carry signs from now 'till eternity. I'm not saying that you did anything wrong - in fact I love that letter - but I hope you folks are making a calculated, determined effort to change that law - it's ridiculous. They can achieve the same illusion of safety if the signs don't have the force of law - a force that is naturally ignored by the lawless.
 
Been down this road with them and they didn't react much. One of the problems is what theatre are you going to send them receipts from showing you took your business elsewhere? Every last one in my area bans carry.
Does this policy fixing behavior fall under the anti-trust laws? JK.
 
I'm just playing devil's advocate here and do not personally condone or recommend what I'm about to say, but what is keeping anyone (good and bad guy alike) from carrying inside these theaters? I understand that it's a violation, but we haven't seen the case where an armed civilian in violation of any posted policy has effectively stopped a criminal. What sort of repercussions would there be if this happened? Would the civilian be deemed a hero/charges pressed? My personal opinion is, and always has been, that a business owner can dictate the terms of his transactions with their clients. If they want to post a "Gun Free Zone" sign, then they have every right to do so. When you conduct business with them, being shot by an armed gunman is the risk you have to be willing to take. I love your letter, don't get me wrong. Will it do any good? No, I don't believe so. I also respect their right to ignore your letter and think they should do whatever the hell they please. I have Netflix, so I'm good.
 
Let me also add, a little off topic, that I don't believe this should apply to any government institutions or schools. We own those as taxpayers, and we should be able to vote carry in those institutions.
 
I understand that it's a violation, but we haven't seen the case where an armed civilian in violation of any posted policy has effectively stopped a criminal.


Probably depends on the jurisdiction, but the first shooting by a CCW in Wisconsin took place about a year ago, when an armed robber with a shotgun was engaged by a citizen standing in line, resulting in the criminal suffering a wound and being neutralized. This took place in a larger supermarket that had "no firearms allowed" signs posted. The Prosecutor declined to present any charges.

Actual mileage will most obviously vary, and no general observation is offered.


Willie

.
 
I can't speak to any generalities but I have seen a number of different cases in different states and involving different versions of possession violations which also involved self-defense and I have never seen the relatively minor possession charge pursued.

For example, there was a case in NY where a woman shot an attacker with a handgun that she was not authorized to possess, as she did not have a permit of any kind, say nothing of that particular firearm being on her permit. However, the shooting was obviously righteous and no charges were brought.
 
Folks...if we don't all stand up to these self serving businesses they will continue to deny us our rights.

Interesting statement. Believe it or not, for profit businesses are in fact self serving. That is why they exist, regardless of whether they allow you to carry or not.

As for your rights, they have rights to. Strangely, theaters also squelch your 1st amendment right, but I noticed that you apparently are okay with giving up that right.

Simply put, carrying a gun into a business as a patron isn't your right. It isn't your right by the plain fact that you can only do it legally if it is allowed by the business. So it is a privilege regardless of whether you think it should be your right to do so or not. Until laws change, that is the way it is.

Please note that not only will I, my family and friends no longer do business with you, but as an individual and as a member of several of the largest firearm forums on the internet, I will both publicize your response and support a boycott of your businesses.

Efforts to force businesses to make them comply with our carry needs through threats, protests, and boycotts, from what I have read on this forum and others, have all failed, IIRC. These are all very negative attacks on the business and businesses generally all respond defensively to such insults. Since they don't want you in with your gun, they are happy to not have you in their business. That you are boycotting doesn't bother them. In fact, it helps them with their desire that you not carry in their business.

The efforts to get business to let people carry in them that have been successful seem to be those efforts that don't try to punish businesses for not complying, but instead are those efforts that attempt to persuade in a logical manner the reasons why it is in fact beneficial for a business to allow law abiding citizens to carry.

Obviously, this is the much harder way to try to make a business change because it requires quite a bit of maturity, eloquence, business logic, and humbleness, not to mention being personable and having the gift of persuasion. Being combative, argumentative, or expressing a sense of entitlement when going into a business personally, verbally, or with written communication isn't likely to result in a beneficial outcome. This just reinforces the business' perspective that it doesn't want people like you as patrons.

That you are now engaging in your punitive action by publicizing the horrors of Regal theaters will undoubtedly help you to feel empowered and feel better about your decision, but Regal hasn't a clue about these "largest firearm forums on the internet" and isn't likely to notice any actual effect outside of the normal business variation they experience from day to day or cycle to cycle. They know this.

You don't change peoples' minds by trying to force them to see things your way. If you haven't noticed, their policy hasn't forced you to see things their way so why would you think your policy will force them to see things your way?
 
I can't speak to any generalities but I have seen a number of different cases in different states and involving different versions of possession violations which also involved self-defense and I have never seen the relatively minor possession charge pursued.

Mas has written up at least one of those. Not sure about the details, though I do remember it involved being on the wrong side of a state line (the good guy lived very close to the border...?)

Can't remember anything else about that one. Someone else help me out here?

pax
 
The efforts to get business to let people carry in them that have been successful seem to be those efforts that don't try to punish businesses for not complying, but instead are those efforts that attempt to persuade in a logical manner the reasons why it is in fact beneficial for a business to allow law abiding citizens to carry.

This!

And we've had especially good luck with rewarding and reinforcing good behavior -- witness the Starbucks "buycott" where gun owners dedicated a day to buying something from that company.

Probably happens that way because the business owner doesn't see the dollars that would have come into the business. They only see the dollars that actually do come in.

pax
 
One example Mas has discussed, where the self-defense case found in favor of the defendant but possession charges were pursued, would be that of Bernard Goetz.
 
One example Mas has discussed, where the self-defense case found in favor of the defendant but possession charges were pursued, would be that of Bernard Goetz.

That's true, I hadn't considered places where the gun was completely illegal. I'd imagine other such cases have happened in NY, Chicago, etc that never made the public attention threshold.
 
And we've had especially good luck with rewarding and reinforcing good behavior -- witness the Starbucks "buycott" where gun owners dedicated a day to buying something from that company.

We need to have these more often. We did it once for Starbucks for one day, but punitive boycotts are ongoing. We need to make an ongoing show of supporting especially pro-gun businesses that specifically say or have made it know to have welcome gun policies.
 
Have never had a problem in any Regal Theatre. I CCW always. They don't ask. I don't offer. We get along well.

However I will join your boycott on general principles.
 
Back
Top