HomeThe Gun Control DebateMeet The Dangerous Ammosexuals and Gun-Fetishists That Invaded Chipotle With Their Blessing

Meet The Dangerous Ammosexuals and Gun-Fetishists That Invaded Chipotle With Their Blessing

Open Carry Tarrant County, recently removed from the larger Open Carry Texas group because they frightened Jack in the Box employees so much that some hid in the walk-in freezer, headed to a Dallas Chipotle on Saturday–packing heat, of course, because everyone knows that it’s necessary to show up armed to the teeth when eating at a restaurant.

Steve Marmel first made us aware that the armed mob shortly after they announced their intentions. Moms Demand Action worked to make people aware so that those who care about their safety could avoid the Victory Avenue location, given Open Carry’s history of making violent threats toward those who disagree with their decision to openly flaunt their boomsticks in public.

5-17-2014 1-39-01 PM

In the past, Open Carry Texas–especially the Tarrant County branch–has revealed the personal information of a woman who, because she was concerned, called the police to report that there was a mob of armed maniacs running around with long guns on an overpass–and has threatened to abuse FOIA requests to do the same to anyone else who stands up to them. Pro-insanity activists have also threatened those who dare oppose their decision to terrorize the public by stalking and spitting on a paralyzed victim of gun violence and shooting a female mannequin while joking that it was a representative of Moms Demand Action, and even showing up dozens-strong just to intimidate a group of four women meeting to discuss gun violence. One member posted a YouTube video explaining that he gets a “perverse pleasure” from terrorizing and intimidating the women.

Given the group’s violent and downright insane history, Moms Demand Action spoke out against the Chipotle demonstration, urging people to call and voice their disapproval. After being notified, Chipotle said that it “takes no position” on the issue. However, by “taking no position,” Chipotle fails to realize that it is actually saying that the safety of its customers takes a backseat to the whims of violent gun fanatics.

5-17-2014 1-50-36 PM

AATTP contacted the manager of the location, Raul, and explained the situation. He initially repeated Chipotle corporate’s statement that they “take no position” but after it was explained that he was not considering the safety of customers he agreed to request that they put their guns away–and that he would not serve them if they did not comply.

Needless to say, we were surprised when we discovered that Raul lied to us. Stephanie Lundy contacted AATTP to let us know that the gun fanatics were, in fact, served while packing heat.

chipotle3

We found Alfonso Delcampo, who posts on Facebook as Flakoo Delcampo, and what we saw was disconcerting at best.  Below are some interesting photos culled from the wannabe gangster’s public posts on Facebook, including his responsible decision to place heavy weaponry in the hands of a toddler:

5-19-2014 10-11-53 AM 5-19-2014 10-12-47 AM

10152614_1399476123662121_1719644600655161992_n 10251967_1404639359812464_5102975023824721338_n 1609768_1396593947283672_2060895383_n 1604694_1405511553058578_8826467462394276144_n

5-19-2014 10-08-04 AM

 

We are severely disappointed that Chipotle has elected to place its customers’ safety–especially after an accidental gun discharge in a Utah location earlier this year–beneath these idiots’ desire to terrorize the public by bringing heavy weaponry into a restaurant in which children are present.

Currently, Texas requires no background check, no license, no training, and has no age restrictions for some of the more dangerous legal guns on the market.

Chipotle had every legal right to turn the gun bullies away at the door. Perhaps people should let Chipotle know exactly how they feel, like these people are doing. #BurritosNotBullets:

5-19-2014 10-21-08 AM 5-19-2014 10-22-12 AM 5-19-2014 10-21-48 AM


5-19-2014 10-25-24 AM

5-19-2014 10-47-56 AM 5-19-2014 10-49-26 AM 5-19-2014 10-49-02 AM 5-19-2014 10-48-42 AM 5-19-2014 10-48-16 AM

Share on RedditShare on LinkedInDigg thisShare on StumbleUponPin on PinterestShare on TumblrShare on Google+Email this to someonePrint this page

About John Prager

John Prager
John Prager is an unfortunate Liberal soul who lives uncomfortably in the middle of a Conservative hellscape and likes to refer to himself as an "island of reason in a sea of insanity." While he is not a fan of politicians, period, he has developed a deep-seated hatred for the bigotry, fear mongering, and lies of the Right Wing. John also works as a warden at one of Barry Soetoro's FEMA re-education camps and as a HAARP weather control coordinator. He can be reached at [email protected] if you have any questions or comments.
  • GammaRae

    The Gun Fetishists’ Psalm…

  • Pingback: Open Carry Texas BACKS DOWN: Orders Members to CEASE Taking Guns Into Businesses! | Atlas Left

  • Chad

    Some might be surprised to know there are quite a bit of gun owners who do not blame Chipotle for their decision, myself being one of them. We all need to take a step back and realize that this isn’t a gun issue as much as it is a stupid and inconsiderate persons issue.

    I cannot for the life of me understand why one would need to carry a semi-auto rifle into any establishment, especially in Downtown Dallas. Please, do not clump all gun owners into the same category of those two dip shits.

    And for the record, yes, law abiding Texans need to get a background check just like everyone else when purchasing a firearm from a FFL.

    • Frank

      Many gun owners don’t agree with these OC advocates because we have already seen too many of our rights erode due to the hoplophobia of beta males or simply because of the low information voter. The people that OC sadly send many of the low information voters who previously didn’t have an opinion to websites like this were they can read lies like the spitting incident that never happened or the guy who supposedly takes pleasure in scaring women when that’s not what he said at all (P.S. If you’re going to lie it’s best not to provide a link to the actual video). We would rather people, as individuals, make an informed decision about firearms from a truthful source than a web site like this or others out there.

  • Brandy C.

    Seems like the safest Chipolte ever. I guarantee no one would rob that store while they were there.

    I’m failing to understand why this is so scary. It’s like america wasn’t founded with weapons in every home.

    I watch the news and it tells me to fear terrorists because they’re around every corner, but they don’t want us to be able to protect ourselves? Violence doesn’t just happen behind closed doors.

    Getting an open cary license is very hard to do. If they pass the tests and are eligible to carry it, then by all means protect our streets. If I were a criminal and saw a person with a gun in the same vicinity as I, I would probably not do the crime in fear of confrontation. I’m sorry but many of you are blind to their statement. This is why I hate politics. The gun “looks scary” so therefor it should be outlawed? I’ve seen two identical guns, where one is deemed illegal simply because it was painted a different color- that makes a whole lot of sense.

    My entire family has owned guns in Texas, California, Hawaii, etcetera and not one of our family members have ever shot, by accident or on purpose, another human being. My partner owns weapons from ww2 that his grandfather passed down. It’s part of the American heritage and culture. Having a weapon with you does’t guarantee your safety, but it sure helps.

    They aren’t bullying anyone. In fact, they are just utilizing their rites. It’s not a loop hole, it’s the second amendment. This whole website is so slanted. I’m sure my comment will be taken down even though it isn’t offensive at all.

    • Tom

      Brandy C. your reference of “they are just utilizing their rites” is not accurate. There is a difference between “use” and “abuse”.

      One of these Ego Carry morons recently walked into a mall that had a no firearms policy with his firearm slung across his back. It was not posted and up until this show of ego the policy had not been enforced when someone had their permitted concealed carry firearm with them in a discrete manner, out of site. He was removed by the police and now it is posted. So now the mall is a firearm free zone and anyone who has one in the mall, even when concealed and with the proper permit is subject to legal charges. So one of these idiots who claims they are just utilizing their rights has cost every concealed carry firearm owner the ability to carry in the mall. The mall has had the policy for their own legal protection because if there were to be an incident they could always fall back on the official policy, now they have to enforce it in order to protect them self. This is similar to having warnings on plastic bags stating they are not toys or curling irons with warnings that they are not to be inserted into any orifice. So if responsible and respectfully carrying persons (generally done with a permit and concealed) are an asset that makes places safer you can thank the ego carry morons for making one Texas mall less safe. For legal reasons, for self protection, this may soon become a trend.

      These “open carry” idiots are giving the anti gun crowd more support with their actions than anything else. The effect is that the rest of us will be equally affected. While I support ownership and use of firearms, I do not support the abuse of the second amendment.
      Some will say if you do not use it, you will loose it but when they abuse it we all stand to loose it much faster.

  • Pingback: Watch Jon Stewart Give Armed Chipotle Terrorists Bad News: No One Thinks You’re ‘Good Guys’ (Video) | Atlas Left

  • Pingback: Watch Jon Stewart Give Armed Chipotle Menaces Bad News: No One Thinks You’re ‘Good Guys’ (Video) | Atlas Left

  • Pingback: Shannon Watts is bullying another business. Pulls out all the crazy. - Page 16

  • Pingback: Long-gun Open Carriers Haven’t Learned From Past Mistakes | Give Me Liberty

  • Stan Backer

    Lighten up, Alsan. If the LE would ENFORCE the gun laws we already have, then you wouldn’t have to worry about “morons, drunks, gang-bangers and thugs” having guns. As long as the liberal judges continue to cry over little Tommy’s bad upbringing and give him a pass for armed robbery, we will CONTINUE to have “morons, drunks, gang-bangers and thugs” with access to firearms. Get your facts straight before you prove beyond a doubt you are a fool.

    • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

      Stan, obviously Chipotle has more common sense and intelligence than the extreme NRA members, since they’ve changed their policy regarding NO GUNS in our restaurants!

  • Stan Backer

    Alsan- then we will hold the same idiotic approach to you. As long as your peers have their hands out for freebies at my expense, YOU are a lazy ass jerk off. As long as you support more welfare for those who can work, YOU are not worthy of the dumps I take. As long as your buddies support open borders and legalized drugs, YOU are a moron beyond help. You smell funny, you are mentally unwell and you are a social waste product who will never know success unless it is handed to you.

    • Joe

      Nice way to win people over to your side Stan. Since you like to generalize and stereotype, should I think all gun owners are obnoxious louts like you?

  • http://www.thenewrifleman.com lothaen

    Your article used way too many generalizations of gun owners. We are not lakoo delcampo and the majority of us decry his behavior and fake “gangsta” lifestyle.

    We are not armed maniacs. The state gives us a background check when we get our liscence to carry. We also get a federal background check when we purchase rifles and pistols at a gun shop. Some of us even have sign offs from our sherrif in addition to a fingerprint card for some of our more exotic weapons.

    The reality is we are a cleaner bunch than you recognize. Hardly worthy of the fear mongering you place in this article. The author sounds like a typically liberal scaredy-cat.

    I’m sure it would please you further if something could tie racsim and gun owners together but that’s beyond the scope of this particular article since we have a white and Hispanic gun owner next to each other in qdoba.

    Maybe the circumstances of your future articles may permit such permissions.

    Sincerely: Lothaen RN BSN Hispanic gun owner.

  • htuser

    Please update this post to reflect this guy’s real name so it shows up in google searches for him. His real name is Alfonso Delcampo, not “Flakoo”. That’s just his gangsta name. Google his name and check the cache of his Facebook page.

  • AJ187

    Just the mere presence of any firearm in the hands of a mere mortal (non-LEO) is enough to get you anti gunners all hot and bothered. What’s the point of open discourse with the commentators here or the author who laces his “article” with derogatory terms only to insight more division and misunderstanding between cultures.

    • https://www.facebook.com/tony.quatermass Tony Quatermass

      Not true. But responsible open carriers don’t unholster their guns in restaurants to show them off.

  • http://gravatar.com/lokidog lokidog

    I live in the Chicago suburbs and work in the Loop, am aware of the vast difference in gun laws, culture, etc.. I’m a veteran, also a gun owner and have broken IL law for 30+ years by concealing and carrying a weapon (now legal with completing required classes and such) whenever my wife and children were with me outside the home. Children grown now, rarely carry it unless traveling long distances with the wife. I thought I was pretty up on things, but I can’t believe this is happening in our country – anywhere. People allowed to carry ASSAULT WEAPONS into restaraunts? Legal or not, I have to be honest enough to say I would have probably pulled my gun on them years ago, thinking I was doing my best to save my family and other customers from mentally instable lunatics. Wow.

    Good on you Tejas folks for putting as many roadblocks into the paths of these irresponsible clowns, who have no right owning weapons if this is how they conduct their “regular” lives. The photo of the two in Chipotles should be made into something that clearly sends the message to ALL of America: look at what the NRA supports. look at what the GOTP loves and cheerleads.

    Ya’ll some good Americans – gosh, even PATRIOTS!

  • Pingback: Chipotle asks customers to not wave guns around their stores, causing gun nuts to threaten boycott — LiberalVoiceLiberalVoice — Your source for everything about liberals and progressives! — News and tweets about everything liberals and p

  • Pingback: Chipotle asks customers to not wave guns around their stores, causing gun nuts to threaten boycott - Political Truths

  • Pingback: It Gets Worse | Shall Not Be Questioned

  • http://epicearth.wordpress.com epicearth

    That guy is what we call a tacti-fool. Normal gun enthusiasts hate those guys.

  • https://www.facebook.com/scott.hooker.562 Scott Hooker

    I would like to apologize on behalf of the extremists that are currently giving the 2nd Amendment rights movement a bad name. Waving scary looking guns around inside of a family restaurant is a terrible way to promote open discourse, and I hope you won’t judge the rest of use based solely on the actions of a very vocal and incendiary minority.

    • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

      Scott, THANK YOU for your common sense comment. This is exactly why the gun not idiots are losing their case with the American people, and also why we don’t read these loco yokels’ comments or take them seriously anymore. They’ve burned their own bridges and blown up the pilings. There’s nowhere to go and they can’t back up. Must be so embarrassing!

    • http://gravatar.com/alsanbalaur alsanbalaur

      We DO judge you by those that are a part of your side of the debate. These gun nuts and idiots are pushing the same legislative insanity you are. Until YOU do something (other than a blog comment) to distance them from you, you are a part of the same pack mentality.

      • http://twitter.com/AutisticAnime Kraznov (@AutisticAnime)

        That’s real constructive. It works on both sides of the debate and being on the extreme on either of them is never helpful.

      • http://twitter.com/AutisticAnime Kraznov (@AutisticAnime)

        And a tip for the future, CAPITALIZING, certain WORDS in your argument makes YOU look like an IDIOT.

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • http://twitter.com/VideoTelegram Rick Cole (@VideoTelegram)

    Chipolte may just have to get used to having a smaller heavily armed customer base. I wonder if gun enthusiasts can buy enough burritos to keep the stores in business?

  • http://kg6itc.wordpress.com kg6itc

    Mom’s Chill, don’t be so quick to slight our Bill of Rights. Yes, these open carry people are childish and have no tact, need to Chill, and be respectful of others. Guns scare many people that is why we have CPL so citizens can be armed and not scare the crap out of people.

    At the same time use rights or lose rights… but carrying an AR15 and SKS into Chipotle does not server the 2nd Amendment at all. Might as well hand the guns to feinstein yourselves.

    My message is Everyone Chill, you are ALL hurting the Unalienable Rights noted in the Bill of Rights. Mom’s you might think this is just about the 2nd, but it is an engineered brain washing and you are flushing the future rights of these children you claim to care about down the potty “As Planned”.

    You are all serving a sinister and evil agenda. Stop, Think, Chill. The Bill of Rights stands as a whole, or is lost as a whole.

    • derp

      You’re clearly low-functioning, and don’t have the slightest idea what you are blathering about . .

    • http://gravatar.com/alsanbalaur alsanbalaur

      Past time that the Second Amendment gets repealed. I WON’T “chill” when morons, drunks, gang-bangers and thugs have a “right” to threaten, intimidate and bully others by bringing weapons into a family establishment.

      • https://www.facebook.com/TRHeadshot Patrick Trheadshot Munson

        You need to google the terms “intimidate, threaten and bully”.

  • Sid

    Ya know it might be legal to carry weapons in Texas, in Georgia and a few other places but the pics I see remind me of teenagers at a party taking pics of their drunken buddies holding up their beer cans in one hand and keys in the as proof that they were indeed at the party.

  • jahwarrior72

    the claims of employees locking themselves in freezers and the paraplegic woman being spat upon were proven to be false, and yet the author still cited them as factual events. Typical liberal douchebaggery.

  • Pingback: Open Carry Texas doesn’t represent American gun owners : This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

  • bruce

    It really shows a failure in our society when people have to group up against another when it’s the idiots that carry a ar-15 or a sks into a store that should be patronized, not every other gun owner in our country. The actions of these idiots is frustrating for both sides. Not every gun owner is a gun nut. All that these idiots have achieved by pulling that little stunt of theirs is pitting more people against each other when the focus should be put on those people. Instead we have groups so heated up against guns and vice versa that facts get shredded and generalization starts to occur. It’s so sad and pathetic that there are “anti gun groups” what we need is “anti idiot groups” not people screaming “gun nut” or “gun owners are bad”. these morons that walk in the way they did is wrong but not once has anyone mentioned the countless crimes where a responsible gun owner has interrupted and saved your kid or young child from losing a mother or a father. Point is that focus is in the wrong place.

  • Tom Burg

    Crazies with guns. Lifetime NRA guy here, these fools make all gun owners look like retards

    • E.A. Blair

      Someone with sanity. Too many people interpret the right to own guns as an obligation to do so. I hope you try to bring a little sanity to that seriously unbalanced organization

  • Pete L

    This article started off with mentioning the Jack in the Box incident, which was proven to be a false claim (employees hiding in the freezer). The call came from a customer that witnessed people walking into the facility. The manager has invited the group back and also stated they “never felt safer” while the persons were in the establishment. Please research the facts before relating your rhetoric to your point. Some accidental death stats to consider in America:
    Automotive: 35,332
    Poison: 33,041
    Slips/Falls: 26,009
    Drowning: 3,782
    Firearms: 606 (legal and illegally owned)
    Reference: 2010 CDC Death Statistics

    The logical conclusion is to be more concerned with upsetting your food server,making sure janitors are cleaning spills, automotive repairmen are educated in the repairs they perform and other people on the road are paying attention while they are driving before you are concerned of people carrying their weapons in the open.

    • http://facebook.com/evilliberalagenda John Prager

      I’ve only seen statements that Jack in the Box CORPORATE changed its story. Have not seen any statements from employees.

      • Michael

        No, Mr. Prager, you see only what you want to see. In a way, you are no different than those rifle carrying morons. They and you are so entrenched in your ideology that you can’t see beyond it. That is more than obvious from your article. You and those like you condemn the political right as fear mongerers, yet you do exactly the same thing. The hypocrisy is no surprise, but I’m sure the irony escapes you.

        • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

          Michael, you amaze me. You have the audacity to call anyone out with YOUR ideologies and yet you condemn others for doing the same. You are in the wrong blog. You sound as if you couldn’t tie your own shoes without video instructions! Intelligent you? Mmmmmmnahhhh!

          • Michael

            I’ve not called anyone out on my ideologies. I’ve simply stated an obvious fact. This article is filled with half truths and blatant lies. BTW, typing in caps makes you look like an idiot.

        • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

          Your eyesight is bad also! If I DID type in CAPS. it would only be to help your Mommy read the comments to you and help you understand, poor Dear! I pity your Mom!

    • http://gravatar.com/alsanbalaur alsanbalaur

      Some @$$hat walk into a place I am dining with my family, we leave that instant, We cannot trust people who feel they need to walk around with a gun. If they are THAT afraid, maybe they should stay in their mom’s basement and let the ADULTS go about their business.

      • Michael

        Want to know something really funny? I guarantee that you are around people carrying guns every day and are none the wiser. Responsible gun owners don’t feel the need to advertise the fact that they have a gun. Those OCT morons do not speak for the majority of gun owners.

        • Joe

          No..they do speak for the majority. As long as people like you sit in silence. You claim to be a responsible gun owner, then you will not only condemn it, you’ll work to make idiots like those pictured above get the message that what they’re doing is doesn’t help the cause.

    • fjuliet

      So gun deaths aren’t important because more people die in auto accidents?

      If someone enters a store with a weapon the ‘carry’ position, I’m getting out as fast as I can.

      If someone drives crazily in a parking lot, I’m staying out of the way.

      In both cases, I’m calling 911. In the first, because I don’t know for certain that these are Open Carry twits. In the second — you can guess the reason.

  • WB

    Was my logic confusing because my comment was deleted? There is factually incorrect information presented here, but I guess that is in an attempt to ignite those that agree with the article. However the fact remains, stating that “Currently, Texas requires no background check, no license, no training, and has no age restrictions for some of the more dangerous legal guns on the market.” is completely false. Minimum age for purchases of ANY firearm is 18 and a background check is required by all dealers (even at gun shows) for every sale.

    • Xnew

      I’m so glad you cleared up that blatant LIE. Thank you good sir!

  • http://gravatar.com/rianya Rebeckah

    That’s not a helpful sentiment.

  • Sean

    What everyone here has failed to realize is that this Chipotle was the safest building in that city while these people were there. Nobody was in danger of being robbed, assaulted, or murdered due to the amount of law abiding citizens legally carrying firearms. What cracks me up is that if you were to put blue costumes on them all with a shiny little badge then this wouldn’t even be a story, and those of you crying about accidental discharges or being placed in unnecessary danger wouldn’t make a peep. Hell, for all any of you know some of these guys were law enforcement or military, however your irrational fear of inanimate objects has blinded your judgment and caused you to make broad assumptions without all the facts. Nobody was injured, Chipotle made money, and no laws were broken, I don’t know about you but I would call that a good day for anybody!

    With all the open carry protests that have happened I challenge any one of you to show me where one person was injured by one of the weapons that were being carried, just one. We’re talking about thousands of people carrying their weapons in heavily populated areas over many different occasions and with varying circumstances. So this should be the easiest challenge you’ve ever faced if what you say about guns and the people carrying them is true, and they endanger others who aren’t carrying them. After all that’s the crux of your argument, is it not? You don’t feel safe because “gun nuts” are loose cannons that want to kill everyone and everything around them? Just one example is all it will take to prove your point and justify your position, otherwise all you’re doing is falling for the manufactured hype and placing broad stereotypes on otherwise peaceful people.

    • https://www.facebook.com/jollie.ausburn Jollie Ausburn

      The guys in blue don’t carry automatic weapons on daily basis. I have no objection to owning guns but carrying weapons like this in public is a form of bullying and intimidation

      • Mike

        Who has an automatic weapon in those photos? Do you even know what it is you are looking at? Seriously… you should educate yourself a bit on firearms before spouting such nonsense.

        • derp

          Good job avoiding the question as usual. .

        • StephenK

          Oh, good lord–misspeak once, call something by the wrong term (e.g., clip vs. magazine), and anybody with the pro-carry agenda to burn into us automatically sets off into an ad hominem rant about how you’re an uneducated person spouting nonsense and thus unqualified to make any response to anything, no matter what your original point was.

      • http://gravatar.com/vanitylicenseplate vanitylicenseplate

        The guys in those photos weren’t carrying automatic weapons, either. Your flagrant ignorance is all we require to completely ignore anything else you have to say on te matter. Stick to things you know and leave politics and rights alone.

        • derp

          Nobody cares . . Thanks for sharing your irrelevant FAIL with the class . .

      • Steve

        Police actually do carry fully automatic weapons on a daily basis.

    • http://gravatar.com/rianya Rebeckah

      //What everyone here has failed to realize is that this Chipotle was the safest building in that city while these people were there.//

      Guns don’t make people safe — ethical human beings make people safe. The reality is that every person in that store was at a vastly increased risk of being accidentally shot by a moron with a gun. Intelligent, mentally healthy people do not feel the need to put random citizens at risk of a fatal accident by parading a useless weapon around with them.

      • Xnew

        No, ethical human beings just don’t harm people. They do not make you safe. There is a big difference not doing me harm and making me safe! The point that was made is valid, someone with intentions to do harm would not have chosen that particular establishment at that particular time to do it.

    • http://twitter.com/VideoTelegram Rick Cole (@VideoTelegram)

      Every day, people are unintentionally injured or killed by firearms. Some are even trained professionals like cops. Weapons in the hands of those with no regard for the safety of the people around them is eventually going to result in tragedy.

      • Xnew

        Really everyday? Why, by chance, are you getting these stats?

        • Joe

          You don’t need stats Sparky just read the police or crime blotter in your local paper.

          • Michael

            Let me see…Yesterday’s police reports. No, no unintentional or accidental shootings. How about the day before? Nope! No accidental or unintentional shootings then either. How about last week? Again, no. No accidental or unintentional shootings. I guess it’s fair to say you were talking out your ass.

  • Pingback: Chipotle: Don't Bring Guns Into Our Stores! - Page 3

  • Alek

    As a licensed concealed carry permit holder, you would be surprised of how many times I have enjoyed a Chipotle burrito (once one of my favorite eateries) with a loaded .40 caliber Glock pistol on my waste. Never once shot a burrito, let alone a person. It is and has always been my constitutional right to defend myself and those around me. Those who intend harm will do so, with or without your permission. So please @ChipotleTweets, loose not only my business but other law abiding citizens business. Imagine the good a law abiding, pistol (they only carry these ‘assault’ weapons to make a statement, much as you are are all trying to do) packing, patriotic citizen could and can do against an individual, who’s intent is harm upon others, against someone with the intent to harm your family and others. I.e. Aurora, Co, Clackamas, Oregon (perfect example), and even Newtown, Connecticut (as we would ALL agree, a national tragedy, as you anti gun advocates like to piggy back on, could have been avoided with a ‘good guy with a gun’). So before you take my constitutional rights away from me please remember, it was US who rose up against tyranny in the 1700’s. We blame the drunk driver, not the car or booze. We blame the bomber, not the marathon runners or instruments intended to do so. We blame the TERRORISTS, not the plane on 9/11. Of course, all are derived from a single instrument or motive, but we do not always blame the same initial tool. So, I ask you, every American, to please reconsider your stance on this subject. So please look at the individual, be mental capability, coherency, drug use, ect., and not the individual abiding by our constitutional rights. We must, as a people of this great nation, recognize the inner threat to ourselves. Violent video games are ok’d for our youth, among other influences by our society, yet we condemn a certain minority of people. Would it be the same as ‘no blacks allowed in our restaurant,’ or, ‘no gays allowed,’? No, it would not. So please, America, I ask you to reconsider not only your corporate and single minded approach on our economic and political views of this great nation and it’s patriotic citizens. May God bless America, and all within its boarders.

    • L Duckworth

      around your “waste”. You’ve already proven your ignorance to me.

      • Michael

        You fail to properly construct a sentence and have the audacity to call someone else ignorant. I’m sure the irony escapes you, hypocrite.

    • Aztecace

      You site that if someone with a gun could have stop the tragedies you mention easily, I would say that that statement is not accurate, because unless you have been under fire before, your first instinct is to duck and run, its fight or flight, and unless you have the skill set to fight in a gun instance, then you will run, hunting and target shooting doesn’t not make you ready for someone shooting at you, because a deer or paper target is not shooting back at you.

  • Dont trust anyone

    I bet none of those people carrying legally have been going around killing innocent people

    • JWilson

      Accidents happen, and I suspect they happen more often than some random guy with a gun stops a “bad guy”. I’m waiting for the day when there is an misfire (or even an actual bad guy) and a shot goes off, and every guy with a gun in the room starts shooting in the chaos and a bunch of “good guys with a gun” kill each other because no one knows who the hell the “bad guy” actually was.

      I’m all for people’s right to own guns and use them on their own property, or at gun ranges, but I think public spaces are not the right places for guns. There are less dangerous ways you can defend yourself and others from a “bad guy” in public spaces which are much less likely to kill a bystander.

    • Betty in NOLA

      How can you tell from a photograph that they are all carrying legally?

  • http://gravatar.com/syzygyne syzygyne

    All gung ho 2nd amendment as long as we leave out “WELL REGULATED”. Apparently the rest of us, who have CHOSEN not to own weapons, are just supposed to submit to WHOEVER claims that ultimate power of violence over us WHEREVER they choose to assert that threat. OUR freedom NOT to own guns is made to mean NOTHING by the anonymous and indiscriminate power of pure violence, a.k.a. FACISM.

    I have spent the last money I will ever spend in a Chipotle.

    • Gunlawyer001

      The Supreme Court affirmed that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, not a collective, regulated privilege.
      The Bill of Rights doesn’t limit any of our rights to “what everyone else does”, which is why you’re free to speak your mind while others remain silent, and why you may marry outside your race even if it offends the old folks, and why you may refuse to incriminate yourself in court even if others agree to talk. The fact that you choose to remain helpless is not a mandate that your neighbors do the same.
      Nearly every mass shooting in the USA has occurred in “gun-free zones”. Every victim had the option to call 911. A gun worked better than the phone.

    • http://gravatar.com/vanitylicenseplate vanitylicenseplate

      Your freedom to not own guns and be a victim to criminals who choose to own them illegaly ends the moment they threaten more than just your precious sensibilities. I am not a victim. Feel free to tell the next criminal you see that you choose to be defenseless. I’m sure they’ll love that.

  • https://www.facebook.com/diana.bauer.167 Diana Bauer

    Adding Chipotle to my list of businesses to avoid.

    • http://twitter.com/AutisticAnime Kraznov (@AutisticAnime)

      May as well avoid all businesses because every business will probably conflict with whatever imbedded morals you chose to follow.

  • Barney Muldoon

    If I see someone carrying weapons into a public place how do I know their intentions? Every single mass shooter in the world started out by carrying a gun/guns into a public place.

    • http://gravatar.com/vanitylicenseplate vanitylicenseplate

      No, every mass shooting in history has started with a criminal carrying guns into a defenseless place where firearms were prohibited.

  • Mica

    Chipotles did it right. Turning these nut bags away could have escalated putting everyone in danger. Sometimes you have to let the Wookie win. Regroup and figure it out sensibly.

    • http://gravatar.com/rianya Rebeckah

      Chipotles didn’t turn them away. They served them.

      • Tom

        Congratulations on your utter lack of reading comprehension.

  • Antonio Villegas

    I sincerely hope all of these morons shoot themselves in their collective faces!

    • Sean

      Really? I thought you all wanted to end violence? Is that your solution to end it. with more violence? So you’re really not anti-gun, you’re anti-anybody but cops having guns. . . How well has that worked out in the past?

  • Frank Klein

    Personal inadequacies show up in many ways. And these folks obviously have a personal inadequacy.

  • phillip

    Haha. . That child is holding a mossberg 715. A freakin .22..lmao.. heavy weaponry? Geeez. Freakin retard

  • Bradly Manning

    Meh. More liberal fundamentalist hysteria…

  • Pingback: VICTORY! After Ammosexuals Bring AK-47s Into Dallas Location, Chipotle Says NO MORE! | Atlas Left

  • kurgen99

    I’ve owned firearms for 30 years, and never POSED for a picture holding one.

  • MonsoonMoon

    Oh hello type-casting. Long time no see.

  • Kenneth

    I received my marksman merit badge at 14 from the boys scouts I turned out perfectly fine normal full time employed person .my grandpa who survived D day taught me to respect guns I have several none have ever been pointed at a person and have only shot paper targets . I ve been on walks with OCT not all are like the man pictured above .

  • Chris

    What an article of CRAP. You target one person as if they represent every gun owner. Should we expect that every single “mom” is abusive and a drug addict because some of them are? You cant stereotype a complete side based on actions of one or few.

    The point is that they arent breaking the law, they arent criminals, and no one was gunned down, imagine that.

    This article is a slanted hack piece by a sad angry individual followed by even worse sad individuals.

    • http://facebook.com/evilliberalagenda John Prager

      You seem angry. For the record, this is not every gun owner. Our own Richard Rowe has a very impressive collection. This focused on an individual representing one very extreme group of gun owners who childishly parade around with their toys.

    • MissTee

      The article makes it pretty clear that these creeps have been removed from the “mainstream” OCT group because of their terrorist acts.

      Just one person? Well, it only takes one person to kill. We have no reason to believe that these guys are not intending on shooting up the place. You don’t go out and buy an assault rifle unless you want to assault. Or maybe if you’re just so insecure you need it to feel like a big man.

      By the way, what is it with you guys and the mom issues? That’s a personal problem you need to work out with a therapist. Don’t take it out on other peoples moms.

      • Gunlawyer001

        Tens of millions of semi-automatic rifles have been sold to American citizens in the last decade, and the FBI tells us that killings with rifles of all kinds (including bolt-action hunting rifles) average about 300 per year, fewer than are killed by hands or feet. Fewer than are stabbed. Fewer than run into traffic and get run over.

        So, apparently there must be some other reason to buy these guns, than your hypothesis that they “want to assault” someone.

    • Dont trust anyone

      I completely agree with you this Article is pro gun control communist bastards

  • Gretchen

    These gun fanatics confuse the hell out of me. What are they trying to prove? I’ve heard them say “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”. So are they trying to be “Bad guys” themselves to convince others to buy guns? These people clearly aren’t responsible gun owners if they enjoy terrifying and threatening people. Everything they do seems counter productive.

  • http://notagoodideasherlock.wordpress.com alyssamwbc

    There those who are responsible gun owners, and there are those who are not. These people are NOT. These are people who feel inadequate and use guns as a means of empowerment, not as a tools for protection or hunting that are to be respected due to their deadly nature. I grew up in a home with guns and a father with a concealed carry license. And guess what – he never acted like these morons because they were never a symbol of his masculinity. He doesn’t use them to intimidate, he doesn’t pose with them to satisfy his ego, he doesn’t let children within 50 feet of them, and the only time he handles them inside his home is if he’s cleaning them. If you can’t understand the difference, and the danger that these idiots, and the current gun culture they represent, pose to society, then you’re suffering from a severe, severe case of denial. Actual responsible gun owners support common sense gun control.

    • sancho

      Boo boo boo boo boo boo boo boo boo boo boo boo

      • JFischer

        And Sancho illustrates Alyssamwbc’s point perfectly with his juvenile non-comment.

  • john b

    I agree, these people are blooming idiots, but what does this have to do with the TeaParty?

    • Steven Lohring

      What? You don’t think that these are the types of cretins that the teapublicans would support? Anything to do with gun rights is a prime interest for extremists.

  • Richard

    These guy are douche nozzles I support their right to open carry but use some discretion as towhere you do it

    • MissTee

      First of all, that’s an insult to douche nozzles. This nozzles, you see, have a function. They are useful to some people. These guys, look at them, everything about them screams “I sleep on the sofa in my mom’s basement”.

      Also, open carry is the opposite of discretion. You can’t have both.

  • https://www.facebook.com/nitwitt73 Nicki Brown

    Maybe it is okay to openly carry your weapon but I am betting it isn’t okay to allow your young child to hold it….I don’t eat at Chipotle anyways but i sure as hell won’t now! Change your policy…

  • https://www.facebook.com/lisaahadler Lisa Hadler

    I was getting my hair cut at Great Clips in Kalispell, MT, and realized the guy in the next chair had a gun in a holster strapped to his leg. Looked like the age of a college kid. What kind of a person needs a gun while getting a haircut. As I paid, I told the manager I wouldn’t be back, because I didn’t feel safe. But this is Montana, so she was just perplexed.

    • Kenneth

      You could be attacked or Robbed any where I understand that you might be afraid of guns but what’s even scarier is lookin down the barrel of a gun stuck in your face because some criminal,who has no respect for the law ,wants your money sure you’ll say just give him the money but their are some who would still shoot and kill you after you give up the money .

      • JFischer

        You won’t be pulling your gun if someone else has theirs shoved in your face, Kenneth. Nope. You’ll be like the rest of us: trying not to mess your pants while hoping like hell the jerk doesn’t shoot you.

    • Tom

      Being 23 myself and having had my conceal carry permit since I was 21, I’m going to inform you that the only respectable reason to carry a firearm into public pacers is got self defense. You can’t plan for such an event to happen, so you carry the firearm with you whenever you can. Say he got his haircut, left his firearm in his car, ignoring his right to protect himself just to please you. Now imagine that he leaves to get back in his car when he gets robbed and murdered by someone who actually had ill intentions. In that situation, which can never be fully prepared for and most (respectable) gun owners hope they never encounter, he was perfectly justified in keeling the firearm on his person.

      Another thing to imagine, is that, for all intents and purposes, he was a responsible gun owner and meant no one any harm. He locks his firearm in his car, but his car is broken into and the firearm stolen. You now have someone with obvious malicious intent, in the possession of the firearm which could have been avoided had he kept the firearm with him.

      A personal opinion of mine is that if you declare yourself a responsible gun owner, you should be able to account for your firearms at all times to be sure they aren’t being mishandled and accidentally discharge. However, I also choose to conceal my firearm out of respect for others and would never go totting around anything other then a handgun since carrying anything larger for self defense or just because you can is ridiculously obnoxious, exaggerated, and unnecessary.

      • GG

        You and these other idiots are exactly the kind of morons who pine away for the pretend days of the old west where men just shot each other in the streets who shouldn’t be allowed to carry a rubber band slingshot, let alone a firearm.
        I support the second amendment accompanied by common sense laws which prevent people like you from intimidating people like the women in the restaurant. I own firearms but am not so infintile or paranoid that I have to carry one on me at all times. Intimidation via firearm is the ultimate expression of cowardice and mental instability.

  • Steve

    So who was injured at the Chipolte? The article mentions that customers went from being safe to in danger the second these guys walked in but there is no mention of anyone being hurt, or shot at or anything.

    • http://facebook.com/evilliberalagenda John Prager

      No one was, this time. Being in danger does not necessarily mean something happened.

      • Steve

        So no one was hurt, but people were in danger. How so? I don’t see how someone with a rifle slung over their shoulder puts me in danger. Now if they pointed it in my general direction then sure.

        • Steven Lohring

          Because people who live in safe and secure environments dont’ expect to see non-uniformed, non-authority figures openly-carrying guns and like toys. Even when I was in the military, we didn’t carry weapons on the base around civilians unless there was a threat or we were on high alert. And we definitely had enough sense not to walk around in plain sight brandishing large rifles. These are terrorists plain and simple. They intentionally display their weapons for the sake of intimidation. Why isn’t just having a gun in a holster enough?

          • Kenneth

            That’s what their goal is . It’s to get open carry of hand guns they aren’t trying to go around terrorising people

        • Karen

          Gun nuts are holding the rest of America hostage. That is okay with you? Yemen is calling your name.

        • Janalina

          Does having the moron who posts photos of himself with his guns and drugs sitting next to you in a restaurant armed to the teeth makes you feel safe? Is he the person you imagine when someone talks about responsible gun ownership?

        • GandalfTheWhatever

          These people have the self-control of toddlers, and many seem to have pretty severe damage. Would you give knives to a child? Would you give bombs to a mentally ill person?

          If a person came into a restaurant I was in, carrying an assault rifle slung over their shoulder, I would tackle them to the floor, break their arm, and place them under Citizen’s Arrest for reckless endangerment of literally everybody in the fucking restaurant.

          Guns have no place in a restaurant, or in the hands of people that don’t seem to understand that they are not toys.

          • Kenneth

            Then you’d be the one under arrest for assault . In Texas it is lawful to carry in public but if some one threatened you or points it at you then you’d have a case but talking some one just because you see a gun would be assault

          • Steve

            I simply asked how does a man with a rifle slung on his shoulder endanger me? None of you answered this question. As I said before if he is pointing said rifle in my direction then yes that a danger to me. If he is yelling threats at me while holding said rifle I would consider that a danger to me. However simply eating and being in possession of a rifle doesn’t seem to endanger me. I for one access the situation before making a judgment. As for the person who claims they would tackle the person and break their arm, that is a horrible idea. You would have been arrested for assault. Also shouldn’t we all be aware of our local laws and maybe not get into a panic if it is perfectly legal in our area?

          • Steve

            “then yes that IS* a danger to me” assess* Whoops, lost it for a second. Maybe not using the phone will help.

          • Steve

            John, can you link to somewhere that states Texas does not require background checks and that there is not an age limit for possession of a rifle. Looking at the State law seems to suggest otherwise.

        • Keith

          So you have a little penis too Steve? Sorry dude.

          • Steve

            Oh man. You ask a couple simple questions and now you have a small penis. The internet makes it impossible to have a civil conversation.

    • Tom

      Steve, to simply answer your question of how it puts people in danger when people open carry into places like restaurants, stores or other places where there is no expected use of the firearm consider what the response is to such idiocy by others.

      If the business is robbed and there are customers who openly carry it immediately raises the potential for armed response by both the robber and the customer who is armed. This poses a danger for other customers. How many civilians are properly trained to respond in such situations? The criminal with a weapon has it generally as a show of power and the armed customer reduces that perceived power so in order to regain the upper position the threat level in turn must rise. You may say it is the criminal’s fault but the openly armed customer elevates the situation and therefore is also an active factor to the escalation of danger.
      You may also claim that the armed customer may be able to hinder the robbery and even take out the criminal (which may save the taxpayers the costs of legal fees and incarceration which in turn may be considered as a good thing) but what about the possibility of others being injured or killed? Open carry in such places and circumstances can easily turn a non-violent robbery based strictly on threat into an actual bloodbath.

      Firearms are a show of power and have the potential to increase the response of someone who has feelings of inadequacy to provoke a response. Such challenges were visible with the arms race and buildup in the cold war. The same show of force or the ability to use it applies on a smaller scale when it comes to individuals and groups within a society or community. Particularly within modern society many persons feel dis-empowered in their lives and making a challenge against someone who openly displays a position of power can be perceived as a way of regaining some of an individuals personal power. Understanding that the open carry theory is not supposedly about using the firearm unnecessarily but rather about simply defending the right to keep and bear arms it may give some individuals a false sense of security in making small shows of challenge to show they are not intimidated by the open carry persons. How many of the open carry individuals do you honestly believe would ignore such challenges? Again you may blame the person who challenges the individual who is simply exercising their open carry rights.
      In comparison if someone leaves their car parked on the street with the windows open, doors unlocked and key in the ignition and someone steals it and takes it for a joyride but has an accident where someone else gets injured or killed we would consider the car’s owner to have been irresponsible and may even be charged with contributing to the accident and injuries.
      With rights just as with car ownership, there is reasonable expectation of acting responsibly so as not to place others at risk. The potential for harm to come to others is greater when it comes to firearms than with being irresponsible with parking ones car so again they do put others in danger when they open carry where there is no reasonable purpose to do so.

      The open carry groups have a wide variety of personalities, egos and mental instabilities among it’s supporters. There are those noted with drug comments, threats and harassment of those in opposition and there are also those who are mentally stable. Who is responsible within the group to decide which persons attend such demonstrations and represent the ideology? Is is possible that someone who has malicious intent or some incident or situation in their life which causes even a temporary instability attend? There are persons that due to circumstances have no hope in their life and may not really car about their life or the lives of others. Such actions as the group going to a restaurant or elsewhere in a public setting give the perfect place for them to run amok and end their situation the same as some shooters who do so with the expectation that they will also be killed. Blending in with such groups and activities also could be a potential cover for someone with terrorist intentions and allows them not only access to carry out their intent but also a way of evaluation the surroundings and reactions of others to be able to inflict the most damage.
      Again it sets up a situation where it has a higher potential for injury and in turn does place the public in danger.

      • Steve

        I guess I just don’t see it Tom. If someone shows up to rob a place I feel like they are going to use the exact amount of violence they planned to use. I don’t see how a guy with a gun will change that. In fact I have seen plenty of videos of places being robbed and the perpetrator usually runs like crazy when a clerk or shopper stands up to them. As far as getting caught in a crossfire I have to agree with you. It is entirely possible. It also happens to be possible to get caught in the crossfire of a cop/criminal shootout. We have all seen it happen. No one is advocating cops being disarmed.

        • Tom

          You may “feel” that they are going to use the exact amount of violence but it does not change the fact that when they expect intimidation alone to work but it does not, the biochemical response of the body is enhanced which in turn heightens the fight or flight reaction. I have seen videos both ways but videos that someone watches online or on television are a poor way to judge reality.
          On the other hand I have worked as a police officer, jail guard and also for a couple federal agencies. I have not only seen the escalation of aggression and violence I refer to but also spoken with plenty of individuals who had certain intents and expectations that reacted more aggressively and with violence when there was resistance.
          It is true that others can also get caught in crossfire if there is a shootout between police and criminals however law enforcement will often reserve the shooting part as a last resort and first attempt to use other tactics to diffuse the situation, that comes with training. I have had a 44 magnum pointed at my head by a jealous husband when I escorted his wife home from a bar to see that she got home safely. It could have turned violent but I was able to calm the situation down non-aggressively. Marital issues are some of the most dangerous situations for law enforcement but as with where the public is at heightened risk, there is training that can be applied in order to lower the risk of injury.

      • Gunlawyer001

        Tom, when those opposed to gay marriage trotted out hypothetical disasters like yours, they were roundly criticized for making stuff up. “Prove that gay marriage will cost anybody money, will harm kids, will dilute marriage”, etc.
        A fair point.
        So when you talk about armed citizens as a hypothetical, and predict horrific crossfires and escalations and collateral damage, you’re doing the same thing. Except that we ALREADY have millions of open and concealed carrying civilians RIGHT NOW, and have for some years. If those things were likely to happen a lot, you’d be able to link to thousands of news accounts.
        The fact is, cops have a worse track record for shooting the wrong person than legally armed citizens do.
        Putting that aside, you have to look at the cost/benefit analysis. It’s simply untrue to assume that banning all lawful carry of firearms would result in “benefits without costs”. The costs are obvious: Mass shootings of those unarmed victims almost always occur in “gun free zones”. Most murder victims were unarmed at the time. And stats show that people who fight back with guns are injured less often than those who do not. (Look up the real data on that, not the tortured “people aged 17 1/2 to 31 3/4 years living in urban areas east of the Mississippi between January 8, 2001 and March 4, 2002, where the attacker was killed”. Look at rational data, please.)
        So MAYBE armed customers will start shooting at robbers and hit children in the face instead…although it hasn’t happened in decades of lawful carry.
        Look up the facts yourself. Nearly all states now allow some form of gun carry today, and for decades a significant number of states did. That’s many millions of hours of gun carry by millions of “untrained” civilians; where are all those dead folks who were killed by inept defensive shootings?

        • Tom

          Gunlawyer001, I’ll accept the use of same sex marriage as a comparison to the attitude of banning firearms and repealing the Second Amendment, both are absurd.
          I can take any of your noted points against same sex marriage and debate the opposite as well as taking the Bible and using it to make the Christian argument against same sex marriage look foolish and even to show how the Bible actually supports it.
          Constitutionally the Free Exercise Clause is supposed to guarantee the free exercise of religion and there are religions that do recognize and preform same gender marriages and therefore any prohibition against same gender marriage is a violation of the US Constitution as long as any clergy members are authorized to sign the marriage documents (and then file them with the government) making a marriage legal. As an ordained minister myself I would preform same gender marriages if asked to do so as they are recognized by my religion. Where the laws prohibit them it is a free exercise violation of not only the couple but also the clergy members free exercise rights.

          Although I use hypothetical examples they are based on documented examples and psychological understanding of such situations.

          As a former law enforcement officer in various capacities I will be the first to say that I have known some officers that would be the last persons who should be carrying a firearm, particularly when it is a part of their job. I have confronted questionable attitudes of upholding the laws and received the reply that “I am the law”. Fortunately my experience with such attitudes among fellow officers was not common but as with most anything else that gets reported in the “news”, sensationalism and negative news gets reported most and gets noticed more. Just as most firearm owners are responsible and respectful of others with their firearms, most law enforcement officers are not egotistical @ssholes that shoot first and make up reasons for shooting the wrong or an unarmed person.

          I in no way support the banning of lawful ownership, carry or use of firearms. I do support the responsible and respectful ownership, carry and use of them. When I want to go shooting, I do not want my rights to be able to do so infringed upon.
          If there were a situation where lives were being directly threatened, I would have no hesitation in eliminating the threat with deadly force if necessary even though I am now a civilian, but the safety of innocent persons is something I would assess if such a situation were to arise.
          We have rights that some would like to see be taken away, I am not one of those. Most of the people who own, use and carry firearms do so with respect for others and without the need to make a show of having a firearm with them.
          These idiots who feel the need to abuse the right of ownership, carry and use of firearms are going beyond reasonable behavior and simply inciting more anti-firearm pushes to limit and/or restrict the rights of all firearm owners. What these people are doing has nothing to do with either self protection or the protection of others. These people are one of the greatest assets for the anti-firearm crowd because they give them something to sensationalize and criticize. How much criticism is there of all the normal firearm owners who basically go unnoticed? Which group is in the majority, the news grabbing sensationalists or the discrete firearm owner who does not flaunt it for everyone to see?
          These open carry morons who feel the need to flaunt it are comparable to Westboro Baptists when talking about Christians.
          Most firearm owners are not showing them off for the world to see or using them to intimidate others and most Christians do not identify with Westboro Baptist Church.

          • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

            Tom… YOU… have taught me a lot today and clarified for me what my feelings have long been. You just put them into words. I am also a Christian minister, and I agree wholeheartedly with your views. I do not own a firearm, nor do I wish to, but responsibility is the main word to follow, plus common sense! I have, however, on occasion , heard that shotguns were sometimes used at weddings. Any truth to that rumor?

  • http://twitter.com/S8NBoi Satan (@S8NBoi)

    #FlakooDelcampo is the new synonym for little dick, gun nut terrorist pedophiles who can’t spell.

  • https://www.facebook.com/Floyd.Droid David Yocum

    Personally I’m a CHL holder and I do carry my weapon concealed where nobody would ever notice. However, I do not condone this “IN-YOUR-FACE” intimidation these wackos are getting away with. Yes, I do understand that it’s constitutionally legal; but let’s face it, times have changed since it was written. Where 227 years ago it was totally a normal thing to see people carrying long rifles because of necessity and way of life… Nowadays it’s totally unacceptable.
    I do hope Chipotle will refrain in the future letting these people in while brandishing a loaded weapon.

  • http://gravatar.com/xenubarb barbz

    What I’d like to see next time? Every person in Chipotles, get up and walk out when these assclowns walk in. Don’t pay. You need to dump your food and get the hell out of there immediately. Your safety is paramount, and certainly more important than Chipotle’s bottom line.

    • William

      Can’t really do that because you pay before you get your food. I’d demand a refund though.

    • Steven Lohring

      I’d like to see patrons boycott Chipotle until they get off the fence and make a real decision to ban terrorists from entering their restaurant, displaying firearms.

  • josh

    You guys sound incredibly butt hurt over Chipotle’s rights. I think I remember the same thing happened when starbucks and thanks to you, it very well increased their sales due to all the support from 2nd amendment supporters. It’s also incredibly funny to see how many childish nicknames you come up with for gun owners.

    • http://gravatar.com/chermoe CherMoe

      What’s more amazing is how CHILDISH gun owners are. Pictures above prove my point. That’s why they are dangerous with guns.

      • MonsoonMoon

        Even more typecasting. Riveting.

      • pedro

        People who are childish with guns are dangerous. So are people who typecast.

    • Janalina

      Wrong. Starbucks CEO stated guns were not welcomed in Starbucks after morons like these tried to use his stores as a location for their stupid demonstrations. He made that decision because he didn’t want his company to be used as a political pawn and because his non carrying customers voices their concerns.

  • pedro

    First rule of owning guns…don’t advertise that you own them. With some research, and a couple buddies, home invasion will quickly disarm you. Now they know you have them, they can grab a kid first…. to help convince u to cooperate.

    • JFischer

      Or wait until you aren’t home, break in, and steal your guns.

      Or ambush you and take your guns.

  • Randall Patton

    That dude’s a scrawny little coward.

    • Jain

      And his choice of clothing is, well criminal! Arse.

  • https://www.facebook.com/noah.matthew.7169 Noah Matthew

    Try that stunt in Boston, You’ll be dead before you take your gun out of your car

    • GandalfTheWhatever

      They could open a chapter here in Chicago – OH WAIT! We have too many liberals, blacks, Mulims, Atheists, and women here. Those are exactly the people they want to keep guns AWAY from.

      Besides…..we all know what happens to Texans who leave their sheltered little Texan world.

  • Peter

    NOT surprising at all that Flakoo is a gun nut … little man’s complex abounds with many of these idiots!

  • https://plus.google.com/106109655112860666109 juniemoon18

    I’m sorry, but why do all of these gun nuts look like the kids who couldn’t get
    out of detention.

  • E.A. Blair

    From 4 United States Code Chapter 1:

    §8. Respect for Flag

    No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.

    (a) The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.

    (b) The flag should never touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water, or merchandise.

    (c) The flag should never be carried flat or horizontally, but always aloft and free.

    (d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker’s desk, draping the front of the platform, and for decoration in general.

    (e) The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.

    (f) The flag should never be used as a covering for a ceiling.

    (g) The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature.

    (h) The flag should never be used as a receptacle for receiving, holding, carrying, or delivering anything.

    (i) The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not be fastened to a staff or halyard from which the flag is flown.

    (j) No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.

    But, then, when did teabaggers ever really respect federal law?

    • https://www.facebook.com/laurie.neufeld.79 Laurie Neufeld

      You got it in one. The rest of the photos (including his lack of spelling ability) are laughable, but the sheer disrespect he shows for his country’s flag is appalling.

  • Ben Weston

    Well shit, Mr Wanna Be a Gangsta seems to have broken the first rule of a responsible law abidding gun owner.

    Post pictures of yourself, with gun, and illegal drugs, online.

    Anyone report that to the local authorities? He could very well lose his right to own a firearm for the rest of his life.

  • https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002847294703 Michael Miller

    While Chipotle will “take no position”, I will. My money will be spent elsewhere. Bullets or burritos Chipotle. You choose.

    • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

      Thank you, Michael, for moving on!

  • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

    I be darned if I’ll order or eat a Chipotle product at gun point or with a gun in the close vicinity! NO GUNS, CHIPOTLE IDIOTS!

    • Alek

      As a licensed concealed carry permit holder, you would be surprised of how many times I have enjoyed a Chipotle burrito (once one of my favorite eateries) with a loaded .40 caliber Glock pistol on my waste. Never once shot a burrito, let alone a person. It is and has always been my constitutional right to defend myself and those around me. Those who intend harm will do so, with or without your permission. So please @ChipotleTweets, loose not only my business but other law abiding citizens business. Imagine the good a law abiding, pistol (they only carry these ‘assault’ weapons to make a statement, much as you are are all trying to do) packing, patriotic citizen could and can do against an individual, who’s intent is harm upon others, against someone with the intent to harm your family and others. I.e. Aurora, Co, Clackamas, Oregon (perfect example), and even Newtown, Connecticut (as we would ALL agree, a national tragedy, as you anti gun advocates like to piggy back on, could have been avoided with a ‘good guy with a gun’). So before you take my constitutional rights away from me please remember, it was US who rose up against tyranny in the 1700’s. We blame the drunk driver, not the car or booze. We blame the bomber, not the marathon runners or instruments intended to do so. We blame the TERRORISTS, not the plane on 9/11. Of course, all are derived from a single instrument or motive, but we do not always blame the same initial tool. So, I ask you, every American, to please reconsider your stance on this subject. So please look at the individual, be mental capability, coherency, drug use, ect., and not the individual abiding by our constitutional rights. We must, as a people of this great nation, recognize the inner threat to ourselves. Violent video games are ok’d for our youth, among other influences by our society, yet we condemn a certain minority of people. Would it be the same as ‘no blacks allowed in our restaurant,’ or, ‘no gays allowed,’? No, it would not. So please, America, I ask you to reconsider not only your corporate and single minded approach on our economic and political views of this great nation and it’s patriotic citizens. May God bless America, and all within its boarders.

      • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

        Alek. if your spelling and grammar are any indication of your grade level of education, I wouldn’t trust you with a pea shooter. You pander and proselytize with the same worn out 2nd Amendment BS that the right wing Constitutional extremists lap up like honey wagon drippings! Patriotic, my foot! Most of you milk duds couldn’t tie your own shoes without video instructions.

        • Sean

          Is there such a thing as a “constitutional extremist?” After all, the Constitution is the law of the land, so basically you’re calling someone an extremely law abiding citizen by saying that and essentially saying you have no respect for the rule of law. Since that’s the case, I would trust him over you any day of the week since he’s willing to abide by a strict interpretation of the law whereas you’re willing to disregard it based on personal beliefs… Without laws what are we, a banana republic?

          • http://daksden.wordpress.com dakotahgeo

            You’re ranting again! I love bananas!

Scroll To Top
website security Website Security Test