restaurants and rights

While I was castigating Mike Chase’s hoplophobic comments here, and getting quoted (but not credited) at a Tennessee newspaper’s site, I was also filling out the “Contact Us” section of the appropriate webpage.
The exact content of what I sent them is more-or-less a compressed version of my post concerning Mike’s words, but, in the end, that content was unimportant – the below form email was sent to everyone who contacted Mike’s corporation concerning his anti-rights interview:

From: Mike Chase

Thank you for your comments in your e-mail concerning my 35 years of being a businessman and selling alcohol with good food.

I respect your position and have no problem with one carrying a gun. I am a hunter, fisherman and a gun owner. I just have a problem with the mixture of the two.

I hope you will respect my position on this matter as I respect yours.

I am not against guns just a mixture of guns and alcohol.

I am a good neighbor – just on the other side of the fence on this one.

The interesting thing is that the email did not originate from Mike’s email account, but rather that of a “Brenda Herron” (who used to be the VP of operations and logistics, and currently might be Mike’s direct assistant). The disjointed quality of the email is somewhat odd, but the, “I am a gun owner, but…,” canard was perfectly predictable. Mike might as well have said, “I like to talk with my friends, but I do not believe you should be able to have a discussion at a restaurant that serves alcohol,” – after all, both free speech and bearing arms are Constitutionally-protected rights, just one is a little more socially-protected than the other.
At any rate, I sent off the below email in response:

Mr. Chase / Ms. Herron,

Your reply is disingenuous and misleading. No one is proposing the
mixing of alcohol and firearms – in fact, when I am carrying my
firearm, it is against Tennessee law for me to consume alcohol, or
have alcohol in my system. That law will remain in place even if the
new bill allowing carrying in restaurants that serve alcohol passes.
The problem, as always, is not the law-abiding folks – we are already
not going into your restaurants (or any restaurants that serve
alcohol) with our firearms, and if we were to start doing so, under
this proposed bill, we would still not drink alcohol while carrying.
After all, we are law-abiding. The problem is those folks who do
not care about the law, and whether you are willing to admit it or
not, they are already carrying into your restaurants, and possibly
consuming alcohol, and you are none the wiser.

The fact is, I see absolutely no reason why I should be legally forced
to disarm myself simply because my wife and I want to eat out one
night. After all, I can carry in Wal-Marts, I can carry at the mall,
I can carry around town, I can even carry in a liquor store… why
should I be forced to remove my ability to effectively defend myself
simply because I want to eat a meal out of my own house? Why should I
voluntarily place myself in a location where criminals will know that
law-abiding citizens will be unarmed and unable to fight back
effectively?

I acknowledge your position, just as I acknowledge all individuals’
positions, and I feel certain you will reciprocate when I decide to
vote with my dollar, and not support restaurants that wish to strip me
of my natural right to self-defense. Believe me – yours are not the
only establishments in Tennessee where one can procure mediocre BBQ.

Sincerely,
[NAME]

I admit, the last comment was a little uncalled-for, but I was annoyed at the quality (or lack thereof) of Mike’s response. As usual, if I hear anything in response, I will keep you all appraised, but I would not hold my breath.