Starbucks no longer allow customers with guns

[UrbanWolf]

Maybe the open carry-ers overdone it? At first they didn't want to be involved, but now chosen the anti's side.

http://www.starbucks.com/blog/an-open-letter-from-howard-schultz/1268

[BigDee]

Get a CCW and don't worry about it. I agree with what he is saying, Starbucks just wants to be a coffee shop not a political playground for anyone.

[Irving]

It is a pretty well written letter. Starbucks really tried to stay out of it, but people used them and lost the privilege to be treated like an adult.

[10mm-man]

Fuck em! You have to take a side; there is no neutral party here. That's like saying your neutral on Hitler, communism, Islam, etc..... Come on really? It's the 2nd amendment, it's in the blood of the country! Not another dime.... Back to Doz bog in the A.M.

[sniper7]

Probably would have been best if they didn't even put out a memo. Just that they accept any customer with money, respect the laws of the states their stores operate in and only ask that the customers be polite, enjoy their coffee and come back.

[theGinsue]

Can't say I didn't see this coming.

But, the memo says "this is a request and not an outright ban", so they're still trying to play the middle.

[davsel]

F-em

" For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.

I am proud of our country and our heritage of civil discourse and debate. It is in this spirit that we make today’s request. Whatever your view, I encourage you to be responsible and respectful of each other as citizens and neighbors."



How bout asking the sheep to respect the gun-toters instead of the other way around.
What about the fact that I feel "unsettled and upset" within a gun-free zone.
Follow the laws of the state and serve your damn overpriced coffee.

F-em!

[UrbanWolf]

Can't say I didn't see this coming.

But, the memo says "this is a request and not an outright ban", so they're still trying to play the middle.

I agree more with 10mm on this. By asking customer to not bring guns they sided with anti's. But hey, they don't support our military either, what reasons left for us to support them?

[Irving]

Would it have changed anyone's mind had the letter requested that people don't open carry specifically, rather than just "don't bring guns?"

[jhood001]

I read the letter and it seemed pretty clear to me:

They want to stick to their beliefs and curb the dick swingers.

I'll keep buying coffee from them.

[jhood001]

Probably would have been best if they didn't even put out a memo. Just that they accept any customer with money, respect the laws of the states their stores operate in and only ask that the customers be polite, enjoy their coffee and come back.

I just re-read your post. Spot on.

I think they wanted to support what you're talking about from the beginning, but their open arms were interpreted as an avenue to promote an agenda.

Degenerate clowns sporting mexican carry and acting like dipshits ruined this. Purposeful open carry didn't.

[lllRorlll]

respectfully requesting is saying NO DONT... right? according to the ccw classes I took... I believe it was something like " if a person of authority says no" then is as good as a sign. am I wrong?... if I am right then` fuck em. its another stroke of the whittling knife.

[Bailey Guns]

Since Starbucks is a private entity I'm having a hard time seeing this as a 2A issue. Sounds more like they want to conduct their business without this huge distraction. How hard is that to understand? I agree with jhood. It's probably more likely that a few arrogant "OC'ers" fucked it up for everyone else. And I'm pretty sure the letter only refers to OC, not concealed carry and it's abundantly clear this is a request. They're asking people to act like adults but that's just too much for some folks. I've rarely seen a more polite and well-worded corporate response to pretty much anything.


But hey, they don't support our military either,...

Pretty sure that whole thing was debunked as just another internet rumor.

[davsel]

From: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335739/facts-about-mass-shootings-john-fund

Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”


F-em

[sniper7]

As long as it s legal it's cool. If it pisses off a few people then so be it, if they make it a corporate policy and people are getting kicked out for open carry then it is time to boycott. Al this is is a letter to appease the other side. I believe Starbucks is on our side but ultimately they know that libtards also frequent their stores and make them money. It is a fine line, a line they should have never mentioned a word on other than they obey the law of the land as written.

[brutal]

Every state is different.

I just took the UT CFP class and if a business owner puts a post-it note on the door, it's legal and binding criminal trespass.

In Texas, the signage must confirm to the letter of the law and is binding criminal trespass as I understand it.

In Colorado, it's criminal trespass if you're caught and refuse to vacate.

If anyone reads the letter, it's a request, not a ban or demand.

jhood001 hit it. Doofus open carry turdsticks and freaked out OMG he's got a gun! soccer moms fooked up any chance of SBX allowing status quo.

Concealed is concealed, I will continue to get my fix at SBX and no one will be the wiser - just like it always was.

[Bailey Guns]

From: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335739/facts-about-mass-shootings-john-fund

Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”


F-em

FFS, dude. Read the letter. Starbucks is not prohibiting guns. They're politely asking people not to openly carry.

[davsel]

F-em
If they really don't want people carrying in their store, put up a sign stating so - as the law allows.
However, they are too cowardly/greedy to take a stand on one side or the other. They know it is a constitutional right, but they don't want to openly allow it any more, and are too much of a pussy to come out and say it.
F-em

[jhood001]

Agreed and amen.

OCing after a range trip and you stop in for a coffee? Go for it.

Strapping on your firearm because you're going to get a coffee at a place that you feel has been designated as OC friendly? You are part of the problem. Seriously.

[Bailey Guns]

F-em
If they really don't want people carrying in their store, put up a sign stating so - as the law allows.
However, they are too cowardly/greedy to take a stand on one side or the other. They know it is a constitutional right, but they don't want to openly allow it any more, and are too much of a pussy to come out and say it.
F-em

I think this is probably the type of attitude that prompted the letter.

They could've come and said "some of you people are too fucking stupid to use common sense so we kinda have to use it for you".

[Bailey Guns]

Oh...and how does this make Starbucks greedy?

[ChunkyMonkey]

I agree more with 10mm on this. By asking customer to not bring guns they sided with anti's. But hey, they don't support our military either, what reasons left for us to support them?

Stop acting like a liberal. It's their business.. its their right. And most of all, stop believing everything you read on the net... There is no truth to the rumor that starbuck is anti military.

I dont drink coffee so I really dont care what they say or dont say.. but I respect a private business's decision in the free market.

[jhood001]

They could've come and said "some of you people are too fucking stupid to use common sense so we kinda have to use it for you".

I wish they would have. Then davesl might go back to drinking the shit brew he strained from his midevil sock and the rest of us could go on with business as usual.

[Bailey Guns]

Stop acting like a liberal. It's their business.. its their right.

Exactly. Everyone has to be offended by something today...even those that should know better.

[davsel]

First off, I don't drink coffee.

I am also not a fan of open carry - different discussion.
My beef is with the wishy-washy, pussified, how bout if we say please, tone of the letter.
Take a Fn stand. Either way.
However, they'd rather sit on the fence and put the dollar before the principle - Greed.
They should have stayed out of the debate from the beginning and at least saved face.

F-em

Sippin some overpriced, fu-fu, organic, creamy, imported beany, chi, soy beverage through a cute little straw, surrounded by self proclaimed intellectuals and hairy-legged liberals?
34015
Have more respect for yourself - find a tavern.
[Beer]

[Irving]

No shit their going after the money, that's the entire reason they are in business. No one will give a shit what Starbucks stand on guns is when all their doors are closed. All everyone will know is that they were a bunch of clowns who apparently didn't care about selling coffee after all.

If you didn't catch what I said, the principle of their business is to make money, period. They don't need to worry about the principle of openly embracing one political ideology or another because they are operating in a country full of adults.

[Bailey Guns]

Big, bad corporation. Yeah. Screw 'em for wanting to make money. The nerve. They should hand out their coffee for free at gunshows. [/sarcasm]

[facepalm]

[3beansalad]

FFS, dude. Read the letter. Starbucks is not prohibiting guns. They're politely asking people not to openly carry.

I read the letter and didn't see that the CEO asked for people to stop open carrying. He did however ask that people don't bring guns into the store. Yes, this was all prompted by open carry but his request is for guns to be left out, period. The previous Starbucks stance of being pro selling coffee I could respect but by this action, minimal as it seems, they have clearly taken a side.

sent from Droid RAZR w/ Tapatalk4

[TheBelly]

Seeing as Starbucks is now a 'gun free zone' (per their own respectful request), I won't allow my money to be spent there. I think the coffee is OK, if a bit overpriced, but mostly because mass shootings (almost to a fault) have happened at gun free zones.

I will just avoid the place so I don't get shot.

[eneranch]

I haven't patronized Starbucks in years, but I did respect their policy of adherence to Local Laws. Now things have changed and I still won't go there for my morning coffee.

[strm_trpr]

Crappy coffee anyways.

[BREATHER]

First off, I don't buy this way overpriced dog piss anyway. Second, I do not open carry. I don't want some shitbag knowing what I got. Open carry is not going to stop some mentally ill shitbag from committing a crime, too crazy to care or on a suicide mission. I prefer clandestine defense, I will produce my piece when it is needed. We all know that there are less than intelligent people in the firearms community. My stance was that I would defend any toothless hilljack with an IQ less than his shoesize his right to a firearm, but I had to reconsider that. I now have to defend MY right and acknowledge that WE have to police are own community...

[bellavite1]

I am in the coffee business.

Their coffee is really bad.
Over roasted, over priced and over rated.
Well, this takes care of my conflict of interests... [Coffee]

[tmleadr03]

I am in the coffee business.

Their coffee is really bad.
Over roasted, over priced and over rated.
Well, this takes care of my conflict of interests... [Coffee]

I like coffee. Who are you with?

[Great-Kazoo]

I like coffee. Who are you with?


The Archdioses of Denver .. Christ Coffe. One sip and you'll be saying JESUS CHRIST ;)

[BPTactical]

Open Carry: when you absolutely and positively have to prove you are a fool and are stupid enough to NOT realize you cause more harm than good for 2A rights and promotion of the shooting sports.

It has its place, such as when you are camping or checking your fence line.
But generally an unwise move in a populated urban area.
And if you do choose to open carry in an urban area, don't you dare say a word if you get hassled by the heat.
You brought it upon yourself.

[Rucker61]

I CC at my closest Starbucks, and its also very close to a yoga studio. I will continue to patronize this location in the mornings.

[buffalobo]

I am in the coffee business.

Their coffee is really bad.
Over roasted, over priced and over rated.
Well, this takes care of my conflict of interests... [Coffee]

I am not in the biz, but, ^^^this.

Have not bought Starbucks product since meeting fellow COAR members at one downtown to attend protest last spring.

I don't buy from them or look to them for political or policy analysis so I don't give a rats ass about their political stance.





Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

[alxone]

i only open carry at gun shows , at the range , and when hiking in the hills . o.c in a fourbucks ....um starbucks seems like a dumb idea and besides the coffee sucks .

[tmleadr03]

Open Carry: when you absolutely and positively have to prove you are a fool and are stupid enough to NOT realize you cause more harm than good for 2A rights and promotion of the shooting sports.

It has its place, such as when you are camping or checking your fence line.
But generally an unwise move in a populated urban area.
And if you do choose to open carry in an urban area, don't you dare say a word if you get hassled by the heat.
You brought it upon yourself.

Or sometimes when I hustle out of the bathroom because the shop phone is ringing and I don't tuck over the pistol.

[BPTactical]

Or sometimes when I hustle out of the bathroom because the shop phone is ringing and I don't tuck over the pistol.

Thank you for the clarification.
Some of us thought you just had a real small pistol[Faint][Faint]

[bellavite1]

I like coffee. Who are you with?
I am with Italco Food Products, we import Lavazza coffee from Italy.
The real thing for Espresso!
My own parents used to buy it back when I grew up in Rome.

[def90]

They should have stayed out of the debate from the beginning and at least saved face.

F-em

They never asked to be a part of this debate.. A group of anti boycotters started the whole thing.. Starbucks came out with a letter stating that they follow the locals laws.. anti boycotters once again stage a protest.. yahoo cowboys go in and purposely rile shit up. It was never their intention to be any part of this, they were drawn into it unwillingly. It's one thing for a business to go out and say "hey, we are going to allow anyone with guns into out store no matter what" and another to follow the law respecting all rights and to be forced into a political side and discussion. There is no "win" for them either way they go.

Starbucks would have stayed with their original letter stating that they adhere to all local laws (and it sounds like they still are, just don't come in our store and be an ass about it) and we still could have supported them when the antis chose to picket them in a better way simply by being a customer and writing a letter to corporate letting them know about your support.

How about writing a nice well worded letter that states.. "Gee, those anti gun protesters out in front of your store sure are rude and annoying, it makes me want to go somewhere else when I see them. I wish you could do something about it. I'm just trying to get a great cup of coffee. PS, Love your coffee!"

[Bailey Guns]

^^ That is like WAY too hard for some people to comprehend.

[UrbanWolf]

Would it have changed anyone's mind had the letter requested that people don't open carry specifically, rather than just "don't bring guns?"

No. It would mean something different to me if they say request both the pro guns and anti's to not use their store of debate ground, telling one side to not do something is supporting the other side.

[UrbanWolf]

First off, I don't drink coffee.

I am also not a fan of open carry - different discussion.
My beef is with the wishy-washy, pussified, how bout if we say please, tone of the letter.
Take a Fn stand. Either way.
However, they'd rather sit on the fence and put the dollar before the principle - Greed.
They should have stayed out of the debate from the beginning and at least saved face.

F-em

Sippin some overpriced, fu-fu, organic, creamy, imported beany, chi, soy beverage through a cute little straw, surrounded by self proclaimed intellectuals and hairy-legged liberals?
34015
Have more respect for yourself - find a tavern.
[Beer]

I'm with you.

[UrbanWolf]

I CC at my closest Starbucks, and its also very close to a yoga studio. I will continue to patronize this location in the mornings.

Which Starbucks in Foco do you patronize?

[3beansalad]

Funny that the Brady Campaign of anti-gunners inserted them into the debate in 2010, and forced Starbucks to state: "We have examined this issue through the lens of partner (employee) and customer safety. Were we to adopt a policy different from local laws allowing open carry, we would be forced to require our partners to ask law abiding customers to leave our stores, putting our partners in an unfair and potentially unsafe position."

http://news.starbucks.com/article_print.cfm?article_id=332

I guess they don't mind placing their 'partners' in a position of asking legal gun owners to leave the store now. Rest assured that they have employees that are zealous enough anti-gunners to ask patrons to leave, or refuse service, because the company made this 'request.' And while I think open carry in urban areas is idiotic, I also believe this letter was worded very carefully to say firearms are no longer welcome, not just open carry. Obviously only law abiding gun owners will comply, whether you carry concealed or not. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before you see signs at all outlets that state 'firearms are not welcome within.' Is their right to do so, absolutely. Do I plan on ever patronizing a Starbucks again? No, but a nearly $5 cup of coffee isn't really my thing anyway.

[hatidua]

-any of y'all have a concealed carry permit?

[Dave_L]

Are there any actively pro-gun coffee shops in Colorado?

[RblDiver]

Bailey and jhood, why are you two blaming the OCers? You seem to be implying that everything is their fault. From the letter, it seems the CEO's main beef was that Starbucks Appreciation Days implied they had Starbucks support. Meanwhile, it was the anti-OC's who were "soliciting and confronting our customers and partners." Sounds like they were the ones being the most disruptive.

Why are you assuming that someone who OCs has a small dick, is trying to be macho, etc? What is it about exercising one's Second Amendment rights that has your panties in such a wad? Quite frankly, by whining about something like this, you imply people SHOULDN'T exercise their rights. This creates a downward spiral, so when someone legally DOES carry, everyone freaks out and assumes that they're going to murder people. I'd say this is worse than "They're compensating."

For the record, I don't OC. I don't CC. Hell, I don't even own a pistol! But I fully support people who want to. I think it can be both a powerful deterrent to criminal activity and, done responsibly, help people get over the GUNZ R BAD mentality.

Chunkey, why do you think Urban is "sounding like a liberal?" What he said is that if they don't want to support OC, he doesn't want to support them. That sure sounds like capitalism to me! If Starbucks said that they fully support mandatory gun confiscation, would you still insist on supporting them? Yes it's their right to choose store policy. It's also my right to choose my policy about supporting (or not) their policy.

[kawiracer14]

Based on the letter I would say that he is asking for no firearms in the store regardless of OC or CC. Yes he mentions OC several times, but he also says no firearms and doesn't specify if they're concealed or not.


For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

[hatidua]

Bailey and jhood, why are you two blaming the OCers? You seem to be implying that everything is their fault.

Research the history of the Starbucks issue.

[ChunkyMonkey]

Chunkey, why do you think Urban is "sounding like a liberal?" What he said is that if they don't want to support OC, he doesn't want to support them. That sure sounds like capitalism to me! If Starbucks said that they fully support mandatory gun confiscation, would you still insist on supporting them? Yes it's their right to choose store policy. It's also my right to choose my policy about supporting (or not) their policy.

Read his post again, show me the actual event that makes starbucks an anti military? Libtards will also bring in alot of 'IF's in any argument sort of like you did there [werdo] Mind your own business, you don't like starbucks, stay clear of them. There is no need to dramatize it... some of the posts here remind me of the LGBT mob when they tried to destroy the small bakery in littleton for refusing to serve a gay couple's wedding. You truly believe in capitalism then you should respect any private enterprise decision as long as it is within their right. You truly believe in free market, then you may boycott them all you want. I know you agree with me -- just tone down the drama.

[ChunkyMonkey]

This write up sums up my opinion on this.

http://www.thebangswitch.com/our-own-worst-enemy/ (http://www.thebangswitch.com/our-own-worst-enemy/)


OUR OWN WORST ENEMY

Posted on September 18, 2013 (http://www.thebangswitch.com/our-own-worst-enemy/) by MAC (http://www.thebangswitch.com/author/admin/)

Back in August I posted an article about the “Starbucks Appreciation Day” event which I titled “Slapping an Ally in the Face (http://www.thebangswitch.com/slapping-an-ally-in-the-face/)“. I expressed my disagreement with the event which brought out thousands of open carrying pro-gun activists to Starbucks stores across the nation. Gun owners felt we should show Starbucks our appreciation for their policy of neutrality by flooding them with armed activists and dragging the company into the middle of the national gun rights debate against their wishes.


This cell phone picture presumably taken by a Starbucks employee of the memo outlining their new “no guns” policy.

In my article I pointed out that Starbucks had previously asked activists on both sides of the divisive issue not involve them in the debate. Starbucks issued a press release in 2010 (http://news.starbucks.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=332) stating that the company was neither pro-gun nor anti-gun and simply sought to honor both federal and state laws when it came to carrying firearms. Not to be dissuaded, pro-gun activists pressed forward pretending Starbucks was one of our staunchest allies and even going so far as to make Guns And Coffee stickers using the Starbucks logo.
In my August article I said “…because of our actions, I wouldn’t be surprised if Starbucks reconsiders their corporate policy.” Well, now they have.
A memo that appears to have been circulated internally to partners (Starbucks employees) that outlines a new corporate policy of “No Weapons in our Stores” has appeared online. The memo explains once again that the company is neither pro-gun nor anti-gun however due to recent events, and the actions of activists on both sides of the issue, they are instituting a new corporate policy of not allowing weapons in their stores. The memo tells the partners not to communicate this new policy to customers and states “external media sources (http://www.cnbc.com/id/101042575)” will be used to make the new policy widely known.
The Starbucks CEO outlined their new corporate policy in a blog post (http://www.starbucks.com/blog/an-open-letter-from-howard-schultz/1268) yesterday morning.
Already I’m starting to see angry posts from gun owners on the forums vowing never to buy Starbucks coffee again. Why? We have no one to blame but ourselves for their new policy. Starbucks tried to remain neutral but we, as a community, acted irresponsibly and disregarded their wishes by dragging their business into the middle of our fight — a fight they wanted nothing to do with.


The “Guns and Coffee” sticker that many pro-gun activists are now vowing to remove from their vehicles.

We, as a community, are our own worst enemy at times. Many of us feel entitled and as a result we become militant in our behavior and begin to alienate potential allies. The fact we forced Starbucks into taking this action through our own irresponsible behavior is a black eye to our cause. We should be ashamed of ourselves and we most certainly shouldn’t blame Starbucks. We will only serve to make this worse by organizing demonstrations, writing angry emails and posts on their Facebook page, and by trying to organize some half-baked boycott. If you want to do something constructive, write a polite letter to Starbucks apologizing for dragging them into the middle of this debate and implore them to reconsider their policy.
…but that’s not likely to happen. The angry “IT’S MY RIGHT TO CARRY A GUN IN YOUR STORE!” posts have already began to flood the Starbucks Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Starbucks) page. Once again we’re pouring gas on the fire and worsening the situation by acting irresponsibly. Not only that, but we look like complete raving lunatics to the casual observer. Just a few weeks ago gun owners were flooding their Facebook page with laurels and accolades for their policy of neutrality and now that we’ve pushed them the other direction, we’re flooding the page with angry posts and threatening never to step foot in their stores again.
I will continue to patronize my local Starbucks and I will continue to do so while carrying concealed. I will also write a polite letter to Starbucks expressing my remorse for the actions of our community during the “Starbucks Appreciation Day” event and ask that eventually they reconsider their new policy. I wish gun owners took a more pragmatic approach to defending our rights… now isn’t the time for hysterics and burning bridges. We need allies, not more enemies.

[RblDiver]

The right is wired different than the left. It’s a healthier wiring, one that leads to far more enjoyment in life and far less heartache.But it’s a wiring that leaves you particularly poorly equipped to wage these kinds of fights. It’s why you lose. It’s why you’re losing the culture. It’s why Howard Schultz doesn’t fear you.

(emphasis mine)

http://freebeacon.com/blog/starbucks-ceo-doesnt-fear-guns-he-fears-liberals/

[ChunkyMonkey]

(emphasis mine)

http://freebeacon.com/blog/starbucks-ceo-doesnt-fear-guns-he-fears-liberals/

Are you suggesting that we give up our principle and act more liberal? Not happening to this guy. Let's just agree to disagree. :)

[Rooskibar03]

I wear this all the time. Haven't been to a SB in over a year.

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm251/cmuthard03/d2647ff95314663d12010d47811017c6_zpsa7028991.jpg

[jhood001]

Bailey and jhood, why are you two blaming the OCers? You seem to be implying that everything is their fault. From the letter, it seems the CEO's main beef was that Starbucks Appreciation Days implied they had Starbucks support. Meanwhile, it was the anti-OC's who were "soliciting and confronting our customers and partners." Sounds like they were the ones being the most disruptive.

Why are you assuming that someone who OCs has a small dick, is trying to be macho, etc? What is it about exercising one's Second Amendment rights that has your panties in such a wad? Quite frankly, by whining about something like this, you imply people SHOULDN'T exercise their rights. This creates a downward spiral, so when someone legally DOES carry, everyone freaks out and assumes that they're going to murder people. I'd say this is worse than "They're compensating."


I'm not blaming 'the OCers'. I'm blaming some of them. I have zero issue with open carry or people that practice it. If you're out in bear and mountain lion country making some livestock checks and you stop in for a cup of coffee after your rounds, don't leave your gun in your truck. Go right on in. Same if you regularly OC on a day to day basis. Have at it.

The people I'm blaming are those that never open carry that slap on their favorite Punisher t-shirt with their gun in a holster that seldom sees any use just to go to Starbucks to be seen. And a lot of that was going on.

We want firearms in our lives and in public to be a normality. And if open carrying is normal for you, carry on. Flooding various Starbuck's with openly displayed firearms because of some buzz on the internet is abnormal. And it draws abnormal scrutiny.

Do something abnormal and expect abnormal reactions and scrutiny.

[davsel]

F-em
At what point did you decide that exercising your Constitutional rights was "acting irresponsibly?"
When did you start to care that exercising our Constitutional rights made you "look like complete raving lunatics to the casual observer?"
Apparently, the fight is already lost on some. Be sure not to ruffle any feathers. Can't we all just get along?
F-em in the A with a big rubber D

[RblDiver]

Are you suggesting that we give up our principle and act more liberal? Not happening to this guy. Let's just agree to disagree. :)

I'm saying we need to, pardon the expression, stick to our guns. As the article I linked says, "you’ll think about how silly it was for you to give up Starbucks in the name of something that literally never impacted you in the first place because you don’t have an open-carry permit." Conservatives generally lead a happier life because we don't get truly obsessed over things like this. Sure we may bluster about for a bit, but eventually we forgive. This is all well and good, except that this can then lead to further actions being taken that go even further. Just a bit at a time, but eventually things'll reach a tipping point. No drop thinks it is responsible for the flood. Bridges loaded with too much weight WILL eventually break.

There comes a time when you just have to say "You shall not pass." Is Starbucks this moment? No, but it's just another example of another drop being added to the forthcoming flood.

[TFOGGER]

Pretentious hipsters with iPads wasting their day away at Starbucks while collecting their 99 weeks of unemployment make me "unsettled and upset". Can I get those fucksticks evicted?

[10mm-man]

F-em
If they really don't want people carrying in their store, put up a sign stating so - as the law allows.
However, they are too cowardly/greedy to take a stand on one side or the other. They know it is a constitutional right, but they don't want to openly allow it any more, and are too much of a pussy to come out and say it.
F-em

^^^ Exactly..... It's not a neutral position. Your either on board with it or you are not. Suck asses playing both sides of the fence.

[10mm-man]

Agreed and amen.

OCing after a range trip and you stop in for a coffee? Go for it.

Strapping on your firearm because you're going to get a coffee at a place that you feel has been designated as OC friendly? You are part of the problem. Seriously.

I believe they narrowed it down to only people "on duty". Going to the range is not an "on duty" function unless your LEO.

[hatidua]

Are you suggesting that we give up our principle and act more liberal? Not happening to this guy. Let's just agree to disagree. :)

I don't think it's a case of giving up principle when a person consciously chooses to spend their money at companies that support their ideals rather than at establishements who actively try to curtail those very same principles and ideals. What I took from the article (in it's entirety, not a mere snippet) is that liberals focus and work at achieving their goals, whereas the conservatives gloss over these things and go right on supporting the enemy 48 hours after the storm has blown over. Colorado was able to recall two legislators through a focused effort but we need to apply that level of focus across the board. I have no qualms, whatsoever, with a merchant doing what ever they want with their own company. But compartmentalizing and justifying that behavior by the pro-2A community by brushing it off as being mere capitalism misses the point: sure, it's capitalism and the very nature of capitalism is that we don't have to support a given vendor, we can take our business elsewhere. I think the article was trying to convey that liberals have longer memories when it comes to company policy whereas conservatives don't have the same level of passion for their causes. If, after repeated poor behavior, we can essentially boycott Cheaper-Than-Dirt, I don't think it's such a reach to apply scrutiny to each entity that we determine worthy of our patronage.

If concerting our efforts toward a specified goal is deemed acting more liberal, I suspect the 2A will cease to exist within my lifetime. That's truly camel with head in sand behavior.

"The left, however, does the politicized life exceptionally well. They mount campaigns to pressure corporations to get what they want. They organize boycotts. They direct their complaints to gatekeepers who share their views and can influence policy. They blacklist artists with whom they disagree and pressure corporations to do the same. They control the levers of the media to add additional pressure from newspapers and television networks.So there will be a lot of fulmination on social media from those on the right about rights and guns and the Constitution, and then a little less the next day, and a little less the day after that, until finally you forgot why you were mad at Starbucks and you stop tweeting and facebooking and kvetching and start buying pumpkin spice lattes by the bucketful and, in a moment of clarity, you’ll think about how silly it was for you to give up Starbucks in the name of something that literally never impacted you in the first place because you don’t have an open-carry permit.

[Rucker61]

Which Starbucks in Foco do you patronize?

West Drake.

[UrbanWolf]

Think like it this way: Pizza Hut no longer allow customer carry guns, no problem, they are private business. Bufflo Wild Wings no longer allow customer carry guns, no problem, they are private business. Starbucks no longer allow customer carry guns, still no problem, they are private business... Then what? McDonald, Burger King, Gunther Today's.....

Are we really going to tolerant to the point when we can't carry our guns anywhere expect our own basements?

[10mm-man]

I don't think it's a case of giving up principle when a person consciously chooses to spend their money at companies that support their ideals rather than at establishements who actively try to curtail those very same principles and ideals. What I took from the article (in it's entirety, not a mere snippet) is that liberals focus and work at achieving their goals, whereas the conservatives gloss over these things and go right on supporting the enemy 48 hours after the storm has blown over. Colorado was able to recall two legislators through a focused effort but we need to apply that level of focus across the board. I have no qualms, whatsoever, with a merchant doing what ever they want with their own company. But compartmentalizing and justifying that behavior by the pro-2A community by brushing it off as being mere capitalism misses the point: sure, it's capitalism and the very nature of capitalism is that we don't have to support a given vendor, we can take our business elsewhere. I think the article was trying to convey that liberals have longer memories when it comes to company policy whereas conservatives don't have the same level of passion for their causes. If, after repeated poor behavior, we can essentially boycott Cheaper-Than-Dirt, I don't think it's such a reach to apply scrutiny to each entity that we determine worthy of our patronage.

If concerting our efforts toward a specified goal is deemed acting more liberal, I suspect the 2A will cease to exist within my lifetime. That's truly camel with head in sand behavior.

"The left, however, does the politicized life exceptionally well. They mount campaigns to pressure corporations to get what they want. They organize boycotts. They direct their complaints to gatekeepers who share their views and can influence policy. They blacklist artists with whom they disagree and pressure corporations to do the same. They control the levers of the media to add additional pressure from newspapers and television networks.So there will be a lot of fulmination on social media from those on the right about rights and guns and the Constitution, and then a little less the next day, and a little less the day after that, until finally you forgot why you were mad at Starbucks and you stop tweeting and facebooking and kvetching and start buying pumpkin spice lattes by the bucketful and, in a moment of clarity, you’ll think about how silly it was for you to give up Starbucks in the name of something that literally never impacted you in the first place because you don’t have an open-carry permit.



Well said..

[RblDiver]

Are we really going to tolerant to the point when we can't carry our guns anywhere expect our own basements?

Well, we could open our own shops. I visited my aunt up in Wyoming last week, and we stopped at a little restaurant with two signs I adored:
1. Due to the increasing cost of bullets, no warning shots will be fired.
2. [Paraphrasing, don't remember exact wording] Guns are permitted in this establishment. We ask that you keep them holstered unless you need them. If you do, judicious marksmanship is appreciated.

[wctriumph]

I have not been to a Starbucks in like two years, just can't afford to spend my money that way. The last time I did go was for the "appreciation" day and I was CCW at that time. Two other guys were OC and there was a cop that could care less.

I don't care to go there anymore, even without the letter.

[davsel]

There's your problem:

http://www.menshealth.com/nutrition/soys-negative-effects (http://www.menshealth.com/nutrition/soys-negative-effects)

Soy Latte anyone? And a hug?

[Mick-Boy]

Pretty much echos my thoughts.




http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/starbucks/


This Is Why We Cant Have Nice Things – Starbucks

http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ILGC-Logo-.jpg
by Admin on September 18, 2013
Well. We have done it.
I say we, as in the collective gun-owners and 2nd Amendment supporters/enthusiasts of this nation. We win together, and we loose together.
Last week, we shared a major victory in Colorado with the recall of two anti-gun politicians (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/10/colorado-recall-results_n_3903209.html). Thats our Win.
This week, we have finally forced Starbucks to choose a side in the great gun debate (http://www.starbucks.com/blog/an-open-letter-from-howard-schultz/1268). All the sabre rattling, and “starbucks appreciation days” and open carry foolishness we could throw at them. They finally made a decision.
Good Job. Well done. We have “educated” them and their “liberal” customers who don’t particularly share our views and affinity for all things that go bang.
The decision is in, and it is not in our favor. Starbucks (http://www.starbucks.com/) has said that they do not wish to see “guns as a part of the Starbucks experience.” We have educated them to the point that they would prefer we just go away…or at least leave them out of it. They have said that they will not ask anyone open-carrying to leave, nor will they post signs regarding the policy. Frankly, I wish they would. I hope the “activists” have the intestinal fortitude to respect their wishes…but I’m not holding my breath based on how they have acted in the past. Calling for a boycott is weak-sauce, too.
We have essentially forced neutral Switzerland into the hands of the Nazis. A company that was not restrictive in their corporate policy. A company who followed local law. We forced them onto the national stage– without consulting them about it, I might add– and into the center of a rather divisive debate. Replete with “I Love Guns and Coffee” patches and t-shirts and mugs and all sorts of other cute little trinkets.
http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Fashion-Accessory.jpg
Instead of quietly supporting a company through the purchase of their product to show your appreciation, you just had to load up an AR, AK, or shotgun or put on that fancy “tactical” drop leg holster, call all of your gun-guy friends to meet you there, and march into the place to “Make a statement” and “educate” people on our rights.
http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/shotgun.jpg
You had to throw that rifle on your back, knowing damn good and well you were going to cause a scene. If you DIDNT know you were going to cause a scene, you’re an idiot when you consider the multiple “active killer/mass murder” incidents of very recent notoriety. You have allowed those of us who choose to be smart regarding these matters to get a black eye from society and, you are directly responsible for allowing the left a small victory.
The attention-whoreness of it all is rather disturbing.
http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Rifles1.jpg
My guess is that you are the same ones who only carry when you are trying to bait a cop or ruffle feathers or trying to “educate” people….well, you did. Congratulations. (P.S. Of the eleventy-billion videos of seen on YouTube wherein folks of your ilk try to “educate” cops on the law, Ive seen about 5 that were legitimate)
Don’t complain now because the company had to make a business decision to make their customers and workers feel more comfortable and/or safe. Remember that YOU are responsible. YOU forced their hand. YOU are the reason they made this choice.
We have turned the debate into a joke. Yes, we are all responsible.
Whether youre an (A) “in your face activist” as previously mentioned, or a (B) gun owner who doesnt agree with them but remains silent and thereby complicit, we are all responsible. Own it.
Personally I fall into the latter category (B). I think the first category are a bunch of fools, and open carry is a piss-poor method of carry outside of a few distinct instances. I have remained silent on the issue, but that ends today. I don’t want to be represented as a gun owner by those who choose to act as those described above. A tactical victory is never worth a strategic defeat. In the end this has hurt us in a battle where we are making progress. If we dont “eat our own” and correct these issues, the OTHER SIDE will. We have lost ground due to tomfoolery, chicanery, and general shenanigans. If we don’t get on the same page, we will continue to give up ground.
Much like how we get irritated when the “not terrorist” muslims dont come out and outright condemn muslim terrorist acts and organizations…we are taking the same track by not raising the bullshit flag when we ought to. We have to police our own. No successful organization, entity, or cause embraces personnel or spokesmen who damage the image and value of the brand.
There is strong precedent that responsible activism, grassroots campaigns, and legal processes can make a tangible difference. Just ask two former Colorado politicians. Ask our Founding Fathers. Ask any number of successful organizations or causes.
And now the internet comes to life on the topic. There are alot of ”scuffles” and debates going on about how Starbucks is wrong to take this stance, or how we (gun owners) shouldn’t “eat our own” with regards to the fools who just have to “educate the public” with their open carrying of guns, and treating them as if they were nothing more than a high end fashion accessory. Still others say that while they dont disagree with Starbuck’s policy, they dont like being “lumped in” with “those guys” — talking about the aforementioned “educators and keepers of liberty”
One internet poster said: “I never believed Starbucks was an ally anyway.” I would say he may be right. They weren’t. They are an outfit that sells coffee. Period. They just had a policy that wasn’t restrictive, and followed local law. They were unwillingly and unwittingly co-opted by the “rabid gun movement” people, and literally thrust on the national stage in the midst of a highly charged debate without their consultation on the matter.
This is why we can’t have nice things.
Don’t blame Starbucks, and don’t blame liberals. Blame stupid gun owners.
Look in the mirror, own it, give yourself a pep-talk, and go fix it.
Practical takeaway: Just because you CAN doesn’t always mean you SHOULD.

[10mm-man]

i had no idea that dumbasses were carrying long guns in starbucks. fucking morons.

wait where is Gman?
lol... This^^^

[sellersm]

So glad our Founding Fathers didn't think the way that some folks in this thread do... Add Rosa Parks to that list, and others that 'stood out' and 'stood up' for rights.

It's like this: use a dam as an analogy. Our Nation, faltering as it is, still has the 'walls of the dam' intact (Constitutional Rights). There is increasing water pressure (libs trying to 'change things') to force the dam to change (break, move out of the way, etc.). What does (or can) the dam do to mitigate the pressure so it won't break? I'm pretty sure that just 'standing there and doing nothing' isn't a very effective option, especially if the water pressure continues to increase! Those who are in support of the fundamentals of this Nation (the dam), must do something to mitigate the risk of breakage by the constantly increasing water pressure!

Conservatives are usually their own worst enemy: "just leave me alone and let me live my life", they say, and rightly so, that's what makes us free people. However, in the face of continually increase 'pressure' from the opposition, just 'being left alone' doesn't prevent the dam from breaking...

Just my thoughts.

[dan512]

Mick, nice article. There is a difference between exercising your rights like a responsible adult, and rubbing shit in people's faces.
Agreed, this is why we can't have nice things.

[UrbanWolf]

West Drake.

Go there with empty holster visable now.

[Rucker61]

Go there with empty holster visable now.

And then wait until someone notices, then stand up in a panic and start looking all around where I was sitting, and then leave in a hurry without saying anything.

[Dave_L]

i had no idea that dumbasses were carrying long guns in starbucks. fucking morons.


They pay $5+ for a cup of coffee...what did you expect? :D

[ChunkyMonkey]

Think like it this way: Pizza Hut no longer allow customer carry guns, no problem, they are private business. Bufflo Wild Wings no longer allow customer carry guns, no problem, they are private business. Starbucks no longer allow customer carry guns, still no problem, they are private business... Then what? McDonald, Burger King, Gunther Today's.....

Are we really going to tolerant to the point when we can't carry our guns anywhere expect our own basements?

You should join the occupy movement as this is their mentality.

Since you believe we need to draw line in the sand, do you think they should be forced to allow open carry, then will hobby lobby be forced to accept obama care and its abortion mandate? Chic fil a should be forced to donate to LGBT foundation? Should all gov funded hospitals required to perform abortion? Should the big brother passes and enforces more laws in our private enterprises???

Like I said, you have the right to boycott, but when your right is infringing others, its no longer your right.

Open carry in the public all you want... When it comes to private entity, he/she/it has the final say. As much as I disagree, I respect their wishes.

[kawiracer14]

I wear this all the time. Haven't been to a SB in over a year.

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm251/cmuthard03/d2647ff95314663d12010d47811017c6_zpsa7028991.jpg


Dunkin's is fucking terrible coffee.

[RblDiver]

Since you believe we need to draw line in the sand, do you think they should be forced to allow open carry,

Occupy wanted government action. I think people here want boycott action. Force them to allow open carry by the power of the marketplace, not the end of the government's gun.

[ChunkyMonkey]

Occupy wanted government action. I think people here want boycott action. Force them to allow open carry by the power of the marketplace, not the end of the government's gun.

Occupy movement is anti govt, anti corporate, anti bank, and anti rich... and a mixed bag of libertarian at the beginning and socialism & communism at the end. In any case, their goal is Robin Hood Tax and the only way to achieve that is obviously through the big govt which they blamed as one the problems itself.. 100% Hypocrisy. Back to subject, it is the same mentality that private entities have no right to 'victimize' our rights to the pursuit of happiness. Although their version of pursuit of happiness is completely based on what others should do for them. You dont like a certain business, dont buy there, I agree with you. But that should end there. Move on already. No need for what if mcdonalds does the same, what if this, what if that...

You want to make a difference? Educate, convince, convert just ONE anti gunner into pro 2D... if each of us do so just ONCE in our lifetime, we would have DOUBLE the 2D supporter in this country. Attacking a private company's policy has never worked in the past, and will never work.
I have let this thread consumes my time more than the subject worths. [dig]

[davsel]

Regardless of the current memo, the fact that gun-owners, in general, patronize this zealously liberal establishment, truly amazes me.
Then again, I find myself amazed by the gun-owner support of civil unions, abortion "rights," and other progressive ideology.
Oh well, reap what you sow.

[10mm-man]

Not mine, but I think it is spot on.


You're either with us or against us! No walking the liberal agenda line! - Chrishttps://scontent-b-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1236261_667069366638726_283891507_n.jpg
(https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=667069366638726&set=a.544213618924302.128613.544207478924916&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf)

[SuperiorDG]

I went to Starbucks this morning and some hippie dude flipped me the bird in the parking lot. I was pulling in to the spot next to the one he was pulling out of and he didn't like it. I guess he was one of tolerant ones.

[Squeeze]

Aaaaaannnnnd, that's one more reason why I hate open-carry.

[Bailey Guns]

I can explain it to some of you over and over (as others have tried to do). I can't understand it for you.

The only way this is a Constitutional issue is in the sense Starbucks has the right to conduct their business as they see fit. If you don't want to patronize them, don't. It's really simple...but it seems to baffle so many of you.

[MrPrena]

I am fairly certain Starbucks will let this fade away.
6 month later, not many will even remember or realize SBUX even wrote this letter. It will go away.
Most of corporations tend to have knee jerk reaction, like Dicks' and some other retailers at first.

[RblDiver]

does anyone think that the majority of Starbucks users want to see people open carry firearms? I dont think they do. I think many of them dont care that there is one under your shirt, in you purse, etc. But, I doubt they want to see you carry a handgun or worse a long gun into the store. That is just bad tactics.

It's about more than just Starbucks, it's businesses in general.

[kawiracer14]

Regardless of the current memo, the fact that gun-owners, in general, patronize this zealously liberal establishment, truly amazes me.
Then again, I find myself amazed by the gun-owner support of civil unions, abortion "rights," and other progressive ideology.
Oh well, reap what you sow.

I forgot when I bought a gun where I signed something that said I had to read and follow the Catholic bible? Should gun owners also prohibit their wives or girlfriends from having ideas like you do?

[DireWolf]

My personal take is that unless you're way out in the sticks, open carry should be the exception rather than the norm, particularly for long guns, and some tact is required (had a few occasions where I needed to do this, and the key is to just not be a dick about it).

For CCW, if it's appropriately concealed, they'll never even know you've got it and everyone can come away happy (of course, CCW should be constitutionally protected, and not require all of the BS of getting a "permit"). If not, then fuckem', and let them incur the massive cost and headache of installing & maintaining metal detectors or armed security at every location (not very likely if you ask me), then watch as their profits go to shit as people decide to go to competitors who don't have a mini fuckin TSA setup at the front door....

[hatidua]

I find myself amazed by the gun-owner support of civil unions, abortion "rights," and other progressive ideology.
Oh well, reap what you sow.

Different book, different movie. We're talking about guns in a coffee shop in this thread.

[MrPrena]

Howard Schultz will be on CNBC Fast Money in few minutes to talk about the recent Open Carry letter.
If available , i will link the video if anyone is interested.

[davsel]

Different book, different movie. We're talking about guns in a coffee shop in this thread.

Had you not removed much of my post, you would have possibly noticed the relevant context.

From: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/24/starbucks-ceo-tells-shareholder-to-invest-elsewhere-if-they-dont-like-companys-stance-on-gays/

The incident occurred when Starbucks shareholder Tom Strobhar of the Corporate Morality Action Center (http://www.corporatemorality.org/), an anti-gay corporate pressure group, raised the issue of Starbucks having been recently boycotted by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). This, Strobhar suggested, had lost the company money and suggested they might want to backtrack on the issue.

“In the first full quarter after this boycott was announced, our sales and our earnings, shall we say politely, were a bit disappointing,” Strobhar said.


Schultz's response:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OaCfvr9EFKs




Some more on Starbuck's Views: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/mbarber/070521


I stand behind my previous (unaltered) post.

[MrPrena]

I was just reading one of the forum message board regarding that same article.





Had you not removed much of my post, you would have possibly noticed the relevant context.

From: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/24/starbucks-ceo-tells-shareholder-to-invest-elsewhere-if-they-dont-like-companys-stance-on-gays/

The incident occurred when Starbucks shareholder Tom Strobhar of the Corporate Morality Action Center (http://www.corporatemorality.org/), an anti-gay corporate pressure group, raised the issue of Starbucks having been recently boycotted by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). This, Strobhar suggested, had lost the company money and suggested they might want to backtrack on the issue.

“In the first full quarter after this boycott was announced, our sales and our earnings, shall we say politely, were a bit disappointing,” Strobhar said.


Schultz's response:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OaCfvr9EFKs




Some more on Starbuck's Views: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/mbarber/070521


I stand behind my previous (unaltered) post.

[MrPrena]

Howard said he will still serve to people who brings guns. LOL





http://i39.tinypic.com/2i6jkj.jpg

[brutal]

Howard said he will still serve to people who brings guns. LOL



link to video?


No surprise media turned into "gun ban"

http://i39.tinypic.com/2i6jkj.jpg

[Colorado_Outback]

I'm all for anything that would keep the lines shorter during peak times..

If I have to wait behind one more D-Bag in a BMW that thinks his mocha-frapa-queero is more important that keeping a through lane of traffic open on a busy street, during rush hour, Ill lose my mind! :D

[davsel]

F-em

Not political?

From: http://news.starbucks.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=200


In which Middle Eastern countries do you operate?
We partner with Alshaya Group to operate Starbucks stores in Egypt, Kuwait, KSA, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, UAE, Jordan and Lebanon in the Middle East region. We are fortunate to have the opportunity to work with so many communities, and we are committed to providing the Starbucks Experience while respecting the local customs and cultures of each country we are a part of. We are also committed to hiring locally, providing jobs to thousands of local citizens in the countries where we operate.

Are you still operating Starbucks stores in Israel? If not, do you have plans to re-open should the opportunity arise?
We decided to dissolve our partnership in Israel in 2003 due to the on-going operational challenges that we experienced in that market.


From: http://give2asia.org/?p=11212

STARBUCKS GLOBAL PHILANTHROPY
In 2005, Starbucks announced its global philanthropy would mirror its corporate footprint and began to develop and implement processes for international philanthropy. To help kick off the global philanthropy expansion, Starbucks announced a US$5 million philanthropic investment initiative in China as part of its ongoing commitment to social responsibility and in recognition of China’s rich tradition of placing an importance on education.


And, this: http://www.wnd.com/2005/08/31716/

None of this surprises me - I could tell from merely observing the average Starbucks patron.

Proverbs 13:20 (DRA)
He that walketh with the wise, shall be wise: a friend of fools shall become like to them.

-or, if you prefer-

You will be known by the company you keep.

[brokenscout]

I guess I don't really give a fuck? I make my own coffee

[DavieD55]

I guess I don't really give a fuck? I make my own coffee


+1 [Coffee]

[MrPrena]

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000200321&__source=yahoo%7Cheadline%7Cquote%7Cvideo%7C&par=yahoo

[Bailey Guns]

I guess I don't really give a fuck? I make my own coffee

+1. This makes as much sense as anything in this thread. I can't say I never go to Starbucks...but it's pretty rare. They wouldn't be in business if they relied on customers like me.

[davsel]

And, on a lighter note - includes coffee scene (1:44)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=G2DCExerOsA

[davsel]

Good questions, salesman (non)answers.
http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2013/09/18/n-starbucks-guns-howard-schultz-full-interview.cnnmoney

[Aloha_Shooter]

It is a pretty well written letter. Starbucks really tried to stay out of it, but people used them and lost the privilege to be treated like an adult.

+1

[TFOGGER]

Hell, I don't even drink coffee most of the time...

[Dave]

I stopped and grabbed a coffee from one near Cold War Remarketing after stopping in to see Patrick. No signs there, and no one got killed by my CCW like people on MSNBC swore would happen.

[spqrzilla]

I agree, the open carry guys got carried away and pushed Starbucks from neutral position that they had adopted. It was good to do appreciation day - I did, and made a point of it to the local Starbucks - but rude to do so in a brash, pushy way with brazen open carry.

That said, I think its interesting that this letter reads like its intended to say to the gun control activists "OK, there, I told them to stay away" and to say to us "Hey, I didn't say you had to stay away."

Its very craftily worded. The real test will be if in those states where signs saying no concealed carry have the force of law - unlike Colorado - the local Starbucks put up compliant signs banning CCW.

[Ridge]

Kids getting poor education? Clearly the answer is to cut the budget to schools!

[ChunkyMonkey]

Talking about open carry...


http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/95999354.html#.UjmWCMoAYG4.facebook


Man Legally Carrying Gun Robbed at Gunpoint

MILWAUKEE - A Milwaukee man found out the hard way that carrying a gun for protection doesn't always keep you safe. In fact, it may have made him a target.
The 34-year-old man legally owned a handgun and carried it out in the open in his holster for protection.
Neighbors say they knew he was always armed.
"It was kind of scary to just see him walking around all the time with that gun kind of just out in the open," said Shambria Mayham Autman. She lives near Teutonia and Good Hope and said they called him "The guy with the gun."
But it wasn't scary for at least one person who robbed "The guy with the gun" at gunpoint.
"I think he was trying to scare people off like, 'Yeah, don't mess with me,' kind of attitude, but it didn't work," Mayham Autman explained.
The president of Wisconsin Carry, Nik Clark, says 100's of thousands of people open carry and he's never heard of anything like this.
"So it really is a very unusual situation, very unique," Clark said.
The victim didn't want to go on camera but said he carried the gun because he had been jumped and held up at knife point in the past. He believes, in his case, open carry made him a target and he will no longer do it.
He said his case proves gun owners should have the right to carry concealed weapons.
Clark agrees. "By and large it is a significant deterrent, open carry is, but I think it really does make the point that Wisconsin should have concealed carry along with open carry so that people who live in a very high crime neighborhood where criminals aren't deterred by firearms would have the ability to conceal carry to protect themselves. The two really work hand in hand," Clark said.

[MrPrena]

LOL. :D

SBUX have approxmately 732 million floats.
If 50% of the NRA members SHORT 1 share each, it would make a difference.

[spqrzilla]

Talking about open carry...


http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/95999354.html#.UjmWCMoAYG4.facebook

[/FONT][/COLOR]

I thought Wisconsin does have concealed carry?

[brutal]

I thought Wisconsin does have concealed carry?

They do. I did.

Someone in that interview is an idiot.

I'd say it's the open carry org pres. He should know better.


http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/conceal-carry/concealed-carry

[BREATHER]

Must be a whole lot of folks here with large disposable incomes. I don't spend that kind of money on this coffee as a matter of principle. Big corporations seem to have the ability to suck lots of suckers to spend big bucks on shit products. And it goes on and on and on......

[rockhound]

Good thing i hate their coffee anyway,

At $5 a cup it would be cheaper to take up smoking

[The Rat]

http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/starbucks/

[RCCrawler]

http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/starbucks/


Haha, just read that and was coming here to post it. Very good article.

[muddywings]

Haha, just read that and was coming here to post it. Very good article.

ditto...beat by 2 hours!

I agree with the article.

[kawiracer14]

Just so we're clear... a cup of black coffee and SBUX does not cost $5 or $10 or $100 as people are saying. A medium coffee at Starbucks is around $2.... about the same price as Dunkin's or Dazbog or any other chain coffee shop.

Yes if you want a Venti Soy Latte Extra Hot No Foam then you're going to pay $5+ for it.

[Bailey Guns]

http://practicaltacticalpodcast.com/starbucks/

It was good. Probably why Mick-Boy posted it in post #74.

[Coffee]

[muddywings]

It was good. Probably why Mick-Boy posted it in post #74.

[Coffee]

whewww...glad TheRat got 'the dupe' and not me....that was a close one!!! [ROFL1]

[Bailey Guns]

I think you and RCCrawler get a "Technical Repost Foul" on that anyway!

[Beer]

[muddywings]

[dig][shithitsfan]

i concede!

[The Rat]

Drat, that's what I get for not reading the whole thread.

[Great-Kazoo]

Bottom line, DOES IT REALLY MATTER ?? "WE" defend a bakery in Denver who refused to do a same sex wedding cake, yet condemn SB for their policy change [facepalm] It's their business let them do what they want.

[Eric P]

Don't care either way. Private property rights trump your personal right while on said private property. If you don't like it, don't go on the private property.

[3beansalad]

Loving IMAO.us:

Random Thoughts: Starbucks, iOS 7, and Government Shutdown (http://www.imao.us/index.php/2013/09/random-thoughts-starbucks-ios-7-and-government-shutdown/)
Posted by Frank J. (http://www.imao.us/index.php/author/imao/): September 19, 2013 9:35 am
The Navy yard shooter didn’t use an AR-15 but he was influenced by one.
It will be a much more dangerous country if people carrying guns don’t get their coffee.
It’s a measure of the civility in this country that no ones seems to fear constantly pissing off the people who own lots of guns.
So the policy at Starbucks is that while they won’t stop you from carrying a gun, they won’t say hello to your little friend.
I don’t get the Starbucks thing; how can you be threatened by a guy drinking a pumpkin spice latte even if he is openly carrying a gun?
Hope this goes without being said, but people who will honor polite requests to not carry a firearm are not the ones you need to worry about.
My iPad is downloading a new iOS. What’s that all about?
“Was going to shoot up a Starbucks, but the CEO said he’d rather I not bring a gun there so I guess I’ll honor that.” -hundreds of people
But I like to drink my coffee out of the barrel of my Colt Python http://www.imao.us/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif
Aieee! My iPad is now all different looking!
Starkbucks should slap the coffee out of the hands of anyone carrying and be like, “What are you going to do about it, people with guns?”
iOS 7 is really different. They should have had more of warning like, “This is going to be really really different.”
Only two gender options for Siri? Not very progressive.
Wow. iOS 7 is so simple. Efficient. Kinda ugly.
So are there actually people out there who think that requesting customers not bring guns into a business will help avoid a mass shooting?
How about anyone with a gun at a Starbucks has to sign an agreement not to shoot anybody? Fine with me as long as it has expiration date.
Noticed the Starbucks statement says nothing about conceal carry, but what in the world can you do about that?
Anyway, shouldn’t the armed hipsters at Starbucks be wielding crossbows?
To be honest, not really big on open carry myself. Rather people not know what gun I have and where it is.
This Starbucks thing seems to be from a number of people trying to make the company a pro-gun champion when it did not want to be.
Let the left politicize everything; there’s no reason everyone else needs to join in that.
But I can’t feel secure in my manhood ordering a soy milk decaf pumpkin spice latte unless there’s an AR-15 slung over my shoulder.
Just shutdown the government and don’t open it again. Who uses the government for anything anymore except idiots?
Last time I dealt with the government, they asked me all these question about the car I was driving and told me to stop waving a gun around. Who needs that?

[Bailey Guns]

^^ Thanks for posting that. Very, very clever and entertaining.

[kawiracer14]

That shit is funny.

[Squeeze]

Time to... [Pot]

/F4_JEBfJppw (http://[youtube]youtu.be/F4_JEBfJppw)

[mtnhack]

Time to... [Pot]

/F4_JEBfJppw (http://[youtube]youtu.be/F4_JEBfJppw)
"YOU fuckin people have done a disservice to the gun community!"

^^Love it.^^

[JohnnyEgo]

In the pantheon of evils, I rank this at about the same level as a hangnail. Nothing stopping me from carrying my concealed weapon and enjoying my overpriced and slightly burnt iced coffee every morning. So business as usual. The fact that a CEO wants to extract as much money as possible from all parties to the issue seems exactly like the behavior I'd want in a CEO. Does the letter make me happy? No. Will it change my relationship to Starbucks? Probably not. Hell, I still listen to NPR.

[brutal]

"Starbucks is anti-dumbass." Yup, that pretty much sums it up for me.

[Bailey Guns]

"Starbucks is anti-dumbass."

Me, too. Everyone has a dumbass moment here and there and that's OK. But for those that make it a lifestyle...

[streetglideok]

I was never a big spender at Starbucks, no love loss there. They were shaky financially not long ago, who knows how long they will last. As many have said, this doesn't shock me with how it all went down. It's been preached before by administrators on this site, and by others, we(gun owners in general not just on this site) shoot ourselves in the foot too often because we don't care what others think. Its the others that swing the votes at elections. Longer it takes for us to change how we present ourselves to the public, the longer it will be before we can get rid of some gun laws.

[BigDee]

I spent several years managing retail stores. The company I work for has a strict no firearms policy but I never enforced it because I wasn't bothered by people who OC'd even though I don't agree with it.

I haven't managed retail for a few years now but I can tell you that if I still were I would ask anyone OCing to leave my establishment. Your rights are your rights and I will never try to take those away from you but Sandy Hook and the Aurora theater shooting are still very fresh in many people's minds and seeing someone OCing in a business makes people VERY uncomfortable. Just like it is your right to bear arms it is everyone's right to be able to shop, drink coffee, read books and etc in an environment that they are comfortable in and when your livelihood is contingent on people shopping, reading and etc you're going to do your damnedest to make sure the folks who patronize your business are comfortable.

For the record anyone defending these fucking idiots carrying AR's, posing with shotguns, unholstering their handguns and etc inside of Starbucks should probably turn in their guns because clearly they are not intelligent enough to own something that requires as much responsibility as a firearm. I can't think of a single gun store that would let people do the shit people were doing inside of Starbucks. Walk into the Firing Line with a loaded shotgun in your hands and see how they respond to you. If a gun store won't even let people act like that why should a coffee shop??

[brutal]

For those that are interested, Starbucks also own Seattle's Best and several other brands.

If you don't want to spend on their stores or brands, reference the following list.

Starbucks Coffee Company • Ethos water (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethos_water) • Evolution Fresh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_Fresh) • Hear Music (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear_Music) • La Boulange Bakery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Boulange_Bakery) • Seattle's Best Coffee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle%27s_Best_Coffee) • Tazo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tazo) • Teavana (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teavana) • Torrefazione Italia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrefazione_Italia)

[3beansalad]

I like Cam Edwards take on this as well:

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz has penned an open letter to gun owners asking they no longer bring guns into stores. While the coffee chain won’t be officially banning guns from the store, Mr. Schultz says the stores have become part of the gun debate, and he doesn’t want Starbucks to play a role in the tug-of-war.
Says the CEO:

“For those who oppose open carry, we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion open carry, please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.”
With all due respect to Mr. Schultz, I’ve been unsettled and upset by some of the piercings I’ve seen on my local baristas. I’ve been unsettled and upset by the sight of a very large woman in very small yoga pants standing directly in front of me in line or the dude in spandex bicycle shorts for that matter. If your top speed is five miles an hour through the streets of Alexandria, VA, aerodynamics aren’t really one of your big concerns.
I understand that when I enter your store, I’ll likely be coming in contact with lots of folks who make different lifestyle choices than I do. It’s cool with me. But if you truly want folks to be respectful of others as citizens and neighbors, you might start by not asking gun owners to go quietly back into the closet as long as they’re in your stores.
I do understand what Schultz is trying to do. He’s tired of gun-control advocates protesting his stores but he also doesn’t want to alienate gun owners. He’d like the open-carry events at Starbucks to stop, he’d like the chain to get out of the spotlight in the gun-control debate and he’d like to keep selling lots of expensive coffee to gun lovers and haters alike. Unfortunately, you can’t always get what you want and, unless Starbucks wants to declare itself a place where politics is verboten, it shouldn’t run away when the debate leads to its doors.
I appreciate Mr. Schultz’s attempt to placate both sides, but again, with all due respect, I think that’s the wrong approach. The smart decision would have been to try and do what was in line with the values of Starbucks as a corporation. Starbucks says it has a commitment to the community rooted in “the belief that we can balance profitability and a social conscience”. A strong community is home to rigorous debate open to both sides. A commitment to the community, to our community, from a corporation that wants to serve a “social conscience” should at least champion free speech, even if it wants to stay neutral in the gun-control debate. And that’s what these open-carry events (and the anti-gun protests) are … political speech.
If I were Howard Schultz, I wouldn’t have tried to extricate my company from the debate. I would have instead embraced the chance to play a positive role. I would have invited local pro-gun and anti-gun activists inside to formally debate in Starbucks shops across the country on certain evenings, instead of demonstrating outside on a weekend. You get to sell coffee (profitability) and help start a conversation instead of a shouting match (social conscience). Starbucks could have used this as an opportunity to demonstrate real corporate leadership.
I do appreciate the fact that Starbucks isn’t instituting a ban on firearms in the store, but based on the tone of Mr. Schultz’s letter, it appears the chain is willing to do that if it believes its request has not been honored. To that end, I’ll honor Mr. Schultz’s request not to bring my legally carried firearm in his stores anymore. I’ll take my business to those stores who truly don’t care about my status as a gun owner but who see me as a valued customer.
- See more at: http://rare.us/story/why-im-done-with-starbucks-at-least-for-now/#sthash.Kqfr5u2z.dpuf

[MrPrena]

See... Dumb anti-gun people won't STOP after this either.
They will pressure NO GUN SIGN PERIOD. SBUX is a corporate, so whatever they want to do.

However, $$$$ talks. If SBUX consistently miss their same store sales rev, they will know why. Just look at stupid Dick's. LOL


GOOD ARTICLE from Mothley Fools.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/09/18/starbucks-takes-potshots-at-gun-owners.aspx



Starbucks Takes Potshots at Gun Owners

By Rich Duprey (http://my.fool.com/profile/tmfcop/info.aspx?source=iapsitlnk0000002) | More Articles (http://www.fool.com/author/1303/index.aspx?source=iapsitlnk0000003)
September 18, 2013 | Comments (3) (http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/09/18/starbucks-takes-potshots-at-gun-owners.aspx#commentsBoxAnchor)
Responsible gun owners are no longer welcome atStarbucks (NASDAQ: SBUX (http://caps.fool.com/Ticker/SBUX.aspx?source=isssitthv0000001) ) . CEO Howard Schultzpenned an open letter (http://www.starbucks.com/blog/an-open-letter-from-howard-schultz/1268) on the company blog saying he no longer wants responsible gun owners that are legally allowed to carry their weapons to come to his stores wearing them.
Criminals, of course, can and will still patronize the establishments while carrying a concealed weapon because they don't care about Starbucks' policy, Schultz's request, or the law, for that matter.
Concealed carry
The gun control debate is fractious to say the least, and the java slinger's policy until now has been to forbid the concealed carry of weapons in its stores in states where it is prohibited and allow them (http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2010/03/09/gunning-for-starbucks.aspx) in states where it's not. But because the stores have become political rallying points for both sides, Schultz says he wants gun owners to stay away while in possession of their guns. He's not outright banning them, however, because if one showed up in his store, he doesn't want his employees confronting an armed individual -- as if a gun owner is just going to shoot the employee because of it.
Presumably, though, Schultz isn't following the example of one Denny's (NASDAQ: DENN (http://caps.fool.com/Ticker/DENN.aspx?source=isssitthv0000001) ) restaurant that earlier this year forbade plainclothes detectives from the local police department from carrying their guns while eating. Although the company tried to placate the police afterward, saying it was a mistake and they welcome police officers in the restaurant, the chief banned both on- and off-duty personnel from dining there, noting "This policy effectively prohibits on-duty sworn police officers from dining in a Denny's Restaurant, but allows 'registered sex offenders,' 'felons' and/or 'pedophiles' to enjoy a dining experience in Denny's." Reuters does report that Starbucks exempts the police from its policy.
"Gun-spree zones"
Yet there's an interesting phenomenon developing around these mass shootings: They all seem to occur in so-called "gun-free zones." From the Aurora, Colo., theater shooting to the Newtown, Conn., school shootings, to even the Ft. Hood massacre and the shooting at the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C., the other day, these are all places that have strictly enforced and sometimes publicly touted, as in the case of the theater, a "no guns allowed" policy.
One would think because of the high profile Schultz attached to his memo, he's effectively announced all of his coffee shops are now "gun-free zones," too.
Shooting themselves in the foot
Some retailers have also responded to these tragedies with their own emotional reactions, oftentimes to their own detriment. Dick's Sporting Goods (NYSE: DKS (http://caps.fool.com/Ticker/DKS.aspx?source=isssitthv0000001) ) banned the sale of handguns and modern sporting rifles at its stores after the Sandy Hook shooting, only to miss out on one of the biggest jumps in gun sales that continues to today. It's trying to get around its own policies by opening up Field & Stream-branded stores (http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/03/13/dicks-to-open-field-stream-concept-store.aspx) that will sell those weapons.
Both Sturm, Ruger (NYSE: RGR (http://caps.fool.com/Ticker/RGR.aspx?source=isssitthv0000001) ) and Smith & Wesson Holdings (NASDAQ: SWHC (http://caps.fool.com/Ticker/SWHC.aspx?source=isssitthv0000001) ) enjoying unprecedented sales growth, and the FBI reports that criminal background checks, which are a precursor to buying a firearm, are running more than 20% ahead of last year, which was a record year itself. Ruger just opened its third manufacturing facility, marking the gunmaker's first major expansion (http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/07/09/sturm-ruger-expanding-manufacturing-capacity.aspx) in more than 25 years.
Starbucks, of course, has a right to enforce whatever policy it wants, and when one thinks about it, a coffee shop where people of all persuasions, political affiliations, and beliefs congregate isn't the best place to hash out these differences. As Schultz noted, gun policy is best left to legislators and the police, not its restaurants.
But a month after gun owners held a Starbucks Appreciation Day, the potshots this open letter represents is a fine thank-you to them.

[sellersm]

I like Cam Edwards take on this as well:

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz has penned an open letter to gun owners asking they no longer bring guns into stores. While the coffee chain won’t be officially banning guns from the store, Mr. Schultz says the stores have become part of the gun debate, and he doesn’t want Starbucks to play a role in the tug-of-war.
Says the CEO:
“For those who oppose open carry, we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion open carry, please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.”

With all due respect to Mr. Schultz, I’ve been unsettled and upset by some of the piercings I’ve seen on my local baristas. I’ve been unsettled and upset by the sight of a very large woman in very small yoga pants standing directly in front of me in line or the dude in spandex bicycle shorts for that matter. If your top speed is five miles an hour through the streets of Alexandria, VA, aerodynamics aren’t really one of your big concerns.
I understand that when I enter your store, I’ll likely be coming in contact with lots of folks who make different lifestyle choices than I do. It’s cool with me. But if you truly want folks to be respectful of others as citizens and neighbors, you might start by not asking gun owners to go quietly back into the closet as long as they’re in your stores.
I do understand what Schultz is trying to do. He’s tired of gun-control advocates protesting his stores but he also doesn’t want to alienate gun owners. He’d like the open-carry events at Starbucks to stop, he’d like the chain to get out of the spotlight in the gun-control debate and he’d like to keep selling lots of expensive coffee to gun lovers and haters alike. Unfortunately, you can’t always get what you want and, unless Starbucks wants to declare itself a place where politics is verboten, it shouldn’t run away when the debate leads to its doors.
I appreciate Mr. Schultz’s attempt to placate both sides, but again, with all due respect, I think that’s the wrong approach. The smart decision would have been to try and do what was in line with the values of Starbucks as a corporation. Starbucks says it has a commitment to the community rooted in “the belief that we can balance profitability and a social conscience”. A strong community is home to rigorous debate open to both sides. A commitment to the community, to our community, from a corporation that wants to serve a “social conscience” should at least champion free speech, even if it wants to stay neutral in the gun-control debate. And that’s what these open-carry events (and the anti-gun protests) are … political speech.
If I were Howard Schultz, I wouldn’t have tried to extricate my company from the debate. I would have instead embraced the chance to play a positive role. I would have invited local pro-gun and anti-gun activists inside to formally debate in Starbucks shops across the country on certain evenings, instead of demonstrating outside on a weekend. You get to sell coffee (profitability) and help start a conversation instead of a shouting match (social conscience). Starbucks could have used this as an opportunity to demonstrate real corporate leadership.
I do appreciate the fact that Starbucks isn’t instituting a ban on firearms in the store, but based on the tone of Mr. Schultz’s letter, it appears the chain is willing to do that if it believes its request has not been honored. To that end, I’ll honor Mr. Schultz’s request not to bring my legally carried firearm in his stores anymore. I’ll take my business to those stores who truly don’t care about my status as a gun owner but who see me as a valued customer.
- See more at: http://rare.us/story/why-im-done-with-starbucks-at-least-for-now/#sthash.Kqfr5u2z.dpuf

Nice.

[Ah Pook]

I don't shop at SB. Not because of any corporate stance on a divisive political issue but because I don't like their coffee. That being said, SB is a corporation interested in making a profit. Alienating customers isn't good business. They tried to walk a thin line and a few dumb-asses pushed them too far.

I've people open carry in my shop. No problem as long as it is no problem. If someone walks in with a rifle/shotgun slung over their shoulder, I would ask them to leave.


"Starbucks is anti-dumbass." Yup, that pretty much sums it up for me.
Yep.

[KAPA]

If you don't want people carrying weapons in plain sight, don't require them to, you should be allowed to put it in your pocket without Government going through your business and having to pay to exercise your right.

Why is it illegal to carry concealed anyway? Am I more dangerous when I go hiking to have a Glock in my backpack than if I have it hanging off my hip?

[3beansalad]

And another fine statement from Colion Noir


http://youtu.be/cYnT6mjSy84

[Squeeze]

And another fine statement from Colion Noir


http://youtu.be/cYnT6mjSy84

http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i445/TangoDownPro/AwesomeApplaud_zps285a16ff.gif (http://s1094.photobucket.com/user/TangoDownPro/media/AwesomeApplaud_zps285a16ff.gif.html)

Mr. Colion Noir is awesome. Well said indeed.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Why is it illegal to carry concealed anyway? Am I more dangerous when I go hiking to have a Glock in my backpack than if I have it hanging off my hip?

I believe the prohibition on concealed carry as opposed to open carry goes back to the Old West days. People didn't have an issue with guns when they could see them -- what they worried about were the guys who had pocket pistols. Our society is bass-ackwards these days. In the immortal words of the Joker,


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKofnVkUwBA

[brutal]

http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i445/TangoDownPro/AwesomeApplaud_zps285a16ff.gif (http://s1094.photobucket.com/user/TangoDownPro/media/AwesomeApplaud_zps285a16ff.gif.html)

Mr. Colion Noir is awesome. Well said indeed.

I can only take so much of him. He often makes good points, but he's a bit of a whiny bitch.

[SuperiorDG]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYnT6mjSy84#t=60

Tap

[SuperiorDG]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYnT6mjSy84#t=60

Yea double tap

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

If I were Howard Schultz, I wouldn’t have tried to extricate my company from the debate. I would have instead embraced the chance to play a positive role. I would have invited local pro-gun and anti-gun activists inside to formally debate in Starbucks shops across the country on certain evenings, instead of demonstrating outside on a weekend. You get to sell coffee (profitability) and help start a conversation instead of a shouting match (social conscience). Starbucks could have used this as an opportunity to demonstrate real corporate leadership.

Anyone here really think this wouldn't turn into a shouting match?
I don't frequent SBUX much, but I did when I was doing school at night and studying all the time. I wouldn't have wanted debates in any form (do you?), I just want my coffee and to read in peace.

[hatidua]

I walked into a Starbucks this morning with my wife in Boulder. I didn't see any signs relating to guns in any way.

[Bailey Guns]

Well said indeed.

If by "well said" you mean "full of analogies that don't work", I agree.

[spqrzilla]

I walked into a Starbucks this morning with my wife in Boulder. I didn't see any signs relating to guns in any way.
That's because Howard Schulz' letter specifically said that they wouldn't put up signs. And that their workers would not attempt to enforce any policy.

[Whistler]

Straddling the fence doesn't work for me, grow a pair and pick a side, sounds like they have.

[mtnhack]

http://www.delish.com/food/recalls-reviews/chick-fil-a-guns-coffee-event


The national gun debate, with regards to eatery policies, continues after Starbucks asked patrons to no longer bring guns to its locations last week. According to The Times-Picayune (http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/09/chick-fil-a_guns_louisiana.html), state representative Jeff Thompson recently held a pro gun event called "Guns and Coffee" at a local Louisiana Chick-fil-A in response to the controversial Starbucks decision.
Despite the fact that Chick-fil-A allows guns based on area laws, the chain, which often tends to get involved in political matters, says that it was not an official host and did not sponsor the event. "Chick-fil-A is not sponsoring an event associated with this cause" stated Communications Vice President Carrie Kurlander. "People gather in our restaurants every day for food and hospitality (but) it's our policy not to host political events," a Chick-fil-A representative explained. Apparently the owner of the Bossier City location where the event was held even asked Thompson to move his "Coffee and Guns" meet-up elsewhere.


Apparently other businesses do not care to be used in politico posturing.