Starbucks no longer allow customers with guns

[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 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/

OUR OWN WORST ENEMY

Posted on September 18, 2013 by MAC

Back in August I posted an article about the “Starbucks Appreciation Day” event which I titled “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 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” will be used to make the new policy widely known.
The Starbucks CEO outlined their new corporate policy in a blog post 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 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...ears-liberals/

[ChunkyMonkey]

(emphasis mine)

http://freebeacon.com/blog/starbucks...ears-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.

[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