• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Starbuck wants out of the middle........

Medic1210

Medic1210

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
298
Location
Rockingham, NC
marshaul said:
I got it. ;)
Click to expand...

I guess I didn't. Usually sarcasm is saying something that isn't realistic, not the other way around.

At any rate, my comment stands. But you guys are free to prove me wrong the next time a business gives a neither for nor against response regarding OC. You can rest assured the anti gun crowd has taken this as a huge victory, and will be pressuring another business into following suit with Starbucks. When that happens, you guys that can't seem to see the forest for all the trees, please make sure you organize as many OC events as you can to really show the anti crowd they just got lucky this time.
 
Last edited:
P

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
Medic1210 said:
Is anybody even remotely surprised at this outcome? This is a perfect example of how we can be our worst enemy sometimes. It has been clear to anybody with even half a brain, that Starbucks wasn't pro gun, but rather chose to remain neutral on the matter and simply stick to their policy of following local law. When you have the CEO making comments urging those who oppose guns to work with their congressmen to change the law, that should be a pretty obvious sign that they don't care for the practice. Not once has he ever alluded to being a proponent of the second amendment. But hey, he didn't say they were banning guns, so what did we do? We acted like the company gave us their seal of approval, and decided to rub our perceived gun rights victory in the faces of all those who didn't feel the same as us. Instead of just going about our lives, enjoying the right to carry on an individual basis, we decided to act like a bunch of assclowns, organizing gatherings and showing up looking like we were armed for combat. Or we tried organizing a "Starbucks Appreciation Day" at the Starbucks in Newtown only months after the shooting. As if we hadn't thumbed our noses at the antis enough, let's get a bunch of assclowns to all show up openly armed at the Starbucks in a town that is still trying to heal from a major gun tragedy. That's as insensitive as the Muslims wanting to build a huge mosque right beside ground zero. Starbucks never wanted to become a platform for gun rights, yet we acted like they were our biggest supporters, and that clearly wasn't the case. So we forced them to take a public position that they never wanted to take, and surprise surprise, turns out they don't really care for the open carry practice after all. So instead of taking the high road with our perceived gun rights victory, we backed Starbucks further into a corner, and gave a real huge victory for the anti-gun crowd. We were the best players on their team. We have nobody to thank but ourselves.

Same thing with these clowns who walk around with rifles slung over their shoulder and handguns on their side, with cameras rolling just so they'll have a video to post to YouTube when the cops come and harass them. You think that helps our cause? Heck no. It causes folks who didn't realize it was legal to suddenly decide to work toward changing the law. Can you say California?

Look, I am all for open carry. I do it on occasion, but tend to prefer blending in rather than sticking out, so I conceal more often than not. About the only time I OC now is when I'm riding my bicycle since it's much easier to use a paddle holster than an IWB in a biking pant. While it's legal for me to do it, would I go out with dual under arm holsters, a belt holster, thigh rig, and 17 mag carriers strapped around my waist? Hell no. Why would I want to draw that sort of attention to myself? This is how I feel when I see folks "supporting Starbucks" with a freaking AR15 on their back. Is it legal for them to do that? Yeah. Is it helping our cause by doing that? I think that answer is quite obvious now. I gotta say, I really wouldn't feel very comfortable seeing some guy walk into a Starbucks dressed like that either.
Click to expand...

I *totally* agree. We (some of us) were our own worst enemy vis a vis Starbux and they are not to blame for their reaction, imnsho. Those who tried to put Starbux at the epicenter of the gun debate are entirely responsible for pushing Starbux into this position. They simply want to sell product, not get placed on a pedestal as a representative of the pro-RKBA position. Their desire was to remain neutral and go with state law, and then people tried to make it into something much more and appropriate starbux as a symbol for our side. Bad move. I empathize with their situation and think their decision, given how people acted, is entirely understandable, and reasonable.

I don't go to Starbux anyway, so even if I agreed with the boycott, it would make no difference to me, since I don't go there
 
Jamesm760

Jamesm760

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
429
Location
Salisbury, NC
MAC702 said:
Are you agreeing or disagreeing that there is a significant difference in handgun OC v. long gun OC? I want to assume you meant the long gun OC.
Click to expand...

Yes I was talking about long guns. Specially when they are trying to pose for some charlie's angels type picture... Stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top