Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: A pretty good opinion piece on the Starbucks debacle

  1. #1
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142

    A pretty good opinion piece on the Starbucks debacle

    http://pistol-training.com/archives/8604

    This was a short read and pretty much echoed what a lot of people in here were saying. I know we already posted the news articles on the story but this is the first opinion piece I've seen.
    Last edited by bebop4one; 09-23-2013 at 03:50 PM.
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    This was a short read and pretty much echoed what a lot of people in here were saying..
    "Echoed" that's euphemism for derivative and a good reason NOT to read it.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Logan 5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    690
    Pretty much. Same babble. But in the end it's correct. Open carrying a muzzle loader has got to be the stupidest stunt I've seen yet. And honestly, same with an M4 or AR15 or even a shotgun. But if that's what turns you on, go for it. Just don't be surprised or have a hissy fit when asked to leave a business over it.
    Lifetime member, Gun Owners of America (http://gunowners.org/)
    Lifetime member, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (http://jpfo.org/)
    Member, Fraternal Order of Eagles since 8/02 (http://www.foe.com/)

    Registering gun owners to prevent crime, is like registering Jews to prevent a HOLOCAUST.

    I am not a lawyer in real life, or in play life. So anything I say is for debate and discussion only.

  4. #4
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan 5 View Post
    Pretty much. Same babble. But in the end it's correct. Open carrying a muzzle loader has got to be the stupidest stunt I've seen yet. And honestly, same with an M4 or AR15 or even a shotgun. But if that's what turns you on, go for it. Just don't be surprised or have a hissy fit when asked to leave a business over it.
    I'm amazed at the picture of the guy holding his shotgun in his hands while posing for the camera INSIDE Starbucks!
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  5. #5
    Regular Member fire suppressor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Kitsap County
    Posts
    872
    Not a bad article overall but I did think it had kind of a anti open carry sound overall. I would have liked the frustration targeted a little more to a few select people not all of us in general
    "Fight like you train, train like you fight"

  6. #6
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,990
    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    I'm amazed at the picture of the guy holding his shotgun in his hands while posing for the camera INSIDE Starbucks!
    Soldier in Kuwait:
    "shotgun photo from thenewcivilrightsmovement.com (edited to add: per the shotgun-wielding gentleman in the photo above via practicaltacticalpodcast.com via Tam, that particular Starbucks is in fact in Kuwait circa 2005 so no harm no foul, buddy, but thanks for giving me a photo to riff off of)"
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  7. #7
    Regular Member Alpine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mercer Island
    Posts
    661
    Yet again, the BOHICAs among us are raising their heads in order to bow down as much as possible.

    If that were really the problem, Starbucks could simply have said "please don't bring LONG GUNS into stores."


    The reality is this, whenever you have a group of people that engage in a behavior, there will always be some who push the envelop and do things that others consider "extreme."

    Society has cars, some people driving giant trucks or tank-like vehicles, and they like to flaunt it.

    People flaunt hair dies, big tattoos, etc. It's their right in a free society. And businesses that don't like it can say things about dress codes, available parking space sizes etc.

    However, before all of you fall over yourselves to blame the "OC" community or say "we did this to ourselves" remember this, the gun grabbers who pushed Starbucks want all guns banned, not just OCing long guns in public. So don't rush to bow and scrape and accommodate anti-gun forces, because they are not acting in good faith anyway.

    Devil's Advocate(I don't necessarily believe this but it's possible): It's possible that if it hadn't been for those "extreme" OCers pushing the SB Appreciation days, this "soft-ban might have been a hard ban. Consider that.
    Last edited by Alpine; 09-23-2013 at 10:21 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member 509rifas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Yakima County
    Posts
    253
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpine View Post
    Yet again, the BOHICAs among us are raising their heads in order to bow down as much as possible.

    If that were really the problem, Starbucks could simply have said "please don't bring LONG GUNS into stores."


    The reality is this, whenever you have a group of people that engage in a behavior, there will always be some who push the envelop and do things that others consider "extreme."

    Society has cars, some people driving giant trucks or tank-like vehicles, and they like to flaunt it.

    People flaunt hair dies, big tattoos, etc. It's their right in a free society. And businesses that don't like it can say things about dress codes, available parking space sizes etc.

    However, before all of you fall over yourselves to blame the "OC" community or say "we did this to ourselves" remember this, the gun grabbers who pushed Starbucks want all guns banned, not just OCing long guns in public. So don't rush to bow and scrape and accommodate anti-gun forces, because they are not acting in good faith anyway.

    Devil's Advocate(I don't necessarily believe this but it's possible): It's possible that if it hadn't been for those "extreme" OCers pushing the SB Appreciation days, this "soft-ban might have been a hard ban. Consider that.
    Two things.
    One, to the public, the people that show up with M4s have found their way to the forefront ad have become the public personification of the OC community, despite this site unendorsing long gun carry.

    To the general public, those that "took it too far" are the OC community.

    Second, people here aren't saying "we did it to ourselves." Personally, I believe those that showed up with long guns looking for confrontation with anti-constitutionalists did it to us by creating a situation that Starbucks didn't want in their stores.
    They were nice to us all those years, but certain people decided to use their store as their soapbox, and Starbucks got tired of it.

    I don't think they would have switched to hard ban if people didn't do Starbucks appreciation day. Hell, they even said they didn't want those events, but people did it anyway.
    LIVE FREE OR DIE TRYING

  9. #9
    Regular Member Alpine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mercer Island
    Posts
    661
    They were nice to us all those years, but certain people decided to use their store as their soapbox, and Starbucks got tired of it.

    I don't think they would have switched to hard ban if people didn't do Starbucks appreciation day. Hell, they even said they didn't want those events, but people did it anyway.
    They were "nice to us" because we gave them money and they wanted our business...

    But given Schultz's outspoken liberal views, as well as SB's reputation for being a "progressive company" I think if it hadn't been for such major pushes from even these long gun people SB would have banned guns long ago.

  10. #10
    Regular Member 509rifas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Yakima County
    Posts
    253
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpine View Post
    They were "nice to us" because we gave them money and they wanted our business...

    But given Schultz's outspoken liberal views, as well as SB's reputation for being a "progressive company" I think if it hadn't been for such major pushes from even these long gun people SB would have banned guns long ago.
    So then what made the difference? The long gun people spending money there prevented a hard ban?
    These people are business people. Their interest is money. They determined that guns at Starbucks were bad for business. I don't see how you can claim that those with long guns brought in so much business that Starbucks wanted to keep them around until the CEOs liberal views eventually won over his company.
    When you're talking billion dollar companies, I don't think politics comes much into play, at all. They need to make money. They will make any decision that will increase profits. If they determine that banning carry will help their profit margin more than hurt it, they will, and they have that right.
    The role we play is what we do that will influence that decision. Making any business a battleground between pro and anti-constitutionalists is bad for business. It was a calculated decision on their part.
    That is why I don't encourage either long gun carry or making any particular place a target of the anti-constitutionalists. If you wanna OC to exercise that right, just go out and do what you do and OC. Don't focus on any place. Make it normal to see a normal citizen exercizing their rights anywhere, not just at some meetup time. How are you helping or even doing anything yourself if you only do it as some group thing?
    LIVE FREE OR DIE TRYING

  11. #11
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    This whole Starbucks thing is BS.

    1) "We" didn't "do this to ourselves", nor did the long gun carriers. The anti gun hopolophobes and the anti gun CEO of Starbucks did this.

    2) Just what is "this" to us? It's NOTHING. Starbucks has come down with a (not very) "respectful request" BUT has also stated on the record and quite publicly that they WILL NOT ask us to leave and THEY WILL serve us. So what have they done? They've attempted to appease the hopolophobes as much as possible while offending the gun owners as little as possible (that's called a business decision). They've tried to straddle the fence (again) just like with their "abide by state law" stance. Personally, the "abide by state law" stance is fine as it basically says that they're willing to serve any law abiding citizen, armed or not. The new stance is not acceptable.

    So what do I plan to do? Carry on! Until and unless they trespass me I will continue to go into their stores from time to time. Usually I'll be armed with a pistol, occasionally I'll be armed with a long gun. Considering their very public policy statement, I expect to be served and not trespassed.

    If that causes them to change their stance to an outright ban I say FINE. It's always nice to know who the enemy is.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  12. #12
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    This whole Starbucks thing is BS.

    1) "We" didn't "do this to ourselves", nor did the long gun carriers. The anti gun hopolophobes and the anti gun CEO of Starbucks did this.

    2) Just what is "this" to us? It's NOTHING. Starbucks has come down with a (not very) "respectful request" BUT has also stated on the record and quite publicly that they WILL NOT ask us to leave and THEY WILL serve us. So what have they done? They've attempted to appease the hopolophobes as much as possible while offending the gun owners as little as possible (that's called a business decision). They've tried to straddle the fence (again) just like with their "abide by state law" stance. Personally, the "abide by state law" stance is fine as it basically says that they're willing to serve any law abiding citizen, armed or not. The new stance is not acceptable.

    So what do I plan to do? Carry on! Until and unless they trespass me I will continue to go into their stores from time to time. Usually I'll be armed with a pistol, occasionally I'll be armed with a long gun. Considering their very public policy statement, I expect to be served and not trespassed.

    If that causes them to change their stance to an outright ban I say FINE. It's always nice to know who the enemy is.
    The long gun carriers standing in starbucks brandishing their weapons did do this... I doubt much would have been said if they would have kept them slung over their shoulder not touching them. They gave the hopolphobes ammo against us that they would not have had otherwise.
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •