Well i just read the article and i think that Howard Schultz needs to reconsider his position on not letting Law abiding Gun Ocing citizens carry in the stores while enjoying coffee and such..
Why would you or ANYONE want to be "security" for a business that is (being anti-gun) against what you stand for? And why would you want to spend your money there making the owner richer, and even possibly putting your life on the line -- if a crimes takes place while you're there (and you intervene) -- for an anti-gun corporation? And do all of this for FREE?
Besides, by the time one has arrived at one's political orientation (let's say conservative or liberal to keep the example simple) -- especially deciding on one or the other road as an older adult and after living life and giving it all much thought -- one is probably NEVER going to change, as one believes he/she has finally found the "truth." So even if CEO Shultz DID change his policy, he still would remain anti-gun, yes?
So why EVER patronize a Starbucks in the future, regardless of any future policy change?
Once this "We'll still serve you gun-people but we'd rather not" policy was stated, I have not gone back (I used to OC at 2 of them here in the NE part of 'The Springs') -- and even decided against going anyway but carrying concealed (so "no one would know"), like some OCers are doing. And when I found out his liberal stance on OTHER issues, that pretty much nailed it. At least for ME: I will never go to a Starbucks again. Ever. At least as long as it's owned by a anti-gun liberal with a corporate/boardroom anti-gun environment.
So personally, I don't care if he DOES change his policy although I think it'd take a WHOLE LOT of such robberies before he changed anything. I mean weren't 2 Starbucks employees killed back in 1997 in DC? And IIRC, there've been other instances of violence outside various Starbucks if not in them. Any changes made to store security after the 1997 murders? No...but he's just like all the other businesses and even public schools: They refuse to hire armed security to protect employees and customers, yet also refuse to let employees and customers have the means (tools) to protect themselves. And no one sues them for their criminal negligence, and the businesses & schools get away scott-free after every "tragic" incident. As they have for decades now every time this has happened. Same will be true for the next incident, and the one after that, and the more to come after those.
Whatever, since Shultz has already been outed (in more ways than his position on armed citizens) for the through-and through flaming liberal he is, so let him and his business be.
Forget Starbucks and move on...