• 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.

Starbucks Doesn't want to get Caught in the Middle

SouthBayr

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2009
Messages
108
Location
San Jose, California, USA
imported post

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20100303/US.Starbucks.Guns/

SEATTLE — Coffee chain Starbucks Corp. is sticking to its policy of letting customers carry guns where it's legal and said it does not want to be put in the middle of a larger gun-control debate.

The company's statement, issued Wednesday, stems from recent campaign by some gun owners, who have walked into Starbucks and other businesses to test state laws that allow gun owners to carry weapons openly in public places. Gun control advocates have protested.

The fight began heating up in January in Northern California and has since spread to other states and other companies, bolstered by the pro-gun group OpenCarry.org.

Some of the events were spontaneous, with just one or two gun owners walking into a store. Others were organized parades of dozens of gun owners walking into restaurants with their firearms proudly at their sides.

Now, gun control advocates are protesting the policy. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, launched a petition drive demanding that the company "offer espresso shots, not gunshots" and declare its coffeehouses "gun-free zones." And Wednesday, that group planned to deliver 28,000 signatures to the coffee giant's headquarters in Seattle.

The group also held a press conference near Seattle's Pike Place Market, just a few yards away from where the first Starbucks cafe opened. Gun rights advocates showed up as well, some carrying handguns in holsters around their waists.

Brian Malte of the Brady Campaign said carrying guns intimidates and frightens people, and said the group thinks Starbucks will "do the right thing" and change its policy.

"They're putting their workers in harm's way by allowing people to carry guns into their stores, especially open carry," Malte said.

More than a dozen pro-gun supporters, some with Starbucks coffee cups in hand, chanted during the press conference, at points interrupting speakers.

"I think the (Brady campaign is) trying to strong-arm private businesses into banning the rights of the people," said Bev Carman of Everett, Wash. Carman held a sign that said: "Criminal Control not Gun Control."

Businesses can choose to ban guns from their premises. And Starbucks said Wednesday that it complies with local laws in the 43 states that have open-carry weapon laws.

"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," the company said in its statement.

It said security measures are in place for any "threatening situation" that might occur in stores.

Starbucks asked both gun enthusiasts and gun-control advocates "to refrain from putting Starbucks or our partners into the middle of this divisive issue."

Starbucks shares rose a penny to $23.34 in midday trading Wednesday.
 

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
imported post

I know the natural inclination of some might be to reccomend a complete withdrawl in regards to this new press release, however I would point out that this is Starbucks telling not just OC advocates but also the Brady Campaign NOT to use their business as a battlezone. This reassertion of their policy has made the Brady Campaign if not impotent, made them out to be the annoying pests that they reallyare.
 

OPS MARINE

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2008
Messages
391
Location
, California, USA
imported post

ConditionThree is right on in that statement. The Bradys have pretty much rendered themselves inert when it comes to this particular issue. I will continue to patronize Starbucks.
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

SouthBayr wrote:
...

"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," the company said in its statement.

...
"unsafe position" sounds to me like they're recognizing that their stores are more safe with gunowners patronizing them. Maybe I'm reading more into it than was intended, but I'm going to give them my business either way.

In the last 14 months I've had 4 servings of Starbucks; all of them since all this started. They've earned my business.
 

Livermoron

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
228
Location
Livermore, California, USA
imported post

Hi Group,

it might be a good time to consider doing only smaller meetups and individual patronage of Starbucks. We don't want to wear out our welcome :-D . The Anti's have lost already...

Carry On,

Livermoron :cool:
 

hammerhands32

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
19
Location
Orangevale, California, USA
imported post

Livermoron wrote:
Hi Group,

it might be a good time to consider doing only smaller meetups and individual patronage of Starbucks. We don't want to wear out our welcome :-D . The Anti's have lost already...

Carry On,

Livermoron :cool:
Excellent idea, sounds like geurilla warfare
 

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

I'm an sbux adict! I'm there daily and I like them even more with this statement. We need to play our cards right here. If we back off too much Brady will move hard, if we come too strong sbux might say "enough of this, no more guns."

Moron is right, show support, but not in mass numbers at once.

Sbux supports american rights and understands that while bad situations may happen, law abiding gun owners don't cause them.

There is loud 80's pop happening downstairs, I'm going to investigate... Good stuff happening for the 2a... Carry on!
 

Captain_Awesome

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
60
Location
Fresno, California, USA
imported post

Pretty impressive. With almost 70,000 votes too.

it might be a good time to consider doing only smaller meetups and individual patronage of Starbucks. We don't want to wear out our welcome :-D . The Anti's have lost already...

Carry On,

Livermoron

I agree. I don't think large demonstrations are really a good idea anywhere where it may have an undesirable result for the business owner. Some places like it or encourage it, and by all means, the more UOCers the better. But other large gatherings should otherwise probably be kept to public places. The way I see it, we're trying to positively affect public opinion, not prove a point. Thats my opinion , at least.

CA_Libertarian
"unsafe position" sounds to me like they're recognizing that their stores are more safe with gunowners patronizing them. Maybe I'm reading more into it than was intended, but I'm going to give them my business either way.
It's either that, or they think the OCers will shoot them. Seems your interpretation is probably more likely.
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

FoxNews' Megyn Kelly did a report on this story.

http://video.foxnews.com/#/v/4070916/starbucks-vs-gun-control-advocates/?playlist_id=87249


ETA: To the lady in the video who doesn't know what she's supposed to say to her kid...read the Constitution, and tell your kid its' every American's birthright to be able todefend oneself from an attacker or predator. Its called the right to keep and bear arms and its why we have all the freedoms and liberties that we do, its what makes this country the greatest on the planet. Is that so hard?
 
Top