Starbucks

imported post

We've all seen the fuss in the media lately about Starbucks. I'm just curious if they deserve to have the spotlight all to themselves. The vast majority of major corporations value money over political statements, and will happily accept that money from any customer whatsoever. Did Starbucks do something above and beyond to welcome gun owners, or has the media simply focused on them to the exclusion of all the other gun friendly businesses?

imported post

In answer to your question, what happened is that a large group of Open Carry advocates in the SF Bay area met at Peet's Coffee and Tea. The antis found out and convinced Peet's to ban guns from the premises. So our brethren went to California Pizza Kitchen with the same results.

Finally, the group made it to Starbucks, who responded to the Brady Campaign's request to ban guns by issuing a statement that said "We will follow state law on this issue." The Brady's didn't like that, so they've been crying and moaning and protesting ever since.

What it comes down to is that Starbucks didn't back down.

Now, sit down, shut up, and let me buy you a latte.:lol::lol::lol:

imported post

I wonder whose water is his 'freight', whose "water he is carrying."

imported post

Welcome to OCDO. Great question. Bookman answered it well.

The antis griping is what made this a story. That was a PR mistake for them and a boon for us. Thanks, guys!

Oh, and ignore the drive-by. Until and unless you demonstrate otherwise, it would be rude to assume that you came here with anyone else's agenda.

imported post

Welcome to the site.

At times Doug has had some interesting insights and comments. Unfortunately, the last was not one of them.

As to your question. I think that the media is notgiving Starbucks the attention as much,justthe other side. Starbucks just happens to take a stand that's not politically correct as the media would like.

-R

imported post

rdinatal wrote:

At times Doug has had some interesting insights and comments. Unfortunately, the last was not one of them.


-R

Click to expand...

He was questioning the motives and intentions of the OP.

Anybody that wishes to benefit from our POV can easily use goggle or the search function here. We've pretty much all agreed that this issue is a dead horse.

Move on - nothing to see here.

Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

rdinatal wrote:

At times Doug has had some interesting insights and comments. Unfortunately, the last was not one of them.


-R

Click to expand...

He was questioning the motives and intentions of the OP.

Anybody that wishes to benefit from our POV can easily use goggle or the search function here. We've pretty much all agreed that this issue is a dead horse.

Move on - nothing to see here.

Yata hey

Click to expand...

Grapeshot; I disagree.

Doug did not question, all he did was post a quick remark. IMO, thoughtless...

No one agreed on anything, let alone the purpose of the OP. Where did the 'all' come from?

-R

imported post

Thanks for the replies. I knew it had started in California, but I didn't know the details. I wasn't intending to diss Starbucks in any way, just curious how they wound up in the headlines, given that I only know of a couple of big corporations which ban guns nationwide.

imported post

Iordered the T-shirt and moved on. Nothing to see here.

imported post

Freightdog wrote:

Thanks for the replies. I knew it had started in California, but I didn't know the details. I wasn't intending to diss Starbucks in any way, just curious how they wound up in the headlines, given that I only know of a couple of big corporations which ban guns nationwide.

Click to expand...

Starbucks has gone a step further than many companies which just follow the local law. Whether they intended to or not is open to speculation, but the main effect of the Brady campaign's effortwas to push Starbucks into a widely-distributed public pronouncement of their policy. This makes it difficult for a manager or employee to trespass you or mount their own campaign against guns at the store level. Contrast that to Walmart or Best Buy which also follow locallaws butare occasionally cited hereforrefusing service based upon a customer complaint or manager's judgement. Since Starbucks has effectively announced we are welcome, it will be an interesting test when the first OC customer is trespassed and refused service by an employee.

If only Walmart, Best Buy, Denny's, Barnes & Noble, Fuddrucker's,Macy'sand others would announce this as strongly we would have a much more favorable environment for enjoying our coffee and pastries, meals, shopping, etc.

imported post

ecocks wrote:

Freightdog wrote:

Thanks for the replies. I knew it had started in California, but I didn't know the details. I wasn't intending to diss Starbucks in any way, just curious how they wound up in the headlines, given that I only know of a couple of big corporations which ban guns nationwide.

Click to expand...

Starbucks has gone a step further than many companies which just follow the local law. Whether they intended to or not is open to speculation, but the main effect of the Brady campaign's effortwas to push Starbucks into a widely-distributed public pronouncement of their policy. This makes it difficult for a manager or employee to trespass you or mount their own campaign against guns at the store level. Contrast that to Walmart or Best Buy which also follow locallaws butare occasionally cited hereforrefusing service based upon a customer complaint or manager's judgement. Since Starbucks has effectively announced we are welcome, it will be an interesting test when the first OC customer is trespassed and refused service by an employee.

If only Walmart, Best Buy, Denny's, Barnes & Noble, Fuddrucker's,Macy'sand others would announce this as strongly we would have a much more favorable environment for enjoying our coffee and pastries, meals, shopping, etc.

Click to expand...

And if more businesses would follow Starbucks' lead the Bradyites, and their ilk, would disappear in a cloud of disgruntled disappointed powerless self pity.