Just got told by a patron at Starbucks that I should leave...while in uniform.

Been really busy lately and haven't posted in a while but thought this was worth mentioning. Just got told by a patron at the Starbucks in Green firs University Place that I shouldn't be in there carrying a gun because Starbucks banned it. I informed her that they in fact requested that people not carry guns and that they would serve them anyway. This was echoed by the barista who was happy to give me my 20 ounces of caramel goodness...the woman said I was making her and several other herbivores uncomfortable. She then marched off upset that her hoplophobic rantings were quickly squashed. I was in there for my usual preshift coffee, in uniform. University place is full of people scared of their own shadows with very few exceptions. I prefer to keep my employer out of this forum so please don't ask who I work for.

sempercarry said:

in uniform.

Click to expand...

If you are LEO, then it's nice to see you treated like a normal citizen (which you are).

You work at a gay sex shop?

That is a scary pic - perhaps if you had your sidearm stenciled in a soothing earth tone design, and have a button saying you use recycled lead and resmelted copper bullets, loaded an earth-friendly biodegradable powder, it would put them more at ease as they drank sumatran coffee beans flown over daily from Indonesia on the biggest, smokiest, old Aeroflot repurposed kerosene belching cargo jet.

HPmatt said:

That is a scary pic - perhaps if you had your sidearm stenciled in a soothing earth tone design, and have a button saying you use recycled lead and resmelted copper bullets, loaded an earth-friendly biodegradable powder, it would put them more at ease as they drank sumatran coffee beans flown over daily from Indonesia on the biggest, smokiest, old Aeroflot repurposed kerosene belching cargo jet.

Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol::monkey

sempercarry said:

Been really busy lately and haven't posted in a while but thought this was worth mentioning. Just got told by a patron at the Starbucks in Green firs University Place that I shouldn't be in there carrying a gun because Starbucks banned it. I informed her that they in fact requested that people not carry guns and that they would serve them anyway. This was echoed by the barista who was happy to give me my 20 ounces of caramel goodness...the woman said I was making her and several other herbivores uncomfortable. She then marched off upset that her hoplophobic rantings were quickly squashed. I was in there for my usual preshift coffee, in uniform. University place is full of people scared of their own shadows with very few exceptions. I prefer to keep my employer out of this forum so please don't ask who I work for.

Click to expand...

Quick question, is that Starbucks on the campus you work at? I'm assuming it isn't.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Tell her that an irrational fear of an inanimate objects is covered by Obamacare.

I think she's trying to make a point. Just because you have a badge doesn't make you any better than the rest of the lemmings.
I'm not saying that is your attitude, I mean dude you could be the greatest most awesome dude on all the Earth, but she's still trying to make a point.

If I recall correctly, Starbuck's has a "no guns" policy.

Whether they enforce it or not is a completely separate question. As private actors, you should be respecting their wishes...not to mention the fact that a responding officer familiar with their policy could establish that YOU are familiar with the policy (the barista said it to you) and acted in violation of it (by staying).

You're treading a fine line. You should respect the wishes of a business owner.

At the very least, leave and never buy from Starbuck's again.

sempercarry said:

Been really busy lately and haven't posted in a while but thought this was worth mentioning. Just got told by a patron at the Starbucks in Green firs University Place that I shouldn't be in there carrying a gun because Starbucks banned it. I informed her that they in fact requested that people not carry guns and that they would serve them anyway. This was echoed by the barista who was happy to give me my 20 ounces of caramel goodness...the woman said I was making her and several other herbivores uncomfortable. She then marched off upset that her hoplophobic rantings were quickly squashed. I was in there for my usual preshift coffee, in uniform. University place is full of people scared of their own shadows with very few exceptions. I prefer to keep my employer out of this forum so please don't ask who I work for.

Click to expand...

Quite unexpected that this person would say this to someone in uniform. smh

Sent from an app instead of a browser simply because browsers on mobile devices are incapable of basic usability by design so that people can sell apps.

CT Barfly said:

If I recall correctly, Starbuck's has a "no guns" policy.

Whether they enforce it or not is a completely separate question. As private actors, you should be respecting their wishes...not to mention the fact that a responding officer familiar with their policy could establish that YOU are familiar with the policy (the barista said it to you) and acted in violation of it (by staying).

You're treading a fine line. You should respect the wishes of a business owner.

At the very least, leave and never buy from Starbuck's again.

Click to expand...

He said another customer told him "no guns" , not an employee. Then when he told that fellow customer that there isn't a no guns policy, the employee backed him up on that and still served him.

The staff of the place are ok with it, some of the patrons seen to not be. So here's a chance CE to go back today.,.. and tomorrow.... etc.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Primus said:

He said another customer told him "no guns" , not an employee. Then when he told that fellow customer that there isn't a no guns policy, the employee backed him up on that and still served him.

The staff of the place are ok with it, some of the patrons seen to not be. So here's a chance CE to go back today.,.. and tomorrow.... etc.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Right. Everybody has their priorities and goals, though.


Lib Sumatran coffee drinkers = Desire to not think about firearms

Our uniformed friend = Drink Starbucks coffee

The barista = Have a normal day and serve a legit seeming guy in uniform his coffee

The general population of OCDO = Never do business with anywhere that is antigun, even if it is not illegal to carry there and even if you haven't been asked to leave

Me = I don't always take a hard line with avoiding businesses that are antigun. I try to avoid them, but sometimes it just isn't practical. In a perfect world, I could always find a way to do business with someone else, but it doesn't always work out that way so I am not as purist as some, in this regard. For instance, if there was a hospital that was not posted with legally binding signage and I had a family member who needed emergency care, I wouldn't avoid the hospital. I would just conceal.




Sent from an app instead of a browser simply because browsers on mobile devices are incapable of basic usability by design so that people can sell apps.

Primus said:

He said another customer told him "no guns" , not an employee. Then when he told that fellow customer that there isn't a no guns policy, the employee backed him up on that and still served him.

The staff of the place are ok with it, some of the patrons seen to not be. So here's a chance CE to go back today.,.. and tomorrow.... etc.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Uhm...that's not what I read.

I believe the employee said "no-guns" but that he would still be served. Starbuck's new non-policy-policy attempted to try and split the difference. They've publicly requested "no guns" but said they would not enforce the policy by refusing service or asking people to leave.

Whether it is enforced or not, it is still a "no guns" policy.

The fact of the matter is that no gun-toting person can say they are "welcome" in Starbuck's.

sempercarry said:

Been really busy lately and haven't posted in a while but thought this was worth mentioning. Just got told by a patron at the Starbucks in Green firs University Place that I shouldn't be in there carrying a gun because Starbucks banned it. I informed her that they in fact requested that people not carry guns and that they would serve them anyway. This was echoed by the barista who was happy to give me my 20 ounces of caramel goodness...the woman said I was making her and several other herbivores uncomfortable. She then marched off upset that her hoplophobic rantings were quickly squashed. I was in there for my usual preshift coffee, in uniform. University place is full of people scared of their own shadows with very few exceptions. I prefer to keep my employer out of this forum so please don't ask who I work for.

Click to expand...

CT Barfly said:

Uhm...that's not what I read.

I believe the employee said "no-guns" but that he would still be served. Starbuck's new non-policy-policy attempted to try and split the difference. They've publicly requested "no guns" but said they would not enforce the policy by refusing service or asking people to leave.

Whether it is enforced or not, it is still a "no guns" policy.

The fact of the matter is that no gun-toting person can say they are "welcome" in Starbuck's.

Click to expand...

Read the OP (above), CT. The OP clearly states that "a patron" said he shouldn't be carrying in Starbucks. Upon explaining the actual Starbuck's statement, the Barista agreed with the OP (echoed his comment). The actual effect of the Starbuck's CEO's statement "requesting" that no one openly carry in their stores has had little effect, and it certainly has not created an attitude of being unwelcome in their stores. No "no guns" policy exists, just a preference for concealed carry, and the CEO's statement specifically states that open carriers will not be denied service.

Each of us must make the individual decision whether to patronize Starbuck's or not, but we should not mis-characterize their position.

JamesCanby said:

Read the OP (above), CT. The OP clearly states that "a patron" said he shouldn't be carrying in Starbucks. Upon explaining the actual Starbuck's statement, the Barista agreed with the OP (echoed his comment). The actual effect of the Starbuck's CEO's statement "requesting" that no one openly carry in their stores has had little effect, and it certainly has not created an attitude of being unwelcome in their stores. No "no guns" policy exists, just a preference for concealed carry, and the CEO's statement specifically states that open carriers will not be denied service.

Each of us must make the individual decision whether to patronize Starbuck's or not, but we should not mis-characterize their position.

Click to expand...

Semantics.

The fact is that the patron said "no guns."

The OP said, "Starbuck's REQUESTED no guns."

The barista agreed with the OP.

I fail to see the Starbuck's "guns are welcome" policy hidden in this thread.

From the CEO:

"For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

I would like to clarify two points. First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Why? Because we want to give responsible gun owners the chance to respect our request—and also because enforcing a ban would potentially require our partners to confront armed customers, and that is not a role I am comfortable asking Starbucks partners to take on. Second, we know we cannot satisfy everyone. For those who oppose “open carry,” we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers."



My personal feeling is that respecting a private company's property rights is the higher calling. It's what a responsible gun owner would do.

CT Barfly said:

My personal feeling is that respecting a private company's property rights is the higher calling.

Click to expand...

So basically, your opinion should be law? I personally don't give my business to Starbucks because their coffee sucks and because of their new anti-gun stance, but really, the fact that the OP does give Starbucks his business is not really your problem. The employee confirmed to the customer complaining that what the OP was doing was perfectly legal and perfectly within the bounds of company policy... So why is that your problem?

Grim_Night said:

So basically, your opinion should be law? I personally don't give my business to Starbucks because their coffee sucks and because of their new anti-gun stance, but really, the fact that the OP does give Starbucks his business is not really your problem. The employee confirmed to the customer complaining that what the OP was doing was perfectly legal and perfectly within the bounds of company policy... So why is that your problem?

Click to expand...

Huh? How on earth are you reaching that conclusion?

My opinion is that if a business/landowner doesn't want guns on the property they should clearly state so (Starbuck's has) and their request should be respected (the OP doesn't). We're not talking about the law...we're talking about private property rights.

The problem with the OP's actions is that it implicates and sanctions disregard for his own property rights/control. Can't have it both ways. Disregarding Starbuck's request isn't fair to Starbuck's.

Its all a moot point anyways. He's law enforcement on his way to work. The company "policy" has no beef with him carrying while at work and I'm assuming to or from work. So he was actually still within "policy" of Starbucks.

As previously stated... an anti gunner customer trying to enforce her opinion on the guy. She was wrong on all accounts.

I'd just show up again buy another cup and if I see that customer just smile and say "afternoon ma'am" and roll out.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

CT Barfly said:

Semantics.

The fact is that the patron said "no guns."

The OP said, "Starbuck's REQUESTED no guns."

The barista agreed with the OP.

I fail to see the Starbuck's "guns are welcome" policy hidden in this thread.

From the CEO:

"For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

I would like to clarify two points. First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Why? Because we want to give responsible gun owners the chance to respect our request—and also because enforcing a ban would potentially require our partners to confront armed customers, and that is not a role I am comfortable asking Starbucks partners to take on. Second, we know we cannot satisfy everyone. For those who oppose “open carry,” we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers."

My personal feeling is that respecting a private company's property rights is the higher calling. It's what a responsible gun owner would do.

Click to expand...

CT, no one said that Starbucks has a "guns are welcome" policy. The OP and I were simply pointing out that while Starbucks would prefer that no one bring a firearm into their stores, they are not banning them and will continue to serve patrons who are openly carrying.

We all have choices to make regarding which stores we patronize, but whatever patronage choice we make for whatever reason does not make us more or less of a "responsible gun owner." My responsibility as a gun owner/carrier is to insure that my firearm is properly carried/holstered and that I understand and obey the laws and safety principles regarding that carry. I understand that for policy purposes, many carriers will refuse to patronize a store that has banned firearms carry even if that banning does not carry force of law ... but please do not categorize carriers as being irresponsible if their choice does not agree with your preferences. That kind of attitude simply divides our community more than necessary, IMHO.

JamesCanby said:

CT, no one said that Starbucks has a "guns are welcome" policy. The OP and I were simply pointing out that while Starbucks would prefer that no one bring a firearm into their stores, they are not banning them and will continue to serve patrons who are openly carrying.

We all have choices to make regarding which stores we patronize, but whatever patronage choice we make for whatever reason does not make us more or less of a "responsible gun owner." My responsibility as a gun owner/carrier is to insure that my firearm is properly carried/holstered and that I understand and obey the laws and safety principles regarding that carry. I understand that for policy purposes, many carriers will refuse to patronize a store that has banned firearms carry even if that banning does not carry force of law ... but please do not categorize carriers as being irresponsible if their choice does not agree with your preferences. That kind of attitude simply divides our community more than necessary, IMHO.

Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. And Primus, the OP is not a LEO, he is an armed security guard of a company that I will not name (I live in pierce county and in fact, my roommate may be an employee of the same security company based on the uniform the OP is wearing). If the OP had been a LEO, the customer wouldn't have said a single word to him.