Starbucks new Firearm Policy? Found this online..

[davidmcbeth]

They want to stop the activists! They are sick of the hassle. We on the pro-2A, pro-OC side did not listen to them..

And who should we listen to? Look, we are no ACTIVISTS ... next stop SOVEREIGN CITIZENS .... next stop .... TERRORISTS

Sick of hassle? Close your doors for good. This is America, not Amerika...

 

[deepdiver]

And who should we listen to? Look, we are no ACTIVISTS ... next stop SOVEREIGN CITIZENS .... next stop .... TERRORISTS

Sick of hassle? Close your doors for good. This is America, not Amerika...

We should have listened to a private business that has every legal right to control their business and their property especially considering that they were, if not on our side, certainly not against us, until the activists tried to use their business locations and neutral position on our preferences to stick a thumb in the eye of the lefty hipster types.

A private business saying, look, if you are going to be a pain in the a$$ about it, then don't wear your guns in here, is NOT in any way, shape or form "Amerika". Their private property rights trump your desire to make their business location a pro-OC rally point. And even now, they did not say you shouldn't carry a gun in public. They just ASKED, didn't even demand or ban, just asked, that you not carry it in their business. They are being as neutral as possible in response, as far as I am concerned, to great provocation. If I, as a business owner, stringent 2A, CC and OC supporter, had to put up with some of the nonsense they did I would do something. Now as I am much smaller with limited locations, I can do something more hands on and specific to a specific person who is a butt, however, they are a huge company and have to come up with something that works everywhere.

All things considered I thought they were very judicious and reserved in their handling of this. The only people I am upset with are my fellow 2A/OC supporters who didn't know when to stop.

 

[Dave Workman]

What others are saying

Gun blogger reaction to Starbucks blisters someactivists

It’s not Starbucks in thecrosshairs of some gun bloggers in the wake of last night’s open letter fromCEO Howard Schultz, but some of the more “in-your-face” activists whosedemeanor may have been at least partly responsible for Schultz’s request to notbring guns into their stores.

http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-blogger-reaction-to-starbucks-blisters-some-activists

 

[marshaul]

We should have listened to a private business that has every legal right to control their business and their property especially considering that they were, if not on our side, certainly not against us, until the activists tried to use their business locations and neutral position on our preferences to stick a thumb in the eye of the lefty hipster types.

Damn right.

A private business saying, look, if you are going to be a pain in the a$$ about it, then don't wear your guns in here, is NOT in any way, shape or form "Amerika". Their private property rights trump your desire to make their business location a pro-OC rally point. And even now, they did not say you shouldn't carry a gun in public. They just ASKED, didn't even demand or ban, just asked, that you not carry it in their business. They are being as neutral as possible in response, as far as I am concerned, to great provocation. If I, as a business owner, stringent 2A, CC and OC supporter, had to put up with some of the nonsense they did I would do something. Now as I am much smaller with limited locations, I can do something more hands on and specific to a specific person who is a butt, however, they are a huge company and have to come up with something that works everywhere.

All things considered I thought they were very judicious and reserved in their handling of this. The only people I am upset with are my fellow 2A/OC supporters who didn't know when to stop.

+100

I agree completely. Every word.

 

[coorsleftfield]

The worst part is we gave the anti groups like mom's demand action a victory.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

 

[davidmcbeth]

The worst part is we gave the anti groups like mom's demand action a victory.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

Let them eat cake !

 

[marshaul]

On an unrelated note, I find it hard to imagine that, at this advanced date, anybody gives any credibility to any organization with the "mad moms" theme in their name. What is this, the 80s?

 

[Bernymac]

Aren't there plenty of business that do not support the bearing of firearms in their establishments? Costco, comes to mind! What makes Starbucks more special?

Oh crap, the mad moms are coercing stores to ban guns one at a time...insidious! Pure evil genius!

 

[MAC702]

Aren't there plenty of business that do not support the bearing of firearms in their establishments? Costco, comes to mind! What makes Starbucks more special?...

On the plus side, Starbucks is also saying that if you violate their official unwelcome policy, they will not go Costco on your a$$.

 

[tmarks11]

Starbuck's response that it is not a "ban" but a request, shows that they still don't want to be in the middle of it.

+++!. Excellent post!

All Howard Schultz wants is to sell coffee. He doesn't want people parading outside his store trying to get him in the middle of a nasty political fight. Private property, his choice.

Those calling for a boycott? Get over it. He isn't posting "gun buster" signs. He is just asking you to chose a different front yard to fight your battles in, and to stop by on your way home to buy a cup of overpriced joe.

 

[Dave Workman]

Let them eat cake !

You do, of course, remember what happened to the last person who said that....

 

[Deadjester]

so we meet out front of them the public sidewalk and drink $1 a cup coffee from McD's....LOL

 

[We-the-People]

Starbucks says guns are no longer welcome in its cafes, though it is stopping short of an outright ban on firearms. The fine line that the retailer is walking to address the concerns of both gun rights and gun control advocates reflects how heated the issue has become, particularly in light of recent mass shootings. [ ... ]

"We will not ask you to leave," he said.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/starbucks-guns-unwelcome-banned-20288279

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...5b1b86-2017-11e3-9ad0-96244100e647_story.html

$tarbuck$ legal case for a charge of trespass is much diminished.

YUP....they won't ask us to leave.....Well then....I'm gonna still be going to Starbucks while OC. If they stop trying to straddle the fence after having had a successful "neutral" policy, I'll reconsider.

 

[We-the-People]

Some of you need to pull your head out of your sphincter, and take a large whiff of reality. YOU ARE NOT WELCOME at Starbucks. Your gun-toting presence is unwanted. If you can't understand that, then you need to get an education.

Some of us recognize that and just don't give a flying F**k. I'll respect their rights when they claim their rights.....I will not allow them to play word games with their disrespectful "respectful request". Ban me as is their right or deal with me. PERIOD

 

[marshaul]

Some of us recognize that and just don't give a flying F**k. I'll respect their rights when they claim their rights.....I will not allow them to play word games with their disrespectful "respectful request". Ban me as is their right or deal with me. PERIOD

I'm inclined to sympathize with this view.

 

[DocWalker]

I'm inclined to sympathize with this view.

This thread is giving us an education on which of us have a caffine addiction; which is actually now a medical diagnosis in the new ICD10 that just came out.
(ICD10 is the manual that medical providers/facilities use for billing and coding of medical conditions.)

 

[Dave Workman]

A gun control truth revealed by Starbucks story

Reacting to yesterday’s appeal to gun-toters by Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz to not carry their firearms into Starbucks coffee shops, Washington Ceasefire’s Ralph Fascitelli allowed his candor to reveal the true nature of the gun control lobby when he told the Seattle Times this was “a good first step.”

http://www.examiner.com/article/a-gun-control-truth-revealed-by-starbucks-story

 

[coorsleftfield]

YUP....they won't ask us to leave.....Well then....I'm gonna still be going to Starbucks while OC. If they stop trying to straddle the fence after having had a successful "neutral" policy, I'll reconsider.

Ya and when the cops show up you'll be cited for trespassing, as you should because they have stated their position. Funny you want them to respect your rights but you don't intent to respect theirs.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

 

[PistolPackingMomma]

Ya and when the cops show up you'll be cited for trespassing, as you should because they have stated their position. Funny you want them to respect your rights but you don't intent to respect theirs.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

Elucidate how you can be cited for trespassing when you have not been banned or personally requested to leave?

 

[We-the-People]

I'm inclined to sympathize with this view.

Thank you. I thought long and hard about giving money to a "wishy washy" establishment but feel that this is the right way for me to go.