TGO David

My last post was composed with two thumbs and an iPhone; not the best of platforms.  Allow me to expand on my thoughts a bit more:       Today, the Internet will undoubtedly be aflame with posts by angry gun owners giving Starbucks the what-for over Howard Schultz's request that they be left out of the open-carry vs. concealed carry debate.  In his Open Letter posted to their corporate web site on Tuesday, September 17, 2013 (read it here) Schultz respectfully requested that handgun carriers no longer use Starbucks stores as a soap-box in support of Open Carry.  He stated his case as follows:     " Recently, however, we’ve seen the “open carry” debate become increasingly uncivil and, in some cases, even threatening. Pro-gun activists have used our stores as a political stage for media events misleadingly called “Starbucks Appreciation Days” that disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of “open carry.” To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores. Some anti-gun activists have also played a role in ratcheting up the rhetoric and friction, including soliciting and confronting our customers and partners. "     Schultz goes on to state that this is a request and not an outright ban as they want to give responsible gun owners the opportunity to respect their wishes of their own free will, and states that Corporately they believe that their stores are not the proper arena for legislative changes to be championed.     "... 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."     Sadly I am concerned that the pro Second Amendment community will fail to hear what Shultz and Starbucks are saying, and instead use this as an opportunity to launch vitriolic attacks against Starbucks claiming that some grave injustice has been done.  At times like this, we gun owners tend to be our worst enemies as we lose sight of the end goal and begin to engage in behavior that ultimately will cost us the "Public Relations Battle" as we fight to preserve the rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment.   For a moment, put aside your anger over losing yet another PR battle and think for a moment about how we got here:   Over the past few years it had become assumed by the pro-gun community that because Starbucks would not prohibit legal carry in their stores, Starbucks shared our "Love for Guns and Coffee".  Someone even copied the Starbucks mermaid logo and altered it to state as such, and undoubtedly made a boatload of money off of a satirical play on their trademarked logo.  To be honest I've frequently wondered when Starbucks would start suing for trademark infringement, but that's beside the point.   Starbucks has stated all along that they were neither supporters of nor dissenters of legal carry, but that they preferred the matter be decided by local laws.  If a community allowed legal carry, their stores would oblige.  If a community did not, their stores would not.  Simply, they wanted to be left out of the argument.   However gun owners haven't really allowed them to remain neutral, have they?  Immediately upon previously hearing that Starbucks would not prohibit legally carried firearms in their stores, Open Carry Activists began staging "Guns & Coffee" events and encouraged folks to visit their closest Starbucks franchise while openly and visibly armed.  The cry was "Support Starbucks!", but take your gun with you and make sure people could see it.  That plan has clearly backfired and will continue to backfire for as long as the visible wearing of arms is a polarizing issue.  And in light of recent events such as the Washington Navy Shipyard shooting and the numerous other mass shootings before it, the public opinion is not likely to change anytime soon.   Perhaps Shultz put it best in his Open Letter:     " 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 opinion on Open Carry is well known here on TGO.  I think it has it's place at times, and I am glad that it is legally allowed, but I do not believe it was made legal for the reasons that some seem to think.  I believe that Open Carry was left as a legal option to protect gun owners from prosecution should their firearms accidentally become visible while being carried in a concealed manner.  As has been pointed out numerous times in the past, there are states that issue concealed carry permits that will absolutely fine you if your cover-garment slips and exposes your firearm.  Tennessee issues a handgun carry permit without the requirement of it being concealed, and conversations with those involved in past legislative efforts suggest that this was done to protect us, not to enable us.   The fact remains that the visible carrying of firearms scares a large percentage of the voting public, or at the very least they find it off-putting.  As I have also said previously, I do not use my handgun as a tool for activism.  It is a tool for protection of myself and my loved ones.  My holster is not a ballot box.   I believe that it is time for responsible gun owners to start thinking about how we will win the hearts and minds of the voting public and stop trying to "scare the sheep".  Scared voters are reflexive, reactive voters.  They do not cast ballots using logic and reasoning.  They cast ballots against us out of emotion, fear, and uncertainty.   If you want to persuade someone, smacking them in the face with the sight of your firearm while they're trying to enjoy their coffee isn't the way to do it.  Scaring a mom of three enjoying a latte with her friends isn't the way to do it.  Frightening a table of college students hovering over their laptops and sipping on macchiatos isn't the way to do it.   Howard Shutlz gets this.  Why do so many of us not?  How many more PR battles do we have to lose before responsible gun owners change their tactics and start winning hearts and minds?

Congrats, "open carry" activists. I seem to remember saying this was going to happen.

Shoot me a PM with the details.  I may have seen it back then but the last week has had several challenges involved that have kept me offline here a little.

Welcome to TGO.  Make yourself at home!

On the subject of mixing with sodas, try Jack Daniels Tennessee Honey and Ginger Ale sometime.  It tastes like a cream soda.

I rather hope this thread keeps going.  I mean, hell... we're only at page 8 and the Everyone else : Robert ratio of posts is surprisingly high.  :D

One thing I noticed really on over at TNJeeps was how many Jeep folks are also gun owners!  I think both appeal to the American spirit.  :)

Actually it's the opposite. The 3.6L doesn't need that much gear to turn 37" tires as compared to the older engine. 4.88's would have it wound up pretty tight. It'll more than handle the 4.88's. :) Here's the chart for gears and tires: 3.6L Pentastar: 3.8L Engine

  I stepped up to 4.56 gears.  The 4.88's are almost too much for 37's and the 3.6L engine but would have been my choice were it a 3.8L.   No computer mods while she's under warranty.  Drivetrain is about the only warranty I haven't voided yet.  :D  Ripp does have a repackaged Vortech SQ trim supercharger that they sell for the 3.6L Jeeps but I'm not crazy about how tight the installation is.   I haven't seen a turbo kit yet but this thing gets hot enough under the hood as is, so I don't think I'd really want to go that route.   Several engine swaps exist for the 2012+ JK.  Several Hemi swaps as well as a myriad of GM LS engine swaps.  When the time comes I'll probably go with an aluminum-block LS engine.

Our '12 has the Pentastar. Good engine as far as I'm concerned but still inadequate once you start heaping on the weight. More HP and Torque than the previous 3.8L and the torque comes on earlier in the power-band. One of these days I'll do an engine swap. I just can't see getting rid of it with as much as I've sunk into it now. She's modded up exactly the way I want and it's been a long, carefully planned build. All it needs now is more power. :lol: This is a shot of it a friend took recently. It's changed a little since then but not much.

Eh... I mean, to be fair they could have just as easily posted a headline saying that Obama is a bi-sexual wrestler.  I didn't see any hard facts in either of those articles.  Just accusations.   Is it plausible?  Well, duh.  But it's also plausible that it's a smear campaign because they're not happy with the Obama Administration.  And I'm not even a fan-boy.

Count me in for two lowers.

Some of you may already know this, but back in 2011 I also started a forum for Jeep owners.  it's a great bunch of people and we've been VERY active hosting meet and greets, trail rides, scenic rides, wrench days, etc.   Come on over and join the fun.  It'll give you something else to spend your money on besides guns.  :D   www.tnjeeps.com

  There was a vote and those were shelved in favor of margarita makers.

Comedians.  :)   Yeah. they are AR platform lower receivers.

Hahaha... saw that last night on Facebook and wondered if it had been posted here.  Awesome stuff.  :D

  Ask me how many times I've gone shooting in the past 10 months.  It's embarrassing!  I haven't shot a single round because I don't want to burn up ammo I can't easily replace.  :(

  Red highlighted emphasis is mine.  THAT is the key difference.  You've sold what you already had, for whatever reason.  Be it you changed calibers, got rid of a gun entirely, whatever... it was yours already and you had no need for it.   The people I take issue with are the ones who clean out entire ammo supplies at stores to capitalize on "market panic".  They buy it from Wal-Mart or some other retailer and then dole it back out to people for a premium price because those people feel hostage to the situation.  It's morally and ethically wrong.  Benton offered up the sort of gouging that happened in Nashville during the flood a few years back as evidence that he's not guilty of gouging.  I say hogwash.  It's the same damn thing.   When a buying public feels that they have no alternative but pay an artificially inflated price for an item that the seller either partially or wholly controls the supply of, through nefarious means, then that seller is guilty of gouging.   I'm seriously teetering on the edge of actually wanting more government involvement in ammo sales as a result of this crap.

  ^^ This man knows how to play the game.

  That's my favorite from them.  Their Oatmeal Porter is good, but the Black Mocha Stout is the best.   If you can find it near you, try some Flat 12 Bierwerks "Pogue's Run Porter".  It's seriously taken top billing in my fridge now.  LOVE that stuff.

  Or... and I'm just putting this out there... it's for medicinal purposes.  :)

Samuel Smith's Organic Chocolate Stout.   If you've never tried it... you're missing out.

Bourbon, dark beer and cigars.  Those things soothe the inner beast.  

  It was a conversation.  The gangrape came in when the OP dropped the soap on aisle 9 in the sporting goods department at Wal-Mart.

Happy to help.  Good luck with the test. It's pretty easy considering the entire answer pool is made available to study ahead of time.  They want you to pass.  :)