Starbucks caves

[DaveS]

Someone needs to open a Gun and Coffee shop. Open carry or stay away! That should be a happy pill for some!

 

DaveS

[RobertNashville]

Nice mature response Robert. You've added a lot of value to the topic.

 

I'm sure every post on Open Carry.org is made up by the members there. It's all a giant conspiracy to promote the cause. That's essentially what you're saying.

Please read Lumber_Jack's spot on analysis; he got exactly what I was saying.

[RobertNashville]

Someone needs to open a Gun and Coffee shop. Open carry or stay away! That should be a happy pill for some!

 

DaveS

Nope; it needs to be, at a minimum, a cigar, coffee and gun shop.

 

Actually, Outpost Armory was close to that...I loved going there for lunch on a Saturday and then browsing the store but then they got rid of the restaurant and turned that whole section into reloading heaven.

 

Nothing against reloading but there aren't many places (that I know of anyway) around here were you could get alligator! ;)

[TMF]

Boobies?

Please tell me you didn't miss the Scarface reference.

[TMF]

Someone needs to open a Gun and Coffee shop. Open carry or stay away! That should be a happy pill for some!

DaveS

I've actually been to a high end range, complete with cigar bar and a real bar. They wouldn't let the types in there who OC a rifle into a Starbucks though. These people have standards.

[Sam1]

Someone needs to open a Gun and Coffee shop. Open carry or stay away! That should be a happy pill for some!

DaveS

Then you would have people show up wearing racially offensive shirts, posting videos online and arguing with you about their freedom of speech.

[Erik88]

I think what he meant was that, of course your gonna read those stories on an open carry forum. Because every time someone gets to tell someone about Open Carry they write a 10page thread about it. But the number of "sharing" instances versus number of "panty wetting" Instances is not a balanced scale, not even close.

 

What are you basing this on? That hasn't been the experience for most people.

[Sam1]

Nope; it needs to be, at a minimum, a cigar, coffee and gun shop.

Actually, Outpost Armory was close to that...I loved going there for lunch on a Saturday and then browsing the store but then they got rid of the restaurant and turned that whole section into reloading heaven.

Nothing against reloading but there aren't many places (that I know of anyway) around here were you could get alligator! ;)

Place at the Dickson/I40 ramp, they've got frog, gator and a few other things on the buffet

[Oh Shoot]

...I got that they are asking nicely enough and not "properly" posting as a policy for wiggle room....

 

They are in all 50 states AFAIK, and signage is only legally binding in maybe 3. I feel safe in saying that giving "tacit approval" for gun owners in TN is not part of their decision.

 

- OS

Edited September 18, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[DaveS]

Yeah, I guess a good cigar would top off a good cup of coffee!

 

DaveS

[Lumber_Jack]

What are you basing this on? That hasn't been the experience for most people.

Define "most people". Most people you know, or have posted on Open Carry, or people you have personally met?

Honestly the true sample size is way too small to say that Open Carry educates people.

If nothing else the liberal media machine drives the consensus to the "panty wetting" by default.

[RobertNashville]

Yeah, I guess a good cigar would top off a good cup of coffee!

 

DaveS

I prefer wine or Jack on the rocks with my cigars but if it was only coffer there wouldn't be a need to go through all the trouble of a liquor license (not to mention that we don't need people carrying and drinking anyway!) :)

[Guest The Itis]

This should not be newsworthy.

 

Starbucks only cares about getting that money. If all it takes to still get money from pro and anti gun folks is to write a little lip service to the gun fearing population, while effectively changing nothing for gun carriers, then this was a sound business decision.

 

Anyone that's reading too much into this and taking it with hostility, especially if they are a gun owner, will only harm the image of gun owners as tempermental and not calm, rational folk.

[Guest ThePunisher]

You could look at it this way.  If the activist crowd becomes so upset with Starbucks then they are "free" to open their own coffee shop where like-minded individuals can lounge around in their tactical gear and openly display their largest rifles to the community at large.  I would bet that they would have very few customers outside of that activist base, and they would be bankrupt within 3 months.

You could also look at it this way. If we let the liberals trample our Constitution that is imperative to having a capitalistic society that encourages free enterprise, how long will it be before businesses will be stifled with suffocating restrictions, and their entrepreneurship is doomed for failure. Constitutional liberties and freedoms should not be restricted b/c someone is offended or believes in a different ideology. The Constitution is what has made our country great, and if we allow it to be trampled upon and we cave in to restrictions on our liberties and freedoms, then we will soon be enslaved with the heavy weight of balls and chains.

[RobertNashville]

You could also look at it this way. If we let the liberals trample our Constitution that is imperative to having a capitalistic society that encourages free enterprise, how long will it be before businesses will be stifled with suffocating restrictions, and their entrepreneurship is doomed for failure. Constitutional liberties and freedoms should not be restricted b/c someone is offended or believes in a different ideology. The Constitution is what has made our country great, and if we allow it to be trampled upon and we cave in to restrictions on our liberties and freedoms, then we will soon be enslaved with the heavy weight of balls and chains.

If Starbucks decided to completely refuse any firearms within their business proper, is that a violation of my constitutional right to arms or is it exercising their right to control what is allowed inside of their business?

 

Maybe I'm just not getting what you are getting at here?

Edited September 18, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Chucktshoes]

Please tell me you didn't miss the Scarface reference.

At this point, under advice from my counsel, I am going to exercise my 5th amendment right and decline to answer the question on the grounds that I may incriminate myself.

[mikegideon]

Please read Lumber_Jack's spot on analysis; he got exactly what I was saying.

 

Erik is why they quit using wooden sticks. They kept breaking :)

[Guest ThePunisher]

If Starbucks decided to completely refuse any firearms within their business proper, is that a violation of my constitutional right to arms or is it exercising their right to control what is allowed inside of their business?

Maybe I'm just not getting what you are getting at here?

I'm saying that the Constitution is what allows us our liberties and freedoms, and if we allow restrictions on our Constitutional rights, then before long our rights will be totally eroded. Everyone and every business entity has a stake in preserving every Constitutional right we enjoy. Currently, law allows them to restrict gun carry in their business if they choose to do so, but their restrictions on my rights has consequences for them short term, and long term if the liberals continue trampling the Constitution. If they cave in to the liberals, they lose, and we as a nation lose. Simply put, if we allow any of Constitutional rights to be eroded, then everyone becomes a little closer to being enslaved. Edited September 18, 2013 by ThePunisher

[JAB]

The article I read quoted the head honcho of Starbucks as saying, "We won't ask you to leave," even if they see you carrying a gun in their stores.  Therefore, they are not really 'prohibiting' anything.  They just want the folks who think it is right and proper to be 'in your face' about an issue 24/7 to simply shut the hell up, throw a cover garment on and drink their damn coffee.  People often say, regarding the firearms community, that we are our own worst enemies and I think this is a perfect example of why that is true.  Starbucks - a business with a quite 'liberal' feel, based in an area that is at least somewhat liberal (Seattle) and that caters largely to a liberal customer base was bending over backward to leave the issue (and us) alone and that wasn't good enough for some 'activists' who just had to try to bend them a little bit further.  It is those 'activists' who should be receiving our ire, not a business that STILL doesn't want to get in the middle of the issue and say that we can't carry in their establishments.

 

As full disclosure, I do have to admit that I have only ever bought a Starbucks product (other than their bottled iced coffee that is available at convenience stores, etc.) on one occasion - and that was at one of their 'kiosk' type locations inside a Target.

 

Matter of fact, I could sing remixed selections from the sound of music while open carrying an AR-15 in condition one and dressed in drag while making my coffee and nobody would give a ####.

Tapatalk ate my spelling.

 

Oh, some of us would.  In fact, if you ever do that then please for the love of God let someone post a video on youtube because I haven't had a good, side-splitting, can't catch my breath laugh in years and I think I am just about due for one.

Edited September 18, 2013 by JAB

[KahrMan]

Yet.  Give the "pro-2A" guys a week or so to force their hand.

 

 

That is a distinct possibility.

[Jonnin]

I'm saying that the Constitution is what allows us our liberties and freedoms, and if we allow restrictions on our Constitutional rights, then before long our rights will be totally eroded. Everyone and every business entity has a stake in preserving every Constitutional right we enjoy. Currently, law allows them to restrict gun carry in their business if they choose to do so, but their restrictions on my rights has consequences for them short term, and long term if the liberals continue trampling the Constitution. If they cave in to the liberals, they lose, and we as a nation lose.

 

This is the property rights argument --- does the property owner have the right to exclude anyone for any reason, or not (though, in this case, they are not even asking anyone to leave!).  

 

The 2nd has nothing to do with property rights and the choices made by property owners.   Just like it is not violating your rights to ask you to be quiet or leave if you are yapping in a movie theater, no matter how you twist the first ammendment.

[RobertNashville]

I'm saying that the Constitution is what allows us our liberties and freedoms, and if we allow restrictions on our Constitutional rights, then before long our rights will be totally eroded. Everyone and every business entity has a stake in preserving every Constitutional right we enjoy. Currently, law allows them to restrict gun carry in their business if they choose to do so, but their restrictions on my rights has consequences for them short term, and long term if the liberals continue trampling the Constitution. If they cave in to the liberals, they lose, and we as a nation lose.

I guess I'm missing the big constitutional issue here or how this is caving to the liberals.  Even if it is caving to the liberals it's Starbuck's business and if they don't want people carrying in their businesses then they have not just the legal authority to make that request (in TN) but they have the right to do so which I believe is proper and fair.

 

I wish they hadn't taken this position but they did and frankly, I believe most of the reason for it rests on the shoulders of those who showed their "support" for Starbucks by having planned open carry events/meetings there (with cameras rolling) to make a "statement".

[Paladin132]

Let's be honest, this has absolutely nothing to do with the few OCers who are just going about their business.  This policy is directly tied to the OC activism, such as groups of folks taking Starbucks by force with open carry sidearms or carrying long guns.  Yes, it is legal, but I would like for someone to give me a rational explanation for why they need to strap a rifle to them when they go to Starbucks.  The common answer to that is "because I can."  Well, okay; I'll accept that as an answer as soon as people accept that any business can ask you to leave if you're carrying a rifle... because they can. 

 

Rights are a two way street.  It isn't about the right to not feel uncomfortable, it's about a business controlling the environment they operate in.  I doubt Starbucks gave two craps about CCers or even OCers during the conduct of everyday operations.  If they did they would have come up with this policy a looooooooonnnng time ago.  So what's changed?  Do you think this is the first time liberals came after Starbucks for not having an anti-gun policy?  No, it isn't.  What has changed is the guntards using Starbucks as a political platform.  As pro 2A that I am, I would adopt a similar policy if my business was being hijacked by a bunch of aholes who represent a marginal amount of my customer base.  We are now those aholes.  Don't thank Starbucks for that, thank the Voldemorts within our midst.

 

I agree with your post sir. I just do not agree with going after a right or denying a right to others because of it. That rather sets us up to pick and choose who can exercise rights based on some loose stipulations. I am also not entirely sure we do not need more activism. I have become much more likely to enter into a discussion about guns today with coworkers and such because I think that our point of view has been drowned out and I feel like I need to present that point of view before we loose our rights... I am not sure about activism with OC, but it is legal, so I do not have a reason to tell them no, even if it may not be the best of ideas. 

 

Another thought: are we ashamed to be supporters of the Second Amendment, or that we carry firearms for self defense? I know for many it is a tactical choice, but I am fearful - fearful of police harassment to have a weapon OC. Even when backpacking - when CC is a royal pain. I am fearful of encountering the wrong officer and having problems stemming from it. That is not right either. 

Edited September 18, 2013 by Paladin132

[Guest ThePunisher]

IMHO, if businesses and property owners don't respect the 2nd Amendment and allow infringements, then it won't be too long before our country puts restrictions on property rights and ownership and puts heavy burdens on business owners. Communism is creeping slowly around the corner. Maybe that's why the IRS is targeting certain individuals and groups. Edited September 18, 2013 by ThePunisher

[DaveS]

Some of y'all are missing the 2nd amendment. You may keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed on by the GOVERNMENT. I "googled" Starbucks, and no where did I find them to be a part of the Government. Therefore, your 2A rights mean nothing on their property, nor mine, nor anyone else's on here. Y'all are forgetting those facts! It's a fact we all have to live with.

 

DaveS

Edited September 18, 2013 by DaveS