Wednesday, September 18, 2013

"No dogs or Irish..."

"...but even if you are Irish, we won't ask you to leave. We don't want to cause a stink or make a scene; we just don't like Irish people that much. But we'd still appreciate their money, if there was some way they could give it to us without being so... Irish-y about it."

Well, the seemingly inevitable end result of noisy campaigns by a tiny handful of Nanny Do-Gooders combined with an equally tiny handful of people who thought Starbuck's carefully vague stance on firearms was a ringing endorsement of shopping there while still dolled up from their "Battle of Fallujah" reenactors' club meeting has occurred.

So, Starbucks, in your corporate memo, laden with terms familiar to anybody familiar with modern progressive-speak (seriously, could you not have worked "trigger warning" or "safe space" in there someplace?) you have informed me what you think of me and my kind.

Back when you were carefully neutral on the topic, I expressed my appreciation the best way I could: I patronized your establishment, despite your synthetically-chic, faux-Seattle-hip chain coffee house being plopped down in the middle of my artsy in-town neighborhood full of authentically hip neighborhood coffee houses. I didn't wave my gun around or carry picket signs. Most of my fellow patrons, unless they were trained observers, never noticed I was armed. My support of your neutrality, which was all I asked for, showed up in the only place it really mattered to you: Your bottom line.

You will not have that support anymore; I will be patronizing my real Bohemian neighborhood coffee houses. Maybe their owners don't like guns either, but they haven't taken the time out of their busy day to tell me to keep my filthy gun (and, by extension, the nasty gun-owner to which it is attached) out of their establishment.

When I am politely asked to not give someone my money, it would be rude of me to ignore their request.

Good day sir.

46 comments:

Ancient Woodsman said...

How interesting. I'm sure that the OC/anti-OC conversations on various forums and blogs will flare up to an even louder pitch now. Divisiveness among the ranks of the free is never a good idea.

Coincidentally, today marks the 42th anniversary - coinciding with their founding - of my having never been to a Starbucks nor having ever had one of their products. I guess that's one holiday I will now celebrate on a daily basis by not giving them any of my money.

Woodman said...

Well, I think I have home iced coffee perfected. I just need to work on a salted caramel flavor for the rest of the family and we won't need them anyway.

Not that I open carry, or even go inside usually.

What's the policy at Waffle House?

Tam said...

Woodman,

"What's the policy at Waffle House? "

Waffle House has a chain-wide no weapons policy. Now that I know this, trips to Tennessee are a little less joyful.

staghounds said...

For those who champion “desegregation”, please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a negro in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.

Joseph said...

I'd like to see the boolean chart overlap of the people who sling an AR and go get coffee and the people who complain about Gay pride parades "shoving it in our faces".

TerriLiGunn said...

Sooo linked on facebook.

Anonymous said...

Great letter, hope you actually sent it to them.

I hate the internecine crap too, but this line "...dolled up from their "Battle of Fallujah" reenactors' club meeting..." speaks my mind. That silliness, along with OC flashmobs with the stated intent to scare the blue people and attract LEO attention just so they can whip out and read the statutes like it was a Miranda card, has done us all way more harm than good.

Doesn't excuse this wuss-out by Starbucks though; I won't be back.

-chaz-

Anonymous said...

Of course, everyone's free to shop where they please, but I understand the CEO's sentiment. Regardless of where I stand on any hot-button political issue, I would not appreciate my place of business being turned into a political arena.

These OC rallies aren't doing our side any favors, and it truly pains me to say that.

jf

Stuart the Viking said...

I read this as Starbucks basically saying

"We don't own a rooster, we aren't really banning roosters from our store, but would you please quit using our front lobby as a cockfighting arena? People are trying to peacefully enjoy coffee here and the noise (and shit, and blood) are a little disturbing."

Starbucks has LONG said that they didn't want to be party to this argument. They just follow the law, and left it at that hoping that people, either for or against, who wanted their policy to change would go use political pressure to get the laws changed rather than cause a ruckus in their stores. That didn't happen. Instead, a bunch of assholes went out of their way to be dicks and try to prove a point.

It isn't surprising that they would ask said dicks to stop it. My Starbucks usage won't change (not that they would notice anyway since I don't particularly like burnt coffee). If I do get a hankering for some burnt coffee, I will walk in and buy some. My pistol will probably be where it usually is, in an IWB holster, concealed on my hip.

The sad thing is, this is probably a fight that we could have won. While the ANTIs were declaring boycotts, we could have calmly countered them and all Starbucks would have had to do was look at the bottom line to know that their policy was the right one. Instead, some of us decided to use Starbucks as a soapbox against their wishes and made us all look like assholes.

s

billf said...

Tam,First let me say that I read your blog every day ,and you entertain and enlighten me.
I think:Starbucks has the right to restrict carrying in their stores if the carriers are being obnoxious,and I have seen OC'ers being obnoxious.They didn't say you can't carry,they said please don't be an ass.
Secondly:your first paragraph has so many run-ons and adjectives it's hard to read/understand.Do you use such sentence construction when you speak,or just when you're trying to be funny for us?
Lastly(if you haven't deleted my comment yet):doesn't Joseph mean 'Venn'diagram ?You can use a Venn diagram to explain a boolean point,but it's not a boolean diagram.

Robert Fowler said...

I've never been a fan of Starbucks anyway. I make a better cup of joe than they do (if I do say so myself).

We here in Iowa, don't have concealed carry. We have a permit to carry weapons. Some carry openly, most don't. I can count the number of times I've open carried on two fingers (both were range trips). I'm a big believer in "discretion is the better part of valor". Besides, It's nobody's business but mine if I'm carrying or not.

Tam said...

billf,

1) To your first point: Starbucks has politely asked you to not bring firearms into their store. You can honor or ignore their request as your conscience dictates, since they have said they will not make a stink either way.

2) This blog is written in one pass with no editing, usually when I'm fresh out of bed in the morning. If it makes you happy to take a red marker to the screen, then get down with your bad self. (Yes, I have been told that my writing "voice" is very close to my spoken one.)

3) You will have to take up the content of quoted text with the person being quoted.

Tam said...

billf,

"(if you haven't deleted my comment yet):"

This one really gets up my nose. Only three people have received the honor of being asked to not comment here. You'll need to be a much bigger dickweasel if you want to join them. ;)

Bob said...

billf
The ice cream is free, ya see. If ya want complete sentences and proper grammar its gonna cost ya.

billf said...

Tam,RE: deleting my comments.That's good to hear.I don't ever want to be kept from sharing,and my previous comment is about as big a dick as I'll probably ever be,so I guess I'm safe.Thanks.

RabidAlien said...

You'll need to be a much bigger dickweasel if you want to join them.

Heh. "Dickweasel". I'm totally stealing that for use in everyday life! Might even surpass "turdburger" as Favorite Expletive!

On the coffee/Starbucks thing. I don't particularly like coffee much, so I don't voluntarily go into Starbucks unless my wife's in the mood for one of their overpriced peppermint-flavored holiday drinks. I'll stick to the occasional frappuccino from the cooler at the corner gas station. Their stance means pretty much next to nothing to me.

Boat Guy said...

Mixed feelings on this one.
Yeah you should ALWAYS endeavor not to act like a dickweasel unless absolutely necessary. I appreciated Sb's neutrality enough to patronize them more than I usually would. I'm old enough to remember "uppity" people sitting at Woolworth's lunch counters; then I thought they were "pushing" things, now I sypathize with their motivations.

Matt said...

Starbucks is free to alienate as many of their customers or potential customers as they wish.

Maybe I should send a nicely worded not to Starbucks that I don't frequent their establishments. It's not because of their politics, but because I don't like their products or the price.

Patrick said...

We want everyone to view open carry as "no big deal". So then we prove our point by making it a real big deal.

We say liberty means not having to live with the consequences of other peoples' politics. Then we force a political fight onto a private party who really wants nothing at all to do with getting involved, and go so far as to create a national day marking our politics using their name.



So now we feign surprise when the private party we forced into our political movement rebels and says, "don't include us in your politics anymore, and kindly stay away from us now that you have shown your willingness to use us as a pawn in your games."

I support open carry, but frankly these games we play are not helpful. There is a huge gulf between going about our personal business while we open carry, and creating a national movement with the express intent of drawing attention to our cause using a single private business that did not consent to being a party to either side of the fight.

Starbucks didn't care if we open carried in their private place of business. Now they do, because we turned them into a political football without their consent.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Earl said...

I do like your finish best. There is no reason to be rude, (when one is the most dangerous creature on Earth).

I know you didn't add the last, but as I get older to elder, I find that the rude folks are the frightened ones.

Matt W said...

As soon as I saw this on the Facebooks I had an imaginary (but believable) conversation going on in my head.

OC'er: I'm going to boycott Starbucks because they don't support my right to open carry a rifle in their stores!

CC'er: Yeah well you are one of the dickweasels that forced their hand!

OC'er: You don't actually support the 2nd amendment because you don't support forcing a company to respect my rights!

CC'er: Yeah well you are just a troublemaker looking to stir up controversy and actually hurt the RKBA movement!

And on and on....

Starbucks was basically forced to take further measures because they were being dragged into a fight they wanted to stay out of. And if anyone is shocked they came down more on the anti-gun than pro-gun side, I have a bridge for sale.

They can politely ask gun owners to leave their firearms at home (or in the car) or to stay out. Firearm owners (especially concealed carry folks) can choose to stay away or still visit - packing heat or not.

Gun owners making a huge stink out of it will likely only force their hand further - potentially posting their stores with valid no weapons signs.

Anonymous said...

stuart and others:

Go read Shultz' comments again, then read Tam's post again.

If the man had said he didn't appreciate his company's name and locations being for the political purposes of either side, I'd have said I'd fight for his right to that position. Instead he said he doesn't want guns, or you by extension, in his stores but he won't ban you...probably only because he doesn't want another type of demonstration, plus hey, yeah we do want your money.

He should and could have adopted his namesake's position and said "we see nothink! we know nothink!" and kept neutral. But no, his statement leaves no doubt about his real sentiment, and it's got hippie libtard PC, CYA, and FU all up in there. As Tam's Irish snarkism makes clear, he hates me and I will not give him my money.

-chaz-

Anonymous said...

being "appropriated" for the political purposes of either side...-c-

Tam said...

Matt W,

I CC.

I think in-your-face OC cocktards forced Starbucks to pick a side.

But the side they picked wasn't mine.

Just because I can pass as White doesn't mean I'm going to go sit at the newly-segregated lunch counter.

Matt W said...

Tam,

I completely agree with you and I'm not advocating that gun owners continue to patronize Starbucks. My only point was that a bunch of dicks forced Starbuck's hand and now gun owners have to decide how to respond.

For me it is a non-issue, as I have rarely set foot in a Starbucks for financial reasons. I would hope that gun owners would decide to take their business to pro-gun, or at least "still neutral", companies and avoid Starbucks.

What I hope doesn't happen is to have new OC rallies outside Starbucks in protest of their new stance. That would only make things worse.

Anonymous said...

I read the memo as corporate speak for can't you kids go fight on somebody else lawn. His corporate law weasels are worried about liability, and law suits for operating an unsafe work places.

Well partner, I bid you and your grande mocha something adios! Little Maria pours a fine cup of java just the way I like it and it comes with a pretty smile added for no extra charge.

Gerry

Anonymous said...

Would have just been smarter to say Hey, leave us/our name out of your agendas. But they responded with picking a side. Should have just remained neutral, or stayed specific.

Scott J said...

"I think in-your-face OC cocktards forced Starbucks to pick a side.

But the side they picked wasn't mine"

Indeed. Don't force someone to pick a side for you might not like the side they pick.

rickn8or said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rickn8or said...

"Heh. 'Dickweasel'. I'm totally stealing that for use in everyday life! Might even surpass 'turdburger' as Favorite Expletive!"

Rabid Alien, these days I'm finding "jackwagon" to be particularly versitile.

But at least Mommies Throwing Hissy Fits can now sip their latte' while feeeling much safer.

Anonymous said...

Starbuck Facebook page is in open warfare mode.

Gerry

Ed said...

One of my favorite George Carlin bits is when he described a woman asking him "Do you mind if I smoke?" His response - "Of course not. Do you mind if I fart?"

My local chain bookstore has a Starbucks, where they invite you to browse and read while having a refreshment. I think I will find a magazine or two like "Guns & Ammo" or "Shotgun News" and have a nibble and while s-l-o-w-l-y reading that insurrectionist material - because I can.

WV: "979 yumanym" - Yes, it is.

mikee said...

Tam, Starbucks has just been Mau-Mau'ed and the Flack Catchers have responded to the Left appropriately.

Continue to patronize them if you like overpriced coffee.

The CEO just said, "I don't like it that my brand name is becoming politicized, but I'm not going to do a darn thing about it, other than this politely phrased letter."

The anti-gun fools think something has been done against open carry, when nothing has been done.

Carry into Starbucks and they will politely serve you your desired beverage, without any notice being taken of your gat, hogleg, milsurp or ubertacticool legally carried arms.

You gotta read the lines, then between 'em, if you want to know what is really going on.

Tam said...

mikee,

"The CEO just said..."

Believe it or not, my grasp of written English is such that I can read what the CEO wrote all by myself. (Without moving my lips or running my finger across the screen, even!)

Scott J said...

"Waffle House has a chain-wide no weapons policy"

This sad news was new to me today as well.

But our visits there have been infrequent since my wife had her gall bladder removed at the end of 2006.

Jeffro said...

I'd rather be sampling the microbrews around your 'hood over some damned overpriced and over sugared coffee any day any how!

Sevesteen said...

Every time someone shows up with a rifle at Starbucks, it costs the company money. I'd be surprised if each time cost less than a couple hundred dollars, I wouldn't be surprised to find that it was in the thousands if you include the impact of yuppies frightened out of future business. I bet that the cost is a good bit more long term than quarterly "Starbucks Appreciation Days".

I think this letter is as limited a response as is consistent with the fiduciary duty of Starbucks management, and it is far better for us than I would expect under the circumstances. Actually banning concealed carry would be picking a side, this is merely "Hey guys, you're scaring our other customers and costing us business--We're not the boss of you but can ya cut it out?".

I don't expect ordinary business to be pro-gun, I just want them to ignore us if we let them.

Buzz said...

Tam nailed it the "cocktard" moniker.
I fully support the 2nd, but someone being a prick about it makes more than just the anti-gunnies uncomfortable.
Starbucks could have done better and they'll see less of my money, but the blame for Starbucks retreating to its Seattle roots is firmly attached to the end of a shoulder-slung AR.

Anonymous said...

Starbucks drew the line, and they're on the wrong side of it. F--K 'em. If you're not with us...
There's coffee places everywhere.

Matthew said...

Anon,

Starbuck's drew a line over a year ago, and were on the correct side of it (let state law apply).

Then a bunch of assholes on -our- side went and shoved them across it.

Blame needs to be placed where due to avoid repetition. The vocal and stupid segment of "our side" that can't comprehend that the best way to normalize carry is to simply carry normally is the direct cause of this outcome. They don't get to try to evade that reponsibility.

Matt said...

Starbucks has effectively asked for a “GUN FREE ZONE” whether they posted a sign or not.

With the GFZ massacres in mind that have occurred starting with the Ft. Hood Shootings, I say we give them what they want and let nature take it’s natural course, then promptly say, “We told you so.”

S_Moriarty said...

As an actual Irish person, therefore someone from a country where it is illegal to carry or own firearms, and a country with an unarmed police force, please do not compare us to your weird gun beef with a coffee chain.

Matthew said...

S_,

"No dogs or Irish" signs were a fact of life for those who -left- Ireland (like my ancestors) to try to avoid such oppression, only to find racist discrimination waiting for them to overcome in America.

So you can relax, the reference has nothing to do with those who chose to stay and eventually accept the yoke.

S_Moriarty said...

Actually Matthew, the reason our police don't carry arms is because when our country got its independence in the 1920s, the Royal Constabulary, famed for its brutality in Ireland, was replaced by the Gardaí Síochána: literally, the guardians of the peace. And while the Royal Constabulary were armed, the Gardaí weren't as a sign that they would work with the people instead of as a tool of the system. So basically, instead of arming everyone like the US, we decided it was better for everyone if guns were used solely for farming.

Also, the discrimination faced by many Irish abroad was in no way race motivated, seeing as most Irish people are white.

Matthew said...

S,

I was referring to the citizenry in terms of oppression, not the authorities. But thanks for the history lesson.

As for "not racial", you apparently need a history lesson of your own. The "Irish race" was demonized in the American press and popular culture as ape-like and brutish, violent and drunk. Barely "white" at all compared to decent Protestant Anglo-Saxons.

The imagery and language used in the cartoons of the day was actually very much like that applied to blacks.

Tam said...

S_Moriarty,

"As an actual Irish person, therefore someone from a country where it is illegal to carry or own firearms, and a country with an unarmed police force, please do not compare us to your weird gun beef with a coffee chain."

"Shut up," she suggested.