Books. Bikes. Boomsticks.
Can't you people see there are guns here?
They see me sippin'
Tryin' ta catch me latte-in' dirty.
— Tamara K. (@TamSlick) September 19, 2013
"Hey guys, that request was wishy-washy and I find it insulting.Let's make them -actually- ban us!"
Stupidity, caffiene, firearms: not the best mixture.
Coffee is for drinking; make your political statements at the ballot box. Rule #53, Leroy Jethro Gibbs
Sigh. What Matthew said. People need to calm the fuck down and let it go for a while. If we want to move the needle back to "neutral" this is neither the time nor the way to do it.Think strategically.
All I know is, if I be packin', I ain't makin' a show of it. Ain' that the point, for it to be a surprise to some miscreant? Just like Gomer Pyle, "Surprise, surprise, surprise!"
(for JohninMd)Better yet, like the U.S. Marshall in 'Justified'"I'm gonna count to one! BANG"gfa
Very quietly. Very politely. Then a Thank you note to the manager to let him know you were there, packing heat, and everyone and everything was OK. If the company starts to get a collection of these, perhaps with a receipt included to show you actually were there on a given day, maybe they will get the message that we are not the in your face crowd or the knuckle draggers the antis want to portray us to be.
Starbucks did what they had to do.Imagine the damage and lost revenue from an "Occupy Starbucks" modeled after Occupy Wall Street. Imagine the vandalism, the stink in the rest rooms with people doing it on the floor, the lost sales from the blocked entrances.They know we don't do that, so we were asked to stay away.
Thanks a latte.Shootin' Buddy
We were not asked to stay away. we were asked to be discrete. Big difference.Do not fall in to the extremists trap.
Let me see if I got this right:Starbucks takes the agnostic position on packin' heat in their stores."Hey, Starbucks is our best friend EVERRRR!!!!!11 Let's grab our guns and go get some coffee!""Uh, do you mind not turning my shops into a gun-rights circus? People are trying to relax here and enjoy a cup of joe.""Starbucks coffee sucks! I don't even go there anyway. They hate us! They're probably even having gay sex0r with Obama! Burn the witch! Burn her! Burn her!"jf
Paul,"We were not asked to stay away. we were asked to be discrete."You were politely asked to not bring firearms into Starbucks stores. In English, not Swahili.Now you can lie to yourself all you want and pretend there was an invisible "open carried" between "don't bring" and "firearms", but don't piss on my leg and tell me it's a double mocha half-caff latte.The man asked you to not bring guns in his store. You can respect his wishes or not; that's up to you.
Tam, I think they're getting hung up on this part of the letter: First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Kind of like Jim Carrey in Dumb & Dumber
Um, guys? Aren't we always trying to convince the fence sitters that "an armed society is a polite society"?Dude made a polite request. Yes, it's a stupid request, but it was polite. The polite thing to do is honor it. At the very least, don't be a dick about ignoring it.
meh. carry concealed and keep your teeth together. nobody complains.
Whole lot of reading comprehension fail going on here. Like Tam said, the man asked that weapons not be brought into the store or outdoor seating areas. He didn't make an exception for CC'd vs. OC'd; he said weapons, period (read: guns). If you think it's a wink and a nod that says CC is okay because nobody will know, you're as delusional as the antis. Now, you can just operate under the old "concealed means concealed" rule and ignore his request, but don't kid yourself that you are doing it with Schultz's blessing. The ethical thing to do is to honor the company's wishes by not bringing weapons into the store. You can choose to stay out of the store with your gun or go get coffee and leave it in the car or at home. I, for one, will stay with my gun. It's just coffee, for cryin' out loud. I can get coffee at any number of alternate locations. Starbucks isn't so wonderful that I will compromise my ethics or disarm for it.
@ChuckYep, they asked us to not be armed in their store. I don't like not being armed so I will continue to not go in their stores as I have better local options.@leaddog,That's the same well-intended "appreciate" behavior that started the problem off in the first place. You don't "thank" someone for following the law. You simply patronize them and let those anonymous dollars show that their decision won't cause them any harm.Thanking them makes it about you and your issue, not them. It is using them as a means to your end in the Kantian sense.
@Matthew and others.Points made and well taken. I respectfully withdraw the suggestion. I had not thought it through completely.As I said, there are not any around me so I am in no danger of being tempted to patronize them. I cannot remember the quality of the product, nor the price. I seem to remember it was a clean and inviting facility.Tam, thank you for the free ice cream, world class snark, making me think, and attracting comments that are well reasoned and thoughtful.
As a footnote, it was the polite and personal nature of the thing that drew the reaction from me that it did.If "no guns" signs had come down from corporate and appeared on the doors, I'd have waltzed past or not, on any given day as my whim dictated because, at least here in Indiana, a "No Guns Sign" has the same legal weight as a Doonesbury comic strip taped in the window.But he asked directly and politely, and so I'll honor his request.
I'm trying to decide if the guys saying Starbucks didn't really mean no concealed carry sound more like Angela Giron telling us that her voters really LOVE her or more like Baghdad Bob reporting live from the sandbox.
Since I don't drink there libation, it will be easy to stay away.
I usually go through the drive through, so even if I did carry it wouldn't matter. If I had a gun rack in the T&C would they ask me to take it down or not go through their drive through?
Woodman, what part of "inside the store or our outside seating areas" is difficult to understand?
This morning's Tampa Bay Times newspaper covers the issue of Starbucks and weapons carry, including an interview with an attorney that just confuses the issue:http://tbo.com/news/business/in-gun-showdown-business-owners-win-20130921/This lawyer is not the best on this issue. For example, SCOTUS has ruled in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) that the 2nd Amendment defines a fundamental right that does apply to the states:http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/0628/Supreme-Court-Second-Amendment-rights-apply-across-USAlso, Florida law prohibits weapons possession at professional sporting events, so the role of the NFL in this issue is irrelevant:http://www.uslawshield.com/florida/florida-gun-law/Regardless, it is important that remember that when a business considers you disruptive, for most reasons, then you must leave, which is why blacks were denied service at whites-only counters and police enforced the wishes of those businesses.Outlawing of denial of service for those who are asserting their 2nd Amendment rights must be raised with your state and Congressional representatives. Placating hoplophobes does not justify the current status.
Nothing like militant pro-gunners getting their panties in a bunch over a coffee shop (well OK, several hundred coffee shops) trying to tell them to calm their tits without actually telling them to go away! Seriously, this is a typically line-walking corporate policy that seeks not to alienate either of two bitterly opposed groups. I like their cold drinks, and I will carry concealed in their stores. They are OK with that, I'm OK with that, so what's the big deal?
DesertRat,"They are OK with that..."If it makes you feel better to pretend that's what they said, then knock yourself out. I don't give two flying fornications one way or another what other people do with respect to Mr. Schultz's request. :)
Post a Comment