Posted on 09/17/2013 5:45:47 PM PDT by Red in Blue PA
I was there today.....and that will be my last time barring a change in this ridiculous rule.
If I went to Starbucks...which I don’t...
but if I did... this wouldn’t stop me, because I carry CONCEALED, PROPERLY and no one is the wiser. I am interested in self-defense, not open-carry grandstanding, which in this case backfired.
So it is perfectly acceptable for cops to OC, just not the peons?
Glad to have your opinion on that.
I see your 20 CC people getting jumped and raise you the 60,000 police officers who get assaulted every year.
Openly carrying.
Open carry does nothing but scare the populace and the business owners and is a fools gambit.
A police officer has multiple indicia of who they are and represent. Everyone else openly carrying is an unknown. People don’t like the unknown.
Apples to apples.
Show me stories of CITIZENS who OC getting jumped. Like I said, I will be waiting.
Again, are you going to speak to the 60,000 police officers who are assaulted every year, openly carrying?
I open carry every day myself, been doing it for 17 years. And twice somebody tried to strip my weapon. Been assaulted probably a dozen times, resisted God know hows many times.
Here’s a myth for you. Criminals are afraid of open carriers. They are most certainly not. I routinely ask them during interviews.
From 1997. In DC. (And not by an NRA member)
3 Employees Killed At D.C. Starbucks
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/march99/starbucks070897.htm
Good luck Starbucks. No more gun owners will be there to fend off any bad guys (not wishing anything of course, just showing what Gun Free Zones INEVITABLY do)
And CEO loves Obamacare.
When I OC I do not OC in bad areas of the city. That, I would agree is stupid.
If people would really be honest with themselves Starbuck’s coffee and lattes taste like crap. If you like paying 4 times more or a cup of coffee and that’s your thing be my guest...
Our friend at gunssavelife.com, John Boch, has just posted a notice at the org’s site announcing that Starbucks has caved to the shrieking of Shannon Watts and Moms Demand Action and have banned guns in their stores. He’s attached a photo of a notice to its stores, above, (h/t pafoa.org) entitled Our Public Request: No Weapons in our Stores. Reading the notice, however, it appears that Starbucks is attempting to split the baby here. While their policy is that guns will not be welcome in their stores, they don’t intend to enforce it, either. The proof of the pudding, though, will be whether or not they post notices (in accordance with local laws in various states) that would carry the force of law. Reading between the line, it doesn’t sound like that’s the intent. Still, feathers will be ruffled. We’ll try to contact Starbucks tomorrow for clarification. Watch this space.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/09/daniel-zimmerman/breaking-starbucks-bans-guns-stores-maybe/
No, the rights of the citizens' contractors for law enforcement are somehow superior to those of the citizens themselves. Or so the policy says.
I am 100% pro Second Amendment, the total Amendment.
Having said that, I must add that I detest activists, on both sides of any issue that distort reality just to be able to whine.
That is a grossly distorted, childish, neurotic headline having no relationship to the rest of the article.
As far as I can tell, reading the policy posted on this thread, Starbucks has NOT caved; they are just so confused that they printed a schizophrenic manual that no one can possibly understand.
I believe that anyone can carry in any Starbucks store and, so long as he does not become belligerent and abusive, he may not be harassed or asked to leave.
My favorite part of the "policy":
What if a customer asks, 'Am I no longer welcome in your store?'
Answer, "Everyone is welcome in our stores, but weapons are not."
A classic example of doublespeak, almost meaningless psychobabble.
I am waiting for the first report of a personless weapon being thrown out of a Starbucks.
Can we have some fun with this?
Let's list all the possible inanimate objects that are unwelcome at Starbucks, but may be asked to leave only if not attached to a living human being...
Nonsense. Starbucks caved to the CT dems and the million (2 dozen) squeeling moms:
Connecticut Democrats are throwing their weight behind the campaign pressing Starbucks to prohibit firearms in their coffee shops nationwide.
Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy and Rep. Elizabeth Esty endorsed a recent letter, spearheaded by family members of victims of December’s shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, asking Starbucks Chief Executive Howard Schultz to help “foster a culture of peace and ban guns from your stores.”
The Starbucks gun policy, which allows customers to carry firearms, including concealed weapons, in accordance with local laws, “undermines the safety and well-being of our citizens,” the signers say.
“[T]o prevent another Sandy Hook, we as a society must prioritize the sanctity of human life over the individual’s ‘right to carry,’” the letter reads.
Starbucks spokeswoman Jamie Riley confirmed that the company had responded to the letter, although details were not provided. Schultz also spoke over the phone with the father of a Newtown victim, but a meeting was not set up as the gun control advocates had hoped.
You didn't read the policy, did you. As long as the person carrying does not become disruptive or belligerent, he/she may not be asked to leave.
Is that all that difficult to understand?
You just made that up.
Is English your second language?
That is NOT what I read.
Does this policy apply to robbers and such also?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.