193rdsoldier
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2010
- Messages
- 1,176
- Likes
- 1,142
You shut youre wh*re mouth!! ( I like Starbucks haha)
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Murphy and Bloomenthol going after Starbucks
- Thread starter BeastlyAdams
- Start date
You shut youre wh*re mouth!! ( I like Starbucks haha)
mikelawtown
NES Member
A med coffee is like 4-6 cents more than Dunks. I'll give you the xtra cash...
I meant steaming pile of poo...
- Joined
- May 12, 2013
- Messages
- 4,174
- Likes
- 6,841
My opinion here is they are picking a commercial chain that everyone can relate to. Even non-coffee drinkers and non lefties at least know what starbucks is and/or make constant jokes about it. (Anyone know what Harbucks is????) I think where Starbucks would be forced to lead, others would follow - thus banning all carry in all commercial venues. That could eventually lead to "there is no where to actually carry, so no we will just no longer allow carry". (In MA, no carry means FID only and that blows a whole bag of meat-rods)
Repped. Hard.
This.
If we win in Colorado next week, the gun control movement will be effectively dead in this country for the next probably 10 years (it's on life support right now).
The worst thing they could do is cave.
Not just for any 2a issue either. It won't stop there if they let the moonbats win.
What if some moron decides they don't like the color of the buildings?
Or takes offence for some god unknown reason at the logo?
How about the employees uniforms?
Maybe they don't think there are enough minorities or gays being hired. Lets make them set a quota.
It'll never Fu**ing end
I learned as a kid to never back away from a growling dog, unless you wanted to get bit in the ass
Not just for any 2a issue either. It won't stop there if they let the moonbats win.
What if some moron decides they don't like the color of the buildings?
Or takes offence for some god unknown reason at the logo?
How about the employees uniforms?
Maybe they don't think there are enough minorities or gays being hired. Lets make them set a quota.
It'll never Fu**ing end
I learned as a kid to never back away from a growling dog, unless you wanted to get bit in the ass
I bet Starbucks can do math by this point...
When "dozens of moms against guns" show up against thousands of pro2A people, it has become clear that the only people who are pro gun control at this point are politicians and barking moonbats. The middle ground has shifted. Even more so in free america.
Would like to see Starbucks give a couple of these hacks a math lesson as well.
No idea what that company is worth. But a nice polite response along the lines of..
"Thank you for your interest in our company policies We will certainly take your opinion into consideration"
"Oh and by the way , Who is running against you in the next election? We would like to make an obscenely large campaign contribution to them."
Last edited:
CockedAndLocked
Banned
The pro gun activities at Starbucks are what started the ball rolling on this. With any luck gun owners wont repeat this same mistake with Walmart; if they do Walmart might ban guns too. Here in CT signage carries the weight of law.
Starbucks wanted to be left out of the politics but pro gun demonstrators didn't care. They brought this sh!t on themselves and on the rest of us.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk 2
Starbucks wanted to be left out of the politics but pro gun demonstrators didn't care. They brought this sh!t on themselves and on the rest of us.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk 2
![[troll]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/016.gif "Troll [troll]")
is obvious. ![[laugh2]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/014.gif "Laugh at above [laugh2]")
mikelawtown
NES Member
so when is the next Meet at Starbucks? I'm craving an Iced Mocha..
It's not over until antis are nearly universally hated and reviled by most...as the fascist commie ****ing shit eating, liberty hating douchebags they are.... something like this would be a good start.... We got a long way to go to even get there, though....
Last edited by a moderator:
Jason Flare
NES Member
I agree. I had to read the post several times to figure out how it could be a construed as a troll post. I think it could appear like trolling in that the poster says we brought all this upon ourselves. I don't know if the Anti's protested first or we did. I don't think it matters who started it. Starbucks would like out of the debate and we shouldn't be in the debate.
Personally I CC at Starbucks and no one knows it but me. The best way to win this is buy Starbucks if you like it and can afford it, and keep completely quiet about Starbucks and guns, just like Starbucks wants it.
Scarecrow
Army Veteran
They already have, which is why it is "Challenge accepted!"
DispositionMatrix
NES Member
Because the original post (and the bolded parts of the quoted posts here) states that open carry is provocative and that the attention it generates is harmful to our 2A rights.
This is precisely the appeasing approach that turned MA into the disaster that it is - "why open carry if people might freak out? Let's just appease them on that little point and they'll stay off our backs". Yeah, right!
Every time you appease a lunatic (anti-gun or anti-whatever else), they get stronger in their beliefs that they are right - after all, if you were right, why would you give in? You want to appease them in Starbucks? Why not on the street? Why not on your own property? Why not everywhere? Appeasement does not work...
I will open carry as soon as feasible, and I will do so knowing that it puts me at higher risk of both criminal activity (since any bad guys would know I am armed before I realized they were trouble) and harrasment from both loonies and police. The point that open carry makes every day to thousands of uninvolved people is that there is nothing wrong with open carry, and the point made to the people who freak out is that they do not get to force law abiding citizens to stop exercising their rights.
To being facts into this exchange of opinions, look at the last decade or so in NH: open carrying citizens are not harassed by cops and bystanders anymore because the people who were manhandled by the police for open carrying a few years ago won their legal cases and the police is now trained on how to properly handle open carry. And while being pinged by the police to check you are clean is still unnecessary, it certainly beats the "I'll take your gun and put you on the ground while I call for backup" approach.
And every time when police tells a moonbat who is breathlessly calling to report an open carrying citizen to stop wasting their time or they will get in trouble for falsely reporting crimes to the police, an angel is born.
P. S. I am not saying that one must open carry - there are solid reasons why concealed carry is generally preferred. Just pointing out why foaming at the mouth about how open carry will hurt the second ammendment is clearly trolling.
CockedAndLocked
Banned
Rubbish. I am the one who was accused of trolling. If I rememeber correctly I think it was post #42 in this thread. I neither wrote nor implied open carry is provocative. I don't give a damn if people carry full auto machine guns openly.
Dragging Starbucks into our cause is going to have the opposite effect to what we want. Starbucks has made it clear they do not want to be involved in the conversation/debate/demonstrations.
In post #20 of this thread TheRoland wrote: "Pulling Starbucks in will have consequences. They've long said they wanted no part of the gun debate, but 'our' side just wouldn't leave them alone.
They'll cave, and I won't blame them for it."
CORRECT!
http://news.starbucks.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=332
Absolutely there is a difference. Starbucks has stated that they want people to comply with the local law, and the people open carrying do that. I fail to see where that shows disrespect to wishes of private business owners.
This is not about the wishes of Starbucks owners - it's about the unfulfilled wishes of the "gun-control" crowd.
Last edited:
This can go either way...
They can cave because the only people who speak out are anti-gun despite representing a tiny lunatic fringe of their customer base.
They can cave because their shops become a focal point of protests and lose business, though they will lose more business if they ban guns as corporate policy (see above, tiny lunatic fringe of their customer base).
At this point, they can't really get away from it, they have become a poster child. So, our support is actually a good thing for them.
I really don't think you can make a clear case in either direction - time will tell, but appeasement and "being quiet" never worked, so anything based on "don't make waves" should be suspect as a long term strategy.
The last attempt to boycott them by the gun-control crowd did not seem to work at all, and that's based on the NH and MA in person reports.
Do not think that Starbucks is looking at this from any other perspective than the all-mighty dollar... this is why I made a point to spend money at Starbucks that day even though I do not use caffeine.
Do not think that Starbucks is looking at this from any other perspective than the all-mighty dollar... this is why I made a point to spend money at Starbucks that day even though I do not use caffeine.
Scarecrow
Army Veteran
I think he's referring to the "Open Carry at Starbucks" days that people keep organizing. Starbucks asked to be left out of the debate, and gun owners "kicked them in the nuts" by organizing a day that brings direct attention to the fact that Starbucks allows it, based on local laws.
"If it's allowed, then do it, but stop bringing attention to it" seems to be the message. I am not sure I agree, as it gives us a chance to show that a group of armed citizens are capable of just sitting around drinking coffee without someone suddenly losing their mind and trying to kill everyone in a 10 block radius... I just think we need to look for a better forum to get that point across than a place that has explicitly asked to be left out of the discussion.
Hell, if/when I open my place, I'm damned sure going to post my gun signs on the entrance and somewhere visible on the interior so people will be damned sure they know that they are surrounded by guns. Best crime deterrent in the world.
This is why Starbucks is going to remain as neutral as possible. Gun owners have MADE them the poster child, and makes a point of spending their money there to ensure they don't feel the impact of losses from the rabid anti's that will boycott. Many anti's aren't anti enough to stop drinking their favorite venti skinny mocha frappucino double whip soft foam whatever, so it won't matter in the long run.
Last edited:
I understand that, but in the current political climate, simply exercising one's individual right to open carry (not as part of an organized event - simply a person stopping at Starbucks while open carrying) will bring attention to it from the easily frightened crowd - asking people to stop bringing attention to Starbucks equates with asking them to stop open carrying.
For the record, I am not advocating for organizing pro-gun events at Starbucks - I'm simply talking about law abiding individuals making individual decisions to exercise their rights.
Similar threads
