Murphy and Bloomenthol going after Starbucks

[wahsben]

Now you're considered to have evil intentions if you just have a firearm by the antis.

I fond it ironic we are having this debate. It was once considered bad form to conceal carry. Someone was considered to have evil intentions if they were concealing a firearm.

 

[cekim]

Will still labor under 1934 NFA which relies heavily on this bias against "concealability" with AOW and SBR definitions based entirely on the concealability of those firearms.

Put a trigger finger hole through a pocket carry holster and it no longer looks like a gun = AOW = tax stamp and form 1/4 required for a fold of leather or nylon.

- - - Updated - - -

Now you're considered to have evil intentions if you just have a firearm by the antis.

In fairness, I assume they have evil intention for being anti-gun.

Did they miss the day school taught how genocide was bad?

Actually, not laughing. They do. It is. They don't seem to care.

 

[WatchCityCPA]

No it doesn't. Just do what you would normally do. If it happens to be at a Starbucks, so be it. What I am getting at, and what seems to be perfectly clear to everyone else reading the thread, is that Starbucks will allow what ever is legal, but they don't want people going out of their way to use their policy to further their agenda on either side.

We can support them with our money and write letters/emails to corporate letting them know that we are doing so. We don't need to drum up attention that they specifically don't want.

Please stop trying to tell me what I mean by what I say; I think I have a firm grasp on it.

Appreciate the insight, but I was not putting words in your mouth - merely trying to understand exactly what you were trying to say. This stuff takes way longer in an online forum - we'd have ironed it out in 30 seconds face to face.

And the part you bolded is not attributed to you - I'm just pointing out that even what you define as normal behavior will still drive hoplophobes crazy and their foaming at the mouth at the sight of a firearm will continue bringing attention to Starbucks for as long as open carry is not prohibited.

If Starbucks has a problem with us using their facilities to make political statements, I'm sure they are even more pissed with the other side for doing the same in much worse fashion. They threaten with boycotts - we go spend more. They ask for lawful acts to be prohibited - we merely ask to be left alone.

At the end of the day, Starbucks' stance on 2A and local firearm laws brings a net benefit to the company and their shareholders and will likely be maintained, moonbat howling be damned.

 

[mikeyp]

They responded:

Dear Mike,




Thank you for your feedback regarding Starbucks' policy on open carry laws.





At Starbucks, we deeply respect the views of our customers and recognize that there is significant and genuine passion surrounding the issue of open carry weapons laws. We comply with local laws and statutes in the communities we serve. Our long-standing approach to this issue remains unchanged and we abide by the laws that permit open carry in 43 U.S. states. Where these laws don't exist, openly carrying weapons in our stores is prohibited.







As the public debate around this issue continues, we encourage customers and advocacy groups from both sides to share their input with their public officials. We are extremely sensitive to the issue of gun violence in our society and believe that supporting local laws is the right way for us to ensure a safe environment for both partners and customers.




Thanks again for writing us. If you ever have any questions or concerns in the future, please don't hesitate to get in touch.




Sincerely,



Samantha M.

customer service

 

[eric_07]

speaking of Starbucks... didn't see this posted yet:

An Open Letter to Starbucks About Concealed Carry | truth-2-Power

 

[Trackrat]

Nice, another poll to mess with.

 

[montemuscle1970]

How long before some anti-gun martyr runs into a starbucks and starts shooting, and their all like "told ya so told ya so!!"

And it won't matter that it was an illegally obtained firearm. What bearing would that have on "the factz!!~!"

 

[TheRoland]

Rumors have it that Starbucks management is tired of being the centerpiece of open-carry protests and will unveil a "request" to not carry inside this week.

Should have listened the first 20 times they said "leave us out of it". But nooooooo....

 

[WatchCityCPA]

Starbucks asks U.S. customers to leave guns at home | Reuters

 

[Viking Kitten]

Rumors have it that Starbucks management is tired of being the centerpiece of open-carry protests and will unveil a "request" to not carry inside this week.

Should have listened the first 20 times they said "leave us out of it". But nooooooo....

Can't blame them - it's a place of business, after all, where their primary objective is making money.

 

[cekim]

I never participated in any of these "OC to Starbucks", but I think the "blaming ourselves" is even worse than overzealous promotion of our "cause".

He's wrong. His ideas are a danger to the community. They are bigoted and discriminatory. I can't support that regardless of the intention. Their best move was to stay out of it with corporate policy. They picked a side and now they will hear even more from a larger group of people than they did before.