Starbucks Sticks to Its Guns

[gzregorz]

Starbucks Guns Debate: Coffeemaker Says It Will Stick To Its Gun Policy

SEATTLE -- Coffee chain Starbucks says it's sticking to its policy of letting customers carry guns where it's legal and is asking not to be put in the middle of a larger gun-control debate.

The statement stems from recent incidents when gun owners have walked into Starbucks and other businesses to test state open-carry gun laws. Gun control advocates have protested.

Starbucks is asking both sides "to refrain from putting Starbucks or our partners into the middle of this divisive issue."

Businesses can choose to ban guns from their premises. But Starbucks says if it did that, it would have to turn away "law abiding customers."

Starbucks's decision flies in the face of a growing campaign by gun control groups, the Seattle Post Inteligencer reports on its blog. The Brady Campaign has collected some 25,000 signatures to get the Seattle company to reverse its policy, and will present the petition to Starbucks execs today.

Peet's Coffee and the California Pizza Kitchen chain have banned guns from their locations. SFGate.com passes this statement along from Peet's:

While Peet's Coffee & Tea respects and values all individuals' rights under local, state and federal laws, our policy is not to allow customers carrying firearms in our stores or on our outdoor seating premises unless they are uniformed or identified law enforcement officers. Like most other private businesses, particularly retail establishments, we believe this policy is in the best interests of all of our customers, regardless of their personal beliefs. In no way does this policy conflict with or discriminate under the law, and it does not take a position on the law.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/0 ... 83685.html

[jasonf]

Anyone that is banning customers carrying guns is really cutting out all customers who carrry guns...If someone's already carrying a gun you can't expect them to just leave it by the door on the way in or stick it in the glove compartment...I don't own a gun, but I respect Starbucks for not cracking under the pressure of liberal petitions, at least so far...

[Darthwing Teorist]

Anyone that is banning customers carrying guns is really cutting out all customers who carrry guns...If someone's already carrying a gun you can't expect them to just leave it by the door on the way in or stick it in the glove compartment...I don't own a gun, but I respect Starbucks for not cracking under the pressure of liberal petitions, at least so far...

I am for gun control, but I also respect a business not giving in to pressure.

[Darth Rock&Roll]

"liberal petitions"?

why the fuck does there have to be division?

law is law, period. If it is within the law, then so be it. end of story.

there is only Americans. period. This whole libs vs reps vs cons vs whatever is crap and nonsense and serves only to divide the people into smaller and smaller voiceless and powerless groups.

I think the first thing taht needs to stop, besides all the attention Sarah Palin gets, is the divisional speech that is rampant.

[klonk]

I avoid declared gun free zones when I can. They are inherently unsafe.

[jasonf]

"liberal petitions"?

why the fuck does there have to be division?

law is law, period. If it is within the law, then so be it. end of story.

there is only Americans. period. This whole libs vs reps vs cons vs whatever is crap and nonsense and serves only to divide the people into smaller and smaller voiceless and powerless groups.

I think the first thing taht needs to stop, besides all the attention Sarah Palin gets, is the divisional speech that is rampant.

Deep breaths...deep breaths...now count to 10

[DeusTrismegistus]

Petitioning a private business is like asking your drill instructor for a break.

Since I have my CCW I avoid posted no carrying places also. Here in Ohio I know when the law first passed there was all kinds of places that posted. Now almost no one does, because the places that posted were targeted by the criminals.

[KEND]

I am also for gun control but if the customers obey the law I have no problem. I undertand in general the person carrying has an empty gun, but carries shells, this would hopefully preclude a drunk or angry person from pulling out a gun and cutting loose with a hail of bullets. If it was possible to remove all guns from civilian hands I would agree to not carry but due to the mindset of the US population regaring right to bear arms this is not going to happen, so a certain degree of pragmatism is necessary.
This should not be a decision for Starbucks to make and if people dont go to their cafes so be it, if they feel uncomfortable with guns how do they feel around cops

[Dale Dugas]

carries an empty gun?

[Bär]

Frankly, unless you're in a war zone or equivalent (like the Mexico-US border, East St. Louis ca. 1980, etc...), you've got some issues if you feel you need to carry a gun into a Starbucks or anywhere else. It's legal, but you're a jackass and you're inviting a challenge from some other small-dicked asshole with a pistol with something to prove. If you want to play war or cops & robbers, become a soldier, a cop or a criminal. Shit or get off the pot, but don't play macho bringing your 45 into the grocery store.

[Michael]

I deleted to remove sarcasm

[Michael]

Frankly, unless you're in a war zone or equivalent (like the Mexico-US border, East St. Louis ca. 1980, etc...), you've got some issues if you feel you need to carry a gun into a Starbucks or anywhere else. It's legal, but you're a jackass and you're inviting a challenge from some other small-dicked asshole with a pistol with something to prove. If you want to play war or cops & robbers, become a soldier, a cop or a criminal. Shit or get off the pot, but don't play macho bringing your 45 into the grocery store.

I suppose some people feel macho with their guns the way a teenager might feel important driving their first car, but well-trained, responsible gun owners don't fall into this category.

Look at it this way:

Frankly, unless you're in a war zone or equivalent (like the Mexico-US border, East St. Louis ca. 1980, etc...), you've got some issues if you feel you need to study martial arts or otherwise protect yourself. It's legal, but you're a jackass and you're inviting a challenge from some other small-dicked asshole with a black belt with something to prove. If you want to play Bruce Lee, become an actor, or go mess with the triads in Hong Kong. Be a total pacifist or continually assault everyone you see, but don't play macho bringing your gong-fu into the grocery store.

Guns, like gong-fu and other older weapons, are basic technology that can not be put back into Pandora's box, but can be used responsibly. They serve a legitimate purpose, and historically those who tried to prevent their acquisition by commoners either weakened their own society unwittingly or specifically wanted people to be unable to protect themselves from those who had weapons.

[Kato]

I think the first thing taht needs to stop, besides all the attention Sarah Palin gets

A fucking Men.

[Michael]

Chuck Baldwin: ‘Hooray For Starbucks’

And should there be any doubt in the minds of sincere men regarding the advantages and appropriateness of an armed citizenry, the research of John R. Lott, Jr. is more than sufficient to dispel it. Lott is a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland, College Park. He was previously the John M. Olin Visiting Law and Economics Fellow at the University of Chicago Law School. His book, “More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws,” is the most authoritative and thoroughly researched volume on the subject. And the title of his book is exactly what his research proves: More guns, less crime!

Lott’s analysis “is based on data for all 3,054 counties in the United States during 18 years from 1977 to 1994.” Lott said carry laws reduce violent crime because “victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.” DUH!

See a University of Chicago-sponsored interview with Mr. Lott at:

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html

[zenshiite]

I'd understand it if you know Peets Coffee & Tea regularly had problems with gun fights breaking out over who gets dibs on the Wi-Fi, but why is it they don't let customers carrying guns in the store? Furthermore, how the hell are they going to know? If you've got a concealed carry permit you've got a concealed weapon... it's not like people are wearing six shooters on their hips anymore, and it's not like a coffee shop is an old West saloon where a couple desperados are going to get in an argument over a hand of poker and start shooting at each other. You might as well ban people coming into the store with fists because a fist fight could just as easily break out in the store and hurt people and property as a fucking gun fight would...