Guns no longer welcome at Starbucks

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NavyLCDR

member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
7,677
Location
Stanwood, WA
In light of the recent news that Starbucks is caving to the anti-gun groups, I would suggest that you not only take your business elsewhere, but be sure to let them know why. They need to be able to correlate a dip in their sales to the recent request to leave our guns at home.

My email to Starbucks:

Goodbye Starbucks. Your recent decision to blame the gun owners of America for dragging you into the gun control debate has caused me to take my business elsewhere. Maybe you should have asked the anti-gun groups to leave you alone as much as you asked the law abiding gun owners to leave you alone.

I find it hard to believe that you would make this decision based on the fact that historically you have made more money from the pro-gun groups than the anti-gun groups. But, if you don't want our money, someone else does.
 
I find it hard to believe that you would make this decision based on the fact that historically you have made more money from the pro-gun groups than the anti-gun groups.
Click to expand...

I’m pretty sure they based their decision on the fact that they don't want to be on either side. I’m pretty sure they just want to sell coffee. Gun rights groups pushed them into the media spotlight. A place no mainstream business wants to be.
 
I've got no problem with that letter. I also think extremists on both sides of the debate will take it entirely the wrong way. This is more of a "get off my lawn!" than taking a side in the debate.
 
Seems more like Howard is asking people to not open carry - so, then concealed carry. If the gun's concealed, how would they know you have one?
 
The owner can do as he chooses, their house their rules. I choose to not stand in line to buy $5 whipped cream topped sissified "coffee" anyhow.
 
Go to Starbucks. Drink coffee.
Keep your gun concealed.


I find this hysteria of having to make a point about 2A
in every possible location - hindering.

It`s provocation that teaches nobody nothing.
And it makes gun enatusiasts look like intolerant nuttery gun-nuts.



Have a look at the "mimimimi... no more money from me"
posts on the SB-Facebook page. I think it`s ridiculous.
 
Either way Starbucks is going to lose business now. He did state that the request was to not bring any firearms into the store or outside. I will cut and paste if I have to. There was no discernment between open carry or concealed. I don't open carry so this isn't an open carry debate. This IS a 2A issue. He tried to sound civil. I do commend him for that. But he did choose a side. I believe it was the wrong choice but it is his decision to make and I respect that.
 
Can anyone suggest action that Starbuck's could take to be neutrally positioned?

The backlash from the 2A side could certainly cause other businesses to consider the implications of appearing to be gun-friendly.

Where's the bigger picture here?
 
I see Schultz's move as one generated by money. He previously had taken the stand that followed local laws. Which allowed him to abdicate responsibility. He has now come clean and took a stance. No doubt under pressure from lobbyists.

I made a point of visiting Starbucks on the "mothers boycott" day just to make a point. I carried concealed as I normally do. I saw a video of three guys on the day who took their rifles to the store on the same day. It provoked the usual response from LEO. I think this kind of action just gives the antis fuel to burn. I am sure if Starbucks revenue had risen on the boycott day with no incidents Shultz would have been more sympathetic to gun owners. Instead stores became the focus of disturbances and nothing kills business like a cop car parked outside.

Money is the key here folks. The people in charge only care about money.
 
Corporate starbucks just wants a break from both side . Do you think they really want the over the top types on ether side buming around showing off how foolish they look. The over the top pro gun guys can be as bad for business as the anti gun crowd. So deal with it. If ya just gota have bad coffee then go thee but wear concealed . There not going to throw you out even if they know your carry'n . There coffee suxcks anyhow . Learn how to make it at home, buy a SS thermos and take it with you and save enough money a week for a few box's of ammo.
 
Davek1977 said:
http://www.starbucks.com/blog/an-ope...d-schultz/1268
Click to expand...

I think that "open letter" is an excellent explanation of their position and reasoning.

If I were a Starbucks patron (I was in one only once in 2009), I would continue to be ... unless I saw a No Guns sign on/by their front door.

O'course it is very rare that I scrutinize signage at the entrance to any retail establishment ... and I never OC, only CC.
 
Please note, most importantly, that he also stated it was a "request, not a ban".

I fully understand and appreciate his concerns. He's running a business, not a bully pulpit for either side. He wants to sell coffee, not piss off one side or the other. His marketing people may have told him that many people find open carry unsettling, and he will go the route of most sales, as I would expect any business person to do. Again, he said it was a request, not a ban, so you are free to do as you please.

To be honest, I find open carry by non uniformed, non badged people unsettling myself. Call me anything you want, but that's just how it is. I worked in law enforcement in NYC, and anytime I saw a plainclothes cop open carry without wearing a shield, I was concerned.

With so many crazies opening up and firing anywhere, you better believe anyone open carrying will have my undivided attention.

Even in the gun community, open carry is a fringe segment, not mainstream.
 
LOL... I'll get my coffee at Chick fil a, gave up on Starbucks a while ago.
 
I just sent them this...

A year or two ago when the anti-gun groups started pressuring you to post your stores, I was impressed with your "We follow local laws" response. Impressed enough to switch from the coffee I was buying at Sam's Club to the 2lb bags of your House Blend, exclusively.
With your new position that "guns are not welcome in your stores", I won't be buying your coffee any longer. You no longer deserve my business.
Click to expand...
 
I don't go to Starbucks because it's lousy, overpriced coffee. RE the gun issue...I think it was handled as well as he could.
 
Yeah, just go concealed and have your next pro-2A rally elsewhere.

The letter doesn't mention (unless I missed it, which is possible) concealed carry, which might be due to Starbucks wishing to have CCers as customers but not wanting to actually say so because saying so might not alienate the antis.

It's no secret here that I am an open carry option advocate, but I'm equally strong on property rights. I rarely go to Starbucks, and I will continue to rarely go there.
 
From the Starbucks letter:

For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.
Click to expand...

If you are carrying concealed are you not bringing a firearm into their store? Unless you are authorized law enforcement personnel. I'm sorry, I must be missing something. Where did they say concealed firearms were welcome but open carry wasn't? The letter states that only LEO firearms are welcome.

In addition, it wasn't the open carry groups that put Starbucks in the middle of the gun control debate. It was the anti-gun groups that did. If they hadn't made a stink about Starbucks lack of a firearm policy there would have been no media excitement over anything. Why should the pro-gun groups always cater to the anti-gun side and just quitely "compromise?" And we aren't really compromising anything. Compromise means both sides give up something. We aren't compromising to the anti-gun groups because they aren't losing anything. They are just not gaining as much as they would like, but we are still the only ones losing. If a thief steals your wallet, but he hands you back $5 out of it, is that a compromise because he didn't take the whole thing?
 
Last edited:
Deviousness of Starbucks statement

A lot of people are missing the deviousness of Starbucks statement. Starbucks has pretty much disavowed any chance of being portrayed as "the bad guy" on this. Let's say someone brings a firearm into Starbucks... who's the bad guy? Is it Starbucks? No, not Starbucks....why? Because Starbucks didn't PROHIBIT firearms in their stores. Starbucks would never do that. They just politely asked the customer not to bring his gun into their store. But that guy with the gun - look at how inconsiderate he is! Starbucks was so nice just to politely ask him not to bring his gun into the store, but he won't listen to polite a polite request not to.

What is the anti-gun crowd going to do with that? "SEE! LOOK! We told you all about those pro-gun guys! They won't listen to polite requests! See how dangerous they are?!? It's not enough to just ask them to leave their guns outside, we must have laws to make them leave their guns outside! Poor, poor Starbucks! Those gun guys just won't respect their polite requests!"

I would rather Starbucks just flat out posted their stores and prohibited guns. Then at least they would be on someone's naughty list. Instead they have now pushed any and all bad publicity onto the pro-gun side.
 
Last edited:
I have to say that open carry activism is what did us in on this one. If you push someone hard enough and long enough they push back. I think Starbucks got tired of the debate and ran the numbers and decided there are a hell of a lot more people that don’t open carry than do and followed the money.
 
I supported them for their stance, but I was conflicted because of their use of GMO. I held my nose and supported them, big time. Then they caved. They had supported a bunch of progressive policies, but they also were atleast neutral on the 2A. I thought they simply respected the civil rights of their patrons, of all stripes. Now I know they only support "progressive" civil rights and not ALL of them. Like the letter said, "no longer welcome". My support for them is gone. They have a right to make store policy, that's fine, they have now made their bed to lie on and who with. Just as an example was made with Morse and Giron in Colorado, I hope the gun owning households in America will also make an example of sbux.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Seminole
  • Locked
Mas Ayoob: Sipping on Starbucks and Listening to the Radio
Replies
3
Views
787
captainmarko
C
D
  • Locked
NH:Armed Citizen Confronted at Starbucks
Replies
18
Views
1K
ChaoSS
C
H
  • Locked
Neutral/Positive RKBA article in Tucson Daily Star
Replies
0
Views
380
History Prof
H
S
  • Locked
Guns not wanted in "family-friendly" Target
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Replies
260
Views
12K
Midwest
M
G
  • Locked
  • Poll
Will you continue to purchase from companies that stay in anti states?
2 3 4 5
Replies
120
Views
5K
tarosean
tarosean
Back
Top