He is acting very reasonably. HERE'S WHY: 1) Starbucks has previously had an entirely neutral stance on firearms. Having pro-gun rallies there is a blatant attempt to scare the antis. 2) It would have been smarter on the part of gun owners to ONLY open carry there if they normally open carry on a daily basis. We should have treated Starbucks for what it is, a gun-neutral business. The anti's could have tried to sensationalize it all they want, but we should have just ignored them by simply continuing to go about our daily routines, not by combating them.
Well said.
I said the same basic thing in another forum.
I believe that if people had treated Starbucks the same as any other business, the memo would not have happened. Want to open carry? Fine. Also want to go to Starbucks? Great! ...get your friends together and make an issue out of going to Starbucks while you carry rifles? Please don't...well, they did...and this is where we are.
I'm all for open carry. I'm all for exercising Rights and Liberties. Regulars of this forum should know that. But we aren't talking about Rights and Liberties when it's a private business and private property.