Guns no longer welcome at Starbucks

[hso]

We're our own worst enemy at times and the people posing in those pics and the ones that missed the mark and decided on a display at the Newtown Starbucks have done us a great injury.

 

[9mmepiphany]

This drew an interesting comment from Raven Concealment,makers of the holster in the picture below, on their Facebook page

I am well aware that many RCS customers are avid proponents of open-carry and use our products for this purpose. Let me remind everyone that our name is Raven CONCEALMENT Systems. Our products are designed to help you conceal your weapon. We do NOT make the right holster for open-carry. Those who would choose to carry openly have a MORAL OBLIGATION to equip and train themselves appropriately for this activity. To wit: If you choose to carry a deadly weapon openly, you should undertake the same precautions as a uniformed police officer and use a Level 2 or 3 duty holster (such as this: http://www.optactical.com/safariland6280.html) on an appropriately-sized stiff belt and undergo formal training in weapon-retention on an annual (if not more frequent) basis. Those who would skip these steps and carry openly are acting with GROSS NEGLIGENCE.

I welcome the business of ALL gun-owners; I simply ask that should you choose to "open-carry", you use the right tools for the job.

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

Its one thing to be in the store and the weapon is in a holster or at sling arms. When the firearms are no longer in these conditions the individuals need to be nailed to the wall as its no longer an open carry issue.

 

[9mmepiphany]

You also have to wonder, especially in light of the recent news, what a natural reaction would be to seeing this upon entering a business



If you didn't have nearby cover, not concealment, to move to, would it not be understandable to draw your CCW and engage this person. Just because he is smiling, doesn't lower the threat level

 

[BSA1]

I read the CEO's letter.

In the first paragraph he asks that customers not bring firearms into the stores. Nothing about conceal carry or open carry just firearms period.

In the second paragraph he gives a self-serving speech about being part of the community. Well Starbucks has expanded into many areas where very conservative gun owners that are not ashamed to display their guns in public and are not afraid of the mere sight of someone carrying a firearm. (What was it that Obama said about clinging to their guns or religion)?

Since Starbucks desire to be part of the "community" is in direct conflict with cities whose population "clings to guns or religion" will they close those stores? Or remain there as long as they make the almighty dollar?

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

Really.

I dont disagree with you. We have rights and we should exercise them, but as 9mmepiphany's pics show, they do get abused....which in turn gives us a bad name. Nothing we can do about that, but we all get punished for their acts....And you say I am part of the problem????

I dont want to squash anything but the people damaging our culture. They Are to be blamed. If open carry is legal where you are at, by all means OPEN CARRY. Its your right!

But......just because it is our right.....doesn't mean everyone will like it.

How do you express yourself through open carry?

If you saw my followup post in regards to the pictures you would understand where my position is.These folks in the pictures are totally negligent. They have had to sweep others when they took their arms from sling arms or their holster. Had I been there I would not have had a problem calling the cops. Its one thing to open carry where its legal to do so but when you are posing with your firearm in a business its no longer open carry.

 

[Billy Shears]

It's not true that the company is not allowing weapons in their stores. The memo, which you can read on the company's website is as follows (with relevant portions emphasized by yours truly):

Posted by Howard Schultz, Starbucks chairman, president and chief executive officer

Dear Fellow Americans,

Few topics in America generate a more polarized and emotional debate than guns. In recent months, Starbucks stores and our partners (employees) who work in our stores have been thrust unwillingly into the middle of this debate. That’s why I am writing today with a respectful request that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas.

From the beginning, our vision at Starbucks has been to create a “third place” between home and work where people can come together to enjoy the peace and pleasure of coffee and community. Our values have always centered on building community rather than dividing people, and our stores exist to give every customer a safe and comfortable respite from the concerns of daily life.

We appreciate that there is a highly sensitive balance of rights and responsibilities surrounding America’s gun laws, and we recognize the deep passion for and against the “open carry” laws adopted by many states. (In the United States, “open carry” is the term used for openly carrying a firearm in public.) For years we have listened carefully to input from our customers, partners, community leaders and voices on both sides of this complicated, highly charged issue.

Our company’s longstanding approach to “open carry” has been to follow local laws: we permit it in states where allowed and we prohibit it in states where these laws don’t exist. We have chosen this approach because we believe our store partners should not be put in the uncomfortable position of requiring customers to disarm or leave our stores. We believe that gun policy should be addressed by government and law enforcement—not by Starbucks and our store partners.

Recently, however, we’ve seen the “open carry” debate become increasingly uncivil and, in some cases, even threatening. Pro-gun activists have used our stores as a political stage for media events misleadingly called “Starbucks Appreciation Days” that disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of “open carry.” To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores. Some anti-gun activists have also played a role in ratcheting up the rhetoric and friction, including soliciting and confronting our customers and partners.

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.

I would like to clarify two points. First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Why? Because we want to give responsible gun owners the chance to respect our request—and also because enforcing a ban would potentially require our partners to confront armed customers, and that is not a role I am comfortable asking Starbucks partners to take on. Second, we know we cannot satisfy everyone. For those who oppose “open carry,” we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.

I am proud of our country and our heritage of civil discourse and debate. It is in this spirit that we make today’s request. Whatever your view, I encourage you to be responsible and respectful of each other as citizens and neighbors.

Sincerely,

Howard Schultz

So what you have here is a company that followed a very reasonable, enlightened, and if you as me, very American policy toward this whole matter: regardless of the feelings of executives of this company toward guns, we are going respect all local laws, and treat law-abiding armed citizens with the same courtesy and respect we show all our customers. That's how all Americans damn well should behave! If you're not harming me, and not breaking any laws, do what you like.

Unfortunately, there are people amongst us gun owners who are not only in favor of open carry, but wear a gun on their hip exactly like a chip on their shoulder -- daring people to have a problem with them. Don't misunderstand me; if you are carry openly, fine. I think it's almost never wise when you can carry concealed, but let's not get into that right now. The point is, if you carry openly, it should be done for self-defense, not political reasons. If you are carrying openly for self-defense reasons, I fully support and respect your decision. If you carry openly when you could carry concealed, and do so more to make a statement than because you feel it is tactically better under the circumstances, well, sorry, I don't think you're acting wisely.

But what's happened here is the open carry crowd has chosen to drag Starbucks into an issue they do not wish to be dragged into. They want to be neutral. I don't blame them. I have no doubt many people in that company are personally pro-gun control, but they have decided to respect the 2nd amendment rights of others even so. I can't ask any more of anyone than that. They're just saying please leave them out of it. So let's respect their right to be left alone like they're respecting our right to keep and bear arms. If you carry, fine, but don't wear your gun into their store like a banner, trying to make a statement.

 

[SuedePflow]

Those images are a bit of an eye opener. How does one distinguish between carrying and brandishing of a long gun?

 

[beatledog7]

Pro OC folks are the purest pro-2A folks.

Think about it: How many people carried a concealed firearm when the BOR was ratified? Clearly, bearing arms at that time did not mean only carrying in a way that others wouldn't see it.

 

[Sapper771]

If you saw my followup post in regards to the pictures you would understand where my position is.These folks in the pictures are totally negligent. They have had to sweep others when they took their arms from sling arms or their holster. Had I been there I would not have had a problem calling the cops. Its one thing to open carry where its legal to do so but when you are posing with your firearm in a business its no longer open carry.

I agree with this^

But what I dont understand is how me and others want to squash your right to express yourself through open carry ?

 

[sawdeanz]

It is pretty disheartening to hear one of our "supporters" forced to backtrack. As others have pointed out, Starbucks was never an explicit advocate (compared to how Chick-fil-A advocates certain things, or other chains that politicize things). Now that I think about it I don't even remember how Starbucks came to be the banner company, but maybe Starbucks' policy is less unique here in Florida where there are virtually no gun prohibition signs.

Its a shame that the anti's have played up neutrality to be akin to standing with the pro-gunners, forcing us to take an equally ironic position to champion neutrality as a pro-gun win.

I think this letter should be taken at face value, and interpreted exactly as it is meant, which is to please stop using their stores as a pulpit. All he is asking is that Starbucks not be made an example of by open carrying rifles etc. into their stores where their customer base is mostly anti-gun. From the tone of the letter it really sounds less like a change of policy (there is nothing saying that Starbucks will begin to usurp local laws with a broad company policy) but rather a stern plea that unnecessary parading was, and is not wanted.

 

[Outlaw Man]

This is absolutely false. You should read what is being discussed before jumping to conclusions. They have told absolutely no one do disarm or get their coffee elsewhere. They have respectfully asked that guns not be brought in the store or their sidewalk area. They have explicitly instructed their employees to not refuse service to anyone or make an issue if someone is carrying.

It makes you sound more credible if you get the facts straight before jumping in with both feet.

I'm sorry that I confused "respectfully asked" with "told." I do realize where my limited comprehension of the English language could be taken as a lack of credibility.


There is at least one Starbucks here that doesn't have a drive thru. Tell me, what are my options for carrying a handgun and ordering coffee while honoring his wishes?

 

[benEzra]

Pro OC folks are the purest pro-2A folks.

This sentiment is a big part of the problem the gun community has regarding OC, I think.

To some, being "pure" is more important than being discreet, or being a good ambassador for the gun-owning community, or being smart and pragmatic.

Go look again at those pics upthread, and tell me that you as an armed citizen wouldn't go to Orange when you see somebody walk into a restaurant with a gun in their hand like that. That's just monumentally foolish if your objective is to get fence-sitters comfortable with guns, or advance the cause of gun rights.

I understand the arguments for OC where OC is appropriate, either for defensive purposes, or a public statement at a pro-gun rally where the property owner is amenable to it.. But exhibitionism is stupid, counterproductive, and hurts our cause. "In your face" tactics are not the way to win this war, and may be a good way to lose it.

Think about it: How many people carried a concealed firearm when the BOR was ratified?

Quite a few, I'd imagine. Concealed carry of handguns goes back to the invention of handguns. Also consider that they didn't ride around in climate controlled cars, and exposing a wheellock or flintlock pistol to heavy rain could deactivate the load. Hence, carry under a cloak would have been a pretty good idea.

 

[BullfrogKen]

I would like to tell Starbux's CEO a simple question. Who does he think has the income to purchase his $5-$7 cups of coffee. Cash strapped students or gun owners.

Perhaps you don't know many college-aged people anymore.

My cousin is in her senior year of college. She and her friends hang out at Starbucks all the time. It's almost become today's version of Arnold's Diner from Happy Days. It's the cool, hip, and trendy hangout for that generation. They've got wifi, and not every coffee beverage there comes with a premium price.

Pro OC folks are the purest pro-2A folks.

Think about it: How many people carried a concealed firearm when the BOR was ratified? Clearly, bearing arms at that time did not mean only carrying in a way that others wouldn't see it.

Yeah, and sometimes they're jerks who deliberately seek out confrontation.


Times and attitudes have changed since 1781. Even as recent as the middle of the last century the open display of a firearm - in appropriate places - was not a cause for alarm. But the act of concealing it was something outlaws, hoodlums and bad men did. Today attitudes are completely different.

Still, go to a frontier state like Alaska and it's common to see families shop for groceries with a long gun slung. There it's appropriate. In Philadelphia, not so much.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

Tell me, what are my options for carrying a handgun and ordering coffee while honoring his wishes?

Buying it somewhere else?
You do have the option of continuing to buy from Starbucks while legally carrying. They aren't posting signs. You're still legal to do so.

 

[hunterwinco]

Originally Posted by Blue Brick View Post 
So what…..Starbucks has overpriced coffee and there store is full of tree hugging wimpy mother earth loving dirt head communist hippies

Blue Brick pretty much described the Starbucks here in Maine. I've only been in one a couple of times, but it never seemed to be a place where I cared to 'hang". much prefer a Newman's Own coffee from McDonald's for a BUCK! I CC but rarely OC unless I am in the woods or in the more rural areas here in the state. I think everyone just hanging out in a Starbucks open carry is just silly and counter productive. I know I'd be PO'd if people were just using my establishments for political point either left or right! This whole thing makes me think back in to 70's when I was in High school, my buddy and I used to walk old woods roads plinking with his ruger single six and my mark 1. Often times we would head to Moody's Diner and grab a burger afterwards. My buddy would always start to walk in with his ruger in his western holster. I would make him leave it in the truck with mine. He would always remind me that it was his right to do so...I would always remind him that it just makes him look like an idiot! ...just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD!

 

[wyohome]

Still, go to a frontier state like Alaska and it's common to see families shop for groceries with a long gun slung. There it's appropriate. In Philadelphia, not so much

The odds of being attacked in Philly is greater than in any store I have ever bought groceries in Alaska.

 

[Warp]

Pro OC folks are the purest pro-2A folks.

Think about it: How many people carried a concealed firearm when the BOR was ratified? Clearly, bearing arms at that time did not mean only carrying in a way that others wouldn't see it.

This isn't a 2A issue. This is a private property Rights issue.

And some of these pictures and examples are not open carry.

A gun IN YOUR HANDS is not open carry.

Open carry = holster or sling.

 

[herrwalther]

I don't think the Starbucks CEO would care to distinguish between open and concealed carry. If he asks customers not to bring firearms in, how is that different than posting a "No firearms" sign? It isn't. He just decided to post it in a blog and share it everywhere and with every news organization. What is to stop Starbucks from attempting to prosecute with trespassing a CCW citizen citing their "well we asked them not to" PR?

Before, Starbucks was all about neutrality with the 2A, they didn't shun it nor encourage it. And that was a huge mistake on their part that has caused this backlash. "Carrying a long gun or shotgun into Starbucks? Fine by us, just use that sling unless SHTF and you actually need to use it. Besides slings will free up the hand to drink our overpriced swill. Carrying a handgun? Open or concealed we don't care, keep it in the holster unless it is needed."

Regardless on how you feel about the 2A and Starbucks, shop there or don't. You will either stomp your foot so hard it hurts or waste money on coffee. Either way Starbucks will stick around, probably long after we are all dead. Personally I don't drink coffee so this is no skin off my teeth.

 

[Warp]

I don't think the Starbucks CEO would care to distinguish between open and concealed carry. If he asks customers not to bring firearms in, how is that different than posting a "No firearms" sign? It isn't. He just decided to post it in a blog and share it everywhere and with every news organization. What is to stop Starbucks from attempting to prosecute with trespassing a CCW citizen citing their "well we asked them not to" PR?

Before, Starbucks was all about neutrality with the 2A, they didn't shun it nor encourage it. And that was a huge mistake on their part that has caused this backlash. "Carrying a long gun or shotgun into Starbucks? Fine by us, just use that sling unless SHTF and you actually need to use it. Besides slings will free up the hand to drink our overpriced swill. Carrying a handgun? Open or concealed we don't care, keep it in the holster unless it is needed."

Regardless on how you feel about the 2A and Starbucks, shop there or don't. You will either stomp your foot so hard it hurts or waste money on coffee. Either way Starbucks will stick around, probably long after we are all dead. Personally I don't drink coffee so this is no skin off my teeth.

I would say the law is to stop that.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

If he asks customers not to bring firearms in, how is that different than posting a "No firearms" sign? It isn't.

Oh but you are wrong about that.
In Arkansas as well as many other states, signs carry the weight of the law. If a business is posted "No firearms" it is against the law to carry a firearm there.
If they simply request that you do not, but make no suck requirement it's a different thing altogether, legally speaking.

What is to stop Starbucks from attempting to prosecute with trespassing a CCW citizen citing their "well we asked them not to" PR?

That's not how it works. They would have to ask you to leave and give you opportunity to do so before they could make a trespassing claim stick. They have very clearly informed their staff not to refuse service to anyone.

They tried to remain neutral and it didn't work. They're again trying to just be in the business of selling coffee and not getting involved and again, we aren't letting them.

 

[herrwalther]

I would say the law is to stop that.

The No Guns sign does not carry rule of law in most states. They can try to prosecute and probably won't win in a criminal court. But that doesn't mean they won't try to win anyway.

This thread is moving faster than I can type today.

Oh but you are wrong about that.
In Arkansas as well as many other states, signs carry the weight of the law. If a business is posted "No firearms" it is against the law to carry a firearm there.
If they simply request that you do not, but make no suck requirement it's a different thing altogether, legally speaking.

I understand how the rule of law for firearms signs work. Like I said in most states, a sign does not carry rule of law. As you said they can only charge with trespassing if you refuse to leave, or don't leave fast enough. I am very grateful that a no firearms sign does not carry rule of law in most states. My stance is, what is stopping Starbucks from calling this blog their no firearms sign? Even if you leave before legalities get involved, it will still be an ugly situation.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

They can try to prosecute and probably won't win in a criminal court.

You're misunderstanding the system. No one can prosecute anyone else. Prosecution is criminal and it is not up to citizens to file criminal charges. The Prosecuting Attorney in your jurisdiction is the only one who can file charges against someone else (other than federal charges). If a person or organization could file criminal charges, there wouldn't be a free person walking the earth.

The only thing one person/business can do is sue in civil court. Filing of criminal charges is not up to an individual. There are circumstances where individuals can fill out a 2-party complaint form and request that charges be filed, but the decision is up to the PA.

Only the state or federal government can file criminal charges. Period.

 

[herrwalther]

A mistake in terminology I admit. Very well, there is nothing to stop Starbucks from attempting to press criminal charges. Even if the case is never brought into the light of a courtroom, it is still a messy situation if you are the guy Starbucks is trying to go after, regardless if an attorney picks up the case.

 

[Warp]

The No Guns sign does not carry rule of law in most states. They can try to prosecute and probably won't win in a criminal court. But that doesn't mean they won't try to win anyway.

This thread is moving faster than I can type today.



I understand how the rule of law for firearms signs work. Like I said in most states, a sign does not carry rule of law. As you said they can only charge with trespassing if you refuse to leave, or don't leave fast enough. I am very grateful that a no firearms sign does not carry rule of law in most states. My stance is, what is stopping Starbucks from calling this blog their no firearms sign? Even if you leave before legalities get involved, it will still be an ugly situation.

What no guns sign??

Why is anybody talking about no guns signs?

No, this blog is not a sign! It's not a sign because it's not a sign.

It's not a sign because the states with laws giving signs the weight of law kind of require that, you know, it be a sign posted at the business.