Posted on 09/19/2013 4:19:45 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Here’s his letter about it to the company. It’s just a request, not a ban. If he made it a ban, then employees would have to enforce it. And he’s quite candid about his misgivings over putting an unarmed worker in the position of telling someone who’s packing that they’re unwelcome.
Lots of grumbling about this on Twitter this morning, which surprised me. Surely there can’t be that much overlap between fans of open carry and fans of pumpkin spice lattes. Turns out I had missed the news about “Starbucks Appreciation Day” by gun owners last month, though. This isn’t just a change in policy by some random company; this is a company that had been notably respectful of gun rights and commended for it by aficionados deciding that it was all a big mistake. No mystery as to why, either. Sonny Bunch is spot on:
What’s interesting to me is that it’s obvious Schultz has no fear of guns (nor should he; when’s the last time there was a mass-shooting at a Starbucks perpetrated by someone with an open-carry permit?). No. He fears the left. And he doesn’t fear the right.
These are all sensible positions for him to take…
The left … does the politicized life exceptionally well. They mount campaigns to pressure corporations to get what they want. They organize boycotts. They direct their complaints to gatekeepers who share their views and can influence policy. They blacklist artists with whom they disagree and pressure corporations to do the same. They control the levers of the media to add additional pressure from newspapers and television networks.
So there will be a lot of fulmination on social media from those on the right about rights and guns and the Constitution, and then a little less the next day, and a little less the day after that, until finally you forgot why you were mad at Starbucks and you stop tweeting and facebooking and kvetching and start buying pumpkin spice lattes by the bucketful and, in a moment of clarity, you’ll think about how silly it was for you to give up Starbucks in the name of something that literally never impacted you in the first place because you don’t have an open-carry permit.
Exactly. Whatever little extra business Starbucks gets from gun owners on the annual “Appreciation Day” would be washed away by the business lost once the left’s intelligentsia finally decides Something Must Be Done about the company’s tolerance for gun rights. Schultz is getting ahead of a backlash by backing down now so that he doesn’t look even weaker by backing down later after a liberal boycott takes effect. Hopefully this half-assed “request, not a ban” position will mollify them while reassuring gun owners that if they simply can’t bear to be without the pumpkin spice while they have their weapon on them, they’re welcome to come in. Unless your business is designed to be overtly conservative, staying on the left’s good side is usually in your economic interest even if it means alienating righties. Imagine how many wedding-industry professionals have learned a lesson from stories like this one to extend their services to gay couples, whether they have an objection to gay marriage or not.
Exit quotation: “There are times when I feel like America has lost its conscience.”
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
I have a Starbucks Gold Card and stopped shopped there as of yesterday. No more K cups, Tazo iced tea, or anything else they sell.
I didn’t go often, but there are things I like. Well, he can ask, but customers don’t have to comply. I’ll bet there isn’t any employee who would refuse service to someone who is carrying.
ThaT is the point of the article. Starbucks CEO relized he had to choose whose business he would rather keep, gun owners or leftists. He chose leftists and the author thinks this was the correct decision from a financial standpoint.
We don’t have DD here. But there is a small privately owned coffee shop nearby that makes great stuff, and has a friendly staff, even though they are liberal leaning. M Street Coffee in Sherman Oaks, California. I don’t have a CC permit, but I still wouldn’t take it in, out of respect for Andrea.
Schultz is setting the stage for a mass killing rampage at a Starbucks, whether he realizes it or not.
Gun-free zones are like a magnet for these commie liberal pre-programmed, anti-depressant medicated, mass-murderering zombies.
Starbucks is no longer a safe place to sit...it’s clearly a gun free zone. Since all of the latest mass shootings have occurred in gun free zones, why would I intentionally want to pay money to sit in a GFZ? No thanks. I value my life much more than anything Starbucks has to offer.
Maybe, but there sure are a lot of pro-2nd Amendment people out there, as MANY politicians (including two very recently) have found to their dismay.
A few other threads if anyone is interested in the comments thereon:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3068101/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3068122/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3068151/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3068564/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3068588/posts
Starbucks can give themselves a $6 double-latte crappachino enema for all I care.
Jay Leno says it makes it easier for Starbucks to rob you.
I believe that if you are stupid enough to go to some place and buy an $8 “Venti” Mocha Soy Latte... you ought not be allowed to have a gun... based purely on your poor judgement skills alone.
The gun goes with me, always.
But dont worry. Me, my guns, or MY MONEY will not be going to a Starbucks.
I wouldn’t call Starbucks a GFZ.
I’d call it is TRE. (Target Rich Environment)
Heaven forbid...but.....
Dear Starbucks ... up yours. Dunkin Donuts has better cheaper coffee and I don’t have to be a potential victim while I’m there.
I warned my local tea party leader to stop patronizing Starbucks over their prior ambiguous support. You simply can NEVER back a liberal organization. Sooner or later it was obvious what would happen. Meanwhile gun-rights folks have added millions of their dollars to Progressive douchebag Schultz’s pockets.
I carry concealed always and everywhere...I won’t patronize any business that posts or publishes as their policy that legally armed customers are not welcome...
But this new policy statement appears to be a subtle attempt by Starbucks corporate to “have it both ways”...
Appease their Leftard customers’ tender sensibilities, while (winkie-winkie) providing an “out” for their armed customers to carry on...
Consider: “Concealed means concealed”, and that means all the time...So if the gun’s concealed, who would know? Unless Starbucks installs metal detectors, or starts frisking customers while they’re waiting in line for their lattes, nobody’s gonna be the wiser...
If need arises and you do defend yourself inside a Starbucks with your licensed handgun, non-compliance with a doofus corporate policy is small potatoes compared with saving your life...
If you carry a handgun, love Starbucks, and can’t stand doing without it, just ignore their “preference” and continue to covertly carry into their stores like you’ve always done...Don’t make an issue of it...Or simply drive thru...
On the other hand, if their “preference” sticks in your craw, find somewhere else (like a local Mom and Pop shop that can use the business) to get your portable caffeine fix...
Aside from the weak-kneed cave-in to the Progs, nothing much has changed, and it’s really a non-issue...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.